Suppr超能文献

欧洲关于强制收治物质使用障碍或滥用问题患者的法律——从人权和公民权利角度的比较性综述

European laws on compulsory commitment to care of persons suffering from substance use disorders or misuse problems- a comparative review from a human and civil rights perspective.

作者信息

Israelsson Magnus, Nordlöf Kerstin, Gerdner Arne

机构信息

Department of Social Work, Mid Sweden University, SE-831 25, Östersund, Sweden.

School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, SE-701 82, Örebro, Sweden.

出版信息

Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2015 Aug 28;10:34. doi: 10.1186/s13011-015-0029-y.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Laws on compulsory commitment to care (CCC) in mental health, social and criminal legislation for adult persons with alcohol and/or drug dependence or misuse problems are constructed to address different scenarios related to substance use disorders. This study examines how such CCC laws in European states vary in terms of legal rights, formal orders of decision and criteria for involuntary admission, and assesses whether three legal frameworks (criminal, mental and social law) equally well ensure human and civil rights.

METHODS

Thirty-nine laws, from 38 countries, were analysed. Respondents replied in web-based questionnaires concerning a) legal rights afforded the persons with substance use problems during commitment proceedings, b) sources of formal application, c) instances for decision on admission, and d) whether or not 36 different criteria could function as grounds for decisions on CCC according to the law in question. Analysis of a-c were conducted in bivariate cross-tabulations. The 36 criteria for admission were sorted in criteria groups based on principal component analysis (PCA). To investigate whether legal rights, decision-making authorities or legal criteria may discriminate between types of law on CCC, discriminant analyses (DA) were conducted.

RESULTS

There are few differences between the three types of law on CCC concerning legal rights afforded the individual. However, proper safeguards of the rights against unlawful detention seem still to be lacking in some CCC laws, regardless type of law. Courts are the decision-making body in 80 % of the laws, but this varies clearly between law types. Criteria for CCC also differ between types of law, i.e. concerning who should be treated: dependent offenders, persons with substance use problems with acting out or aggressive behaviors, or other vulnerable persons with alcohol or drug problems.

CONCLUSION

The study raises questions concerning whether various European CCC laws in relation to substance use disorder or misuse problems comply with international ratified conventions concerning human and civil rights. This, however, applies to all three types of law, i.e. social, mental health and criminal legislation. The main differences between law types concern legal criteria, reflecting different national priorities on implicit ambitions of CCC - for correction, for prevention, or for support to those in greatest need of care.

摘要

背景

精神健康、社会及刑事立法中针对患有酒精和/或药物依赖或滥用问题的成年人的强制收治法律,旨在应对与物质使用障碍相关的不同情形。本研究考察欧洲各国此类强制收治法律在法律权利、正式决策命令及非自愿收治标准方面的差异,并评估三种法律框架(刑事、精神和社会法)在保障人权和公民权利方面是否同样有效。

方法

分析了来自38个国家的39部法律。受访者通过网络问卷回答了以下问题:a)在收治程序中给予有物质使用问题者的法律权利;b)正式申请的来源;c)收治决定的情形;d)根据相关法律,36项不同标准是否可作为强制收治决定的依据。对a - c项的分析采用双变量交叉表进行。基于主成分分析(PCA)将36项收治标准分为不同标准组。为调查法律权利、决策机构或法律标准是否会在强制收治法律类型之间产生歧视,进行了判别分析(DA)。

结果

在给予个人的法律权利方面,三种强制收治法律类型之间差异不大。然而,无论法律类型如何,一些强制收治法律似乎仍缺乏对防止非法拘留权利的适当保障。80%的法律中,法院是决策机构,但这在不同法律类型之间差异明显。强制收治标准在法律类型之间也存在差异,即涉及应治疗哪些人:依赖型罪犯、有行为失控或攻击性行为的物质使用问题者,或其他有酒精或药物问题的弱势群体。

结论

该研究提出了关于欧洲各国与物质使用障碍或滥用问题相关的各种强制收治法律是否符合国际批准的人权和公民权利公约的问题。然而,这适用于所有三种法律类型,即社会、精神健康和刑事立法。法律类型之间的主要差异在于法律标准,反映了各国在强制收治隐含目标(矫正、预防或支持最需要护理者)上的不同优先次序。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验