Department of Psychiatry, University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA; Jane and Terry Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, Psychiatry, Los Angeles, CA.
Department of Psychiatry, University of California Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA; Jane and Terry Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, Psychiatry, Los Angeles, CA.
Psychosomatics. 2018 Mar-Apr;59(2):169-176. doi: 10.1016/j.psym.2017.09.005. Epub 2017 Sep 21.
Medically hospitalized patients who lack decisional capacity may request, demand, or attempt to leave the hospital despite grave risk to themselves. The treating physician in this scenario must determine how to safeguard such patients, including whether to attempt to keep them in the hospital. However, in many jurisdictions, there are no laws that address this matter directly. In this absence, psychiatrists are often called upon to issue an involuntary psychiatric hold (civil commitment) to keep the patient from leaving. Yet, civil commitment statutes were not intended for, and generally do not address, the needs of the medically ill patient without psychiatric illness. Civil commitment is permitted for patients who pose a danger to themselves or others, or who are gravely disabled, specifically as the result of a mental illness, and allows the transport of such individuals to facilities for psychiatric evaluation. It does not permit detention for medical illnesses nor the involuntary administration of medical treatments. Therefore, the establishment of hospital policies and procedures may be the most appropriate means of detaining medically hospitalized patients who lack capacity to understand the risks of leaving the hospital, in addition to mitigating the potential tort risk faced by the physician for acting in a manner that protects the patient.
The purpose of this article is to identify the array of clinical and medical-legal concerns in these scenarios, and to describe the development of a "medical incapacity hold" policy as a means of addressing this unresolved issue.
尽管存在严重的自身风险,缺乏决策能力的住院患者仍可能要求、要求或试图离开医院。在这种情况下,主治医生必须确定如何保护此类患者,包括是否试图将他们留在医院。然而,在许多司法管辖区,没有直接解决这一问题的法律。在这种情况下,精神科医生通常被要求发布非自愿的精神科拘留令(民事拘留)以阻止患者离开。然而,民事拘留法规并非专为没有精神疾病的患病患者而设,通常也不解决他们的需求。民事拘留适用于对自己或他人构成危险的患者,或者因精神疾病而严重残疾的患者,并允许将此类患者送往精神科评估设施。它不允许因医疗疾病而拘留,也不允许非自愿进行医疗治疗。因此,制定医院政策和程序可能是除了减轻医生因以保护患者的方式行事而面临的潜在侵权风险之外,还可以拘留无能力理解离开医院风险的住院患者的最合适手段。
本文的目的是确定这些情况下存在的一系列临床和医疗法律问题,并描述制定“医疗能力丧失拘留”政策作为解决这一未解决问题的手段。