Suppr超能文献

依据2017年《精神卫生保健法》与法定机构打交道。

Dealing with statutory bodies under the Mental Healthcare Act 2017.

作者信息

Prashanth N R, Abraham Shalu Elizabeth, Hongally Chandrashekar, Madhusudan S

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.

出版信息

Indian J Psychiatry. 2019 Apr;61(Suppl 4):S717-S723. doi: 10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_152_19.

Abstract

India has an enormous burden of mental illness. In spite of the recognition of this population of people living with mental illness, the treatment gap continues to be about 83%. In order to meet this vast unmet need and in the view of aligning the mental health legislation with the international standards and the UN-Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the Mental Healthcare Act 2017 was passed and enforced recently. The provisions in the act have been controversial from its conception. Now after the enforcement of the act, all mental health professionals (MHPs) have a legal binding to follow the provisions in the law. The MHPs are accountable to the statutory bodies - the Central Mental Health Authority, State Mental Health Authority (SMHA), Mental Health Review Board, and finally, the High Court or the Supreme Court. The Mental Healthcare Act (MHCA) and relevant articles/documents obtained pertaining to MHCA and their evaluation were reviewed, the major focus being on the role of statutory/regulatory bodies. Furthermore, an attempt was made to summarize the previous experiences in inspection of mental health establishments by SMHA of Karnataka. We concluded that the MHCA will have both positive and negative aspects. Many of the provisions in the law may appear unclear and unrealistic by many practitioners. However, it becomes precautionary for the MHPs to be well equipped with the MHCA and be acquainted with the requirements of the statutory bodies for ensuring a safe practice. The outcome of the implementation of the act will become evident only with time.

摘要

印度面临着巨大的精神疾病负担。尽管认识到了这一患有精神疾病的人群,但治疗缺口仍持续约为83%。为了满足这一巨大的未满足需求,并鉴于使心理健康立法与国际标准以及《联合国残疾人权利公约》保持一致,《2017年精神保健法》最近获得通过并开始实施。该法案中的条款从构思之初就颇具争议。如今该法案实施后,所有精神卫生专业人员(MHPs)都有法律义务遵守法律条款。精神卫生专业人员要对法定机构负责,这些机构包括中央精神卫生管理局、邦精神卫生管理局(SMHA)、精神卫生复审委员会,最终还有高等法院或最高法院。对《精神保健法》(MHCA)以及获取的与MHCA相关的文章/文件及其评估进行了审查,主要重点是法定/监管机构的作用。此外,还尝试总结了卡纳塔克邦邦精神卫生管理局对精神卫生机构检查的以往经验。我们得出的结论是,《精神保健法》会有积极和消极两方面的影响。许多从业者可能觉得该法律中的许多条款不明确且不切实际。然而,精神卫生专业人员充分了解《精神保健法》并熟悉法定机构的要求以确保安全执业是很有必要的预防措施。该法案实施的结果只有随着时间推移才会显现出来。

相似文献

1
Dealing with statutory bodies under the Mental Healthcare Act 2017.依据2017年《精神卫生保健法》与法定机构打交道。
Indian J Psychiatry. 2019 Apr;61(Suppl 4):S717-S723. doi: 10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_152_19.
2
Liabilities and penalties under Mental Healthcare Act 2017.《2017年精神卫生保健法》规定的责任与处罚。
Indian J Psychiatry. 2019 Apr;61(Suppl 4):S724-S729. doi: 10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_150_19.
6
Making the most of Mental Healthcare Act 2017: Practitioners' perspective.充分利用《2017年精神卫生保健法》:从业者视角
Indian J Psychiatry. 2019 Apr;61(Suppl 4):S645-S649. doi: 10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_98_19.
8
Cost estimation for the implementation of the Mental Healthcare Act 2017.2017年《精神卫生保健法》实施的成本估算。
Indian J Psychiatry. 2019 Apr;61(Suppl 4):S650-S659. doi: 10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_188_19.

本文引用的文献

5
The mental health care bill 2013: a critical appraisal.《2013年精神卫生保健法案》:批判性评估
Indian J Psychol Med. 2015 Apr-Jun;37(2):215-9. doi: 10.4103/0253-7176.155634.
7

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