Chelberg Kristina
Australian Centre for Health Law Research, School of Law, Faculty of Law and Business, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, QLD 4001 Australia.
Int J Semiot Law. 2023 Mar 14:1-24. doi: 10.1007/s11196-023-09979-w.
This paper argues that while regulatory frameworks in aged care authorise restraints to protect vulnerable persons living with dementia from harm, they also serve as normalising practices to control challenging monstrous Others. This argument emerges out of an observed unease in aged care discourse where older people living with dementia are described as 'vulnerable', while dementia behaviours are described as 'challenging'. Using narrative analysis on a case study from the Final Report of the Australian Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety (RCAC), this paper investigates how the RCAC (re)produced constructions of persons with dementia as 'vulnerable monsters'. Drawing upon monstrous theory about 'unruly and leaky' bodies, extracts from the case study reveal how the RCAC repeated and reinforced monstrous constructions of dementia. Dementia behaviours, particularly 'wandering', were constructed through a dehumanising crisis frame that produced 'challenging' bodies and legitimised 'last resort' normalising practices, such as physical and chemical restraints. In failing to resist monstrous constructions of dementia behaviours, the RCAC accepted and authorised a regime of scaled responses leading to restrictive practices for control of challenging bodies in aged care. Although dementia care and restrictive practices received substantial attention in the RCAC, this paper reveals a missed opportunity for deeper review of institutionalised use of restraints that has relevance for ongoing reform of Australian aged care following conclusion of the RCAC.
本文认为,虽然老年护理监管框架授权采取约束措施,以保护患有痴呆症的弱势群体免受伤害,但这些措施也成为了一种常态化手段,用于管控那些具有挑战性的“怪异他者”。这一观点源于在老年护理话语中观察到的一种不安情绪,即患有痴呆症的老年人被描述为“弱势群体”,而痴呆症行为则被描述为“具有挑战性”。通过对澳大利亚皇家老年护理质量与安全委员会(RCAC)最终报告中的一个案例研究进行叙事分析,本文探讨了RCAC如何(重新)构建痴呆症患者为“弱势怪物”。借鉴关于“不羁且渗漏”身体的怪异理论,该案例研究的摘录揭示了RCAC如何重复并强化了对痴呆症的怪异构建。痴呆症行为,尤其是“徘徊”,是通过一种去人性化的危机框架构建出来的,这种框架塑造了“具有挑战性”的身体,并使诸如身体和化学约束等“最后手段”的常态化做法合法化。由于未能抵制对痴呆症行为的怪异构建,RCAC接受并授权了一系列分级应对措施,导致在老年护理中采取限制性做法来控制具有挑战性的身体。尽管痴呆症护理和限制性做法在RCAC中受到了大量关注,但本文揭示了一个错失的机会,即未能对约束措施的制度化使用进行更深入的审查,而这对于RCAC结束后澳大利亚老年护理的持续改革具有重要意义。