Balbuena Rivera Francisco
Facultad de Educacion, Universidad de Huelva, Huelva, Spain.
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2024 Dec;70(8):1392-1401. doi: 10.1177/00207640241268356. Epub 2024 Aug 2.
After a period of institution-based mental health care, in which the asylum system was the way in which the mental patients were treated, deinstitutionalization brought a set of significant changes and transformations in the conceptualization of mental illness and, by extension, the traditional therapeutic settings in which those in most need were assisted. However, this shift in the psychiatric domain was not only accompanied by valued achievements, but also by difficulties and challenges, as has been evidenced today.
AIM/OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is thus to examine the pros and cons of the closure of asylums, and the subsequent implementation of deinstitutionalization over the 60 years or so of such important transformations in the field of psychiatry.
In considering this question, I examine in detail recent works of literature based on scholarly knowledge. In addition, I identify various issues involved, as well as ways of confronting these so as to attempt to overcome the difficulties they present.
As I show here, the changes in the treatment and care of the mentally ill after asylum and deinstitutionalization brought a new air of hope to patients and their families, but also had undesirable effects. The paper also considers how mental health professionals today try to solve these effects on behalf of patients and society as a whole.
在以机构为基础的精神卫生保健时期，收容系统是治疗精神病人的方式，非机构化在精神疾病的概念化方面带来了一系列重大变化和转变，进而也改变了为最需要帮助的人提供援助的传统治疗环境。然而，正如如今所证明的，精神科领域的这一转变不仅伴随着有价值的成就，也伴随着困难和挑战。
因此，本文的目的是探讨精神病院关闭的利弊，以及在精神病学领域如此重要的转变大约60年的时间里随后实施的非机构化的情况。
在思考这个问题时，我根据学术知识详细研究了最近的文献作品。此外，我确定了所涉及的各种问题以及应对这些问题的方法，以便试图克服它们所带来的困难。
正如我在此所表明的，收容和非机构化之后精神疾病治疗与护理的变化给患者及其家庭带来了新的希望，但也产生了不良影响。本文还探讨了当今精神卫生专业人员如何代表患者和整个社会努力解决这些影响。
