Wisor R L
Cornell University.
Am J Law Med. 1993;19(1-2):145-75.
Even as the Clinton administration considers an increased federal commitment to mental health care, delivery of such care remains fixed at the state level. In Massachusetts, state officials are privatizing mental health care on an unprecedented scale, an experiment that promises to provide better care at lower cost. This Note explores whether privatization can achieve that lofty goal, given a legal system that has made individual patient autonomy its preeminent value. The author concludes that wide-scale privatization and modern notions of self-determination can only coexist with a significant investment in the support services that are critical to the community tenure of former state hospital patients.
即便克林顿政府考虑增加联邦政府对精神卫生保健的投入,但此类保健服务的提供仍停留在州层面。在马萨诸塞州,州政府官员正在以前所未有的规模将精神卫生保健服务私有化,这一试验有望以更低成本提供更好的护理。鉴于一个将患者个体自主权奉为首要价值的法律体系,本评论探讨了私有化能否实现这一崇高目标。作者得出结论,大规模私有化与现代自决观念只有在对那些对于从前州立医院患者的社区安置至关重要的支持性服务进行大量投资的情况下才能共存。