能力评估中的宗教问题。

Religious issues in the capacity evaluation.

作者信息

Waldfogel S, Meadows S

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107, USA.

出版信息

Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1996 May;18(3):173-82. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(96)00003-5.

DOI:10.1016/0163-8343(96)00003-5

Abstract

The authors explore the difficulties present in the capacity evaluation of patients with strong religious beliefs. The article reviews the legal protection for treatment refusal on religious grounds as well as psychiatry's approach to religion. Clinical cases encountered in an urban hospital are presented to highlight how the conflicts among psychiatric, religious, and legal issues can be resolved. Suggestions are made for incorporating an exploration of religious values into the capacity assessment.

摘要

作者探讨了对具有强烈宗教信仰的患者进行能力评估时存在的困难。本文回顾了基于宗教理由拒绝治疗的法律保护以及精神病学对宗教的处理方式。文中呈现了一家城市医院遇到的临床案例，以突出精神科、宗教和法律问题之间的冲突该如何解决。文中还就将宗教价值观探索纳入能力评估提出了建议。

相似文献

1

Religious issues in the capacity evaluation.能力评估中的宗教问题。

Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1996 May;18(3):173-82. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(96)00003-5.

2

Ethical, legal, and psychiatric issues in capacity, competency, and informed consent: an annotated bibliography.能力、行为能力与知情同意中的伦理、法律及精神科问题：一份注释性文献目录

Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1996 May;18(3):155-72. doi: 10.1016/0163-8343(96)00016-3.

3

Rationality and the refusal of medical treatment: a critique of the recent approach of the English courts.

J Med Ethics. 1995 Jun;21(3):162-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.21.3.162.

4

Informed consent and the refusal of medical treatment in the correctional setting.惩教机构中的知情同意与拒绝医疗

J Law Med Ethics. 1999 Fall;27(3):240-51, 210. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720x.1999.tb01458.x.

5

Iatrogenic ethical problems: commentary on "can a patient refuse a psychiatric consultation to evaluate decision-making capacity"?医源性伦理问题：对《患者能否拒绝精神科会诊以评估决策能力？》的评论

J Clin Ethics. 1994 Fall;5(3):234-7.

6

Toward a pure best interests model of proxy decision making for incompetent psychiatric patients.迈向针对无行为能力精神病患者的纯粹最佳利益代理决策模式。

Int J Law Psychiatry. 1998 Winter;21(1):1-30. doi: 10.1016/s0160-2527(97)00056-3.

7

Authenticity and autonomy in the managed-care era: forensic psychiatric perspectives.管理式医疗时代的真实性与自主性：法医精神病学视角

J Clin Ethics. 1994 Fall;5(3):237-42.

8

Consent and capacity in psychiatric practice revisited.重新审视精神病学实践中的同意与行为能力

Eur J Health Law. 2000 Mar;7(1):47-55. doi: 10.1163/15718090020523043.

9

Consent and the mentally disordered detained patient.同意与被拘留的精神障碍患者。

Br J Nurs. 2003;12(22):1331-4. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2003.12.22.11896.

10

Image of psychiatric patients' competency to give informed consent to treatment in Japan. I. A factor analytic study.日本精神病患者对治疗给予知情同意的能力的影像。I. 一项因素分析研究。

Int J Law Psychiatry. 1999 Jan-Feb;22(1):45-54. doi: 10.1016/s0160-2527(98)00036-3.

引用本文的文献

1

Can procedural and substantive elements of decision-making be reconciled in assessments of mental capacity?在评估心理能力时，决策的程序要素和实质要素能否协调一致？

Int J Law Context. 2013 Mar;9(1):71-86. doi: 10.1017/S1744552312000493.

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。

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型，支持多种主流文档格式。