RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Can we justify eliminating coercive measures in psychiatry?
JF Journal of Medical Ethics
JO J Med Ethics
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and Institute of Medical Ethics
SP 69
OP 73
DO 10.1136/jme.2007.022780
VO 35
IS 1
A1 E J D Prinsen
A1 J J M van Delden
YR 2009
UL http://jme.bmj.com/content/35/1/69.abstract
AB The practice of coercive measures in psychiatry is controversial. Although some have suggested that it may be acceptable if patients are a danger to others or to themselves, others committed themselves to eliminate it. Ethical, legal and clinical considerations become more complex when the mental incapacity is temporary and when the coercive measures serve to restore autonomy. We discuss these issues, addressing the conflict between autonomy and beneficence/non-maleficence, human dignity, the experiences of patients and the effects of coercive measures. We argue that an appeal to respect autonomy and/or human dignity cannot be a sufficient reason to reject coercive measures. All together, these ethical aspects can be used both to support and to reject a non-seclusion approach.The total lack of controlled trials about the beneficial effects of coercive measures in different populations however, argues against the use of coercive measures.