Child and Adolescent Mental Health最新文献

Mental health care is underpinned by human rights. However, certain mental health presentations can be associated with increased risk to self or others. Thus, appropriate and effective care plan to mitigate the risk may include a temporary restriction of the person's human rights. Legal frameworks are required to ensure appropriate safeguards for the affected person, and clarity about boundaries of necessity and proportionality for clinicians. The restriction needs to be proportionate, for the shortest possible period, done in a humane manner, and in a safe environment. Effective early mental interventions can reduce need for human right restrictions by preventing acute escalations in risk-related behaviours. While these principles apply across all regions, we discuss the particular circumstances in low and middle-income countries.

People of all ages are subject to involuntary psychiatric detention and treatment worldwide but there is current discussion about whether this complies with modern human rights law. The use of involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation among children and young people has largely eschewed research and policy interest to date. In this debate section, we hear from people with experience of child mental health services in the UK, USA and low- and middle-income countries about their views on the use of involuntary treatment in young people.

Involuntary treatment is a complex dialectic balancing self-autonomy and the individual's right to consent to treatment with society's duty to protect those suffering from severe mental illness who are at risk of causing harm to themselves or others. When necessary, involuntary treatment should provide evidence-based and medically justified care, with sufficient oversight and due process to protect the rights of patients. Clinically, the issue is not whether involuntary treatment should ever be used, but rather what other services are needed to enhance the quality of care within comprehensive community systems of care, thus limiting or preventing the need for involuntary interventions while also improving the outcomes of individuals affected by severe mental illness.

An important setting to detect youth mental health problems and provide interventions is the school context, but effective and affordable school-based interventions are scarce and implementation of the available evidence-based interventions is limited. In this editorial, we highlight three issues and propose a research agenda. First, we emphasize that many of the mental health interventions currently used in school settings lack a solid evidence base. Second, we outline that high-quality studies are needed to determine what works, for whom it works and under which circumstances. This includes insight into the most effective intervention elements, subgroups of students who profit more or less from these interventions, and the most effective modes of delivery. These questions should drive our research agenda on school-based mental health interventions. Finally, while answering these pivotal questions, a collaborative multidisciplinary effort should be made to implement school-based interventions with a solid evidence base, which involves, among others, studying how this can be done most effectively.

Most social media platforms censor and moderate content related to mental illness to protect users from harm, though this may be at the expense of potential positive outcomes for youth mental health. Current evidence does not offer strong support for the relationship between censoring mental health content and preventing harm. In fact, existing moderation strategies can perpetuate negative consequences for mental health by creating isolated and polarized communities where at-risk youth remain exposed to harmful content, such as pro-eating disorder communities that use lexical variants to evade censorship. Social media censorship of content related to mental illness can also silence positive discourse about mental health, create barriers to accessing online support and resources, and hinder research efforts on youth well-being. Social media content about mental health can have important positive impacts on youth mental health by facilitating help-seeking, depicting positive coping strategies, and promoting a sense of belonging for struggling youth, but these benefits are minimized under existing moderation and censorship practices. This article presents a call to action for evidence-based social media policies and for practitioners to consider the clinical implications of social media engagement when connecting with young patients.