{"title":"洞察力和拒绝电休克疗法治疗的能力。","authors":"Russ Scott, Steve Prowacki","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>All Australian jurisdictions have statutory provisions governing the use of electroconvulsive therapy. Cases in which the patient lacks insight into their psychotic illness and need for treatment and refuses to have ECT are particularly poignant. In Re ICO [2023] QMHC 1, the Queensland Mental Health Court considered whether a patient with a treatment-resistant psychotic illness had decision-making capacity to refuse ECT. The Court also considered whether the patient had been provided with an adequate explanation of the proposed treatment including the expected benefits, risks and adverse effects of ECT. As well as deciding whether ECT was appropriate in the circumstances, the Court considered whether there were alternative treatments including another trial of the oral antipsychotic clozapine. This article reviews issues relating to lack of insight in persons with psychotic illness and relevant considerations for determining capacity to decline ECT.</p>","PeriodicalId":45522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Medicine","volume":"31 2","pages":"273-323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insight and the Capacity to Refuse Treatment with Electroconvulsive Therapy.\",\"authors\":\"Russ Scott, Steve Prowacki\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>All Australian jurisdictions have statutory provisions governing the use of electroconvulsive therapy. Cases in which the patient lacks insight into their psychotic illness and need for treatment and refuses to have ECT are particularly poignant. In Re ICO [2023] QMHC 1, the Queensland Mental Health Court considered whether a patient with a treatment-resistant psychotic illness had decision-making capacity to refuse ECT. The Court also considered whether the patient had been provided with an adequate explanation of the proposed treatment including the expected benefits, risks and adverse effects of ECT. As well as deciding whether ECT was appropriate in the circumstances, the Court considered whether there were alternative treatments including another trial of the oral antipsychotic clozapine. This article reviews issues relating to lack of insight in persons with psychotic illness and relevant considerations for determining capacity to decline ECT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"273-323\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
澳大利亚所有司法管辖区都有关于使用电休克疗法的法律规定。病人对自己的精神病和治疗需求缺乏洞察力,拒绝接受电休克疗法的案例尤其令人痛心。在 Re ICO [2023] QMHC 1 一案中,昆士兰州精神卫生法院考虑了一名患有难治性精神病的患者是否具有拒绝电痉挛疗法的决策能力。法院还考虑了是否向患者充分解释了拟议的治疗,包括电痉挛疗法的预期益处、风险和不良反应。在决定电痉挛疗法在当时的情况下是否合适的同时,法院还考虑了是否有替代治疗方法,包括再次试用口服抗精神病药物氯氮平。本文回顾了与精神病患者缺乏洞察力有关的问题,以及在确定是否有能力拒绝电痉挛疗法时的相关考虑因素。
Insight and the Capacity to Refuse Treatment with Electroconvulsive Therapy.
All Australian jurisdictions have statutory provisions governing the use of electroconvulsive therapy. Cases in which the patient lacks insight into their psychotic illness and need for treatment and refuses to have ECT are particularly poignant. In Re ICO [2023] QMHC 1, the Queensland Mental Health Court considered whether a patient with a treatment-resistant psychotic illness had decision-making capacity to refuse ECT. The Court also considered whether the patient had been provided with an adequate explanation of the proposed treatment including the expected benefits, risks and adverse effects of ECT. As well as deciding whether ECT was appropriate in the circumstances, the Court considered whether there were alternative treatments including another trial of the oral antipsychotic clozapine. This article reviews issues relating to lack of insight in persons with psychotic illness and relevant considerations for determining capacity to decline ECT.