“知情同意对我来说有点像笑话”:在心理健康护理环境中的洞察力、胁迫和能力的生活经历

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW International Journal of Law in Context Pub Date : 2023-06-20 DOI:10.1017/s1744552323000174
Magdalena Furgalska
{"title":"“知情同意对我来说有点像笑话”:在心理健康护理环境中的洞察力、胁迫和能力的生活经历","authors":"Magdalena Furgalska","doi":"10.1017/s1744552323000174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The Independent Review of the Mental Health Act 1983 found that people’s experiences and self-knowledge were mislabelled as a ‘lack of insight’. Insight, a psychiatric concept, is defined as an ability to recognise one’s mental illness, awareness of one’s symptoms and compliance with treatment. Across different jurisdictions, legal scholars have raised concerns about the influence of insight on legal provisions for psychiatric care and mental capacity assessments, given its prevalent use in psychiatry and its absence from statutory criteria. However, outside of these findings, little is known about people’s lived experiences of ‘insight’ and the law. This article draws on narrative and photo-elicitation interviews with psychiatric survivors to argue that insight is an extra-legislative proxy for regulating involuntary detention and other coercion masked as consent. Finally, this article draws on the capabilities approach to deliver a justice argument for creating real opportunities to provide informed consent in mental health settings.","PeriodicalId":45455,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law in Context","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Informed consent is a bit of a joke to me’: lived experiences of insight, coercion, and capabilities in mental health care settings\",\"authors\":\"Magdalena Furgalska\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1744552323000174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The Independent Review of the Mental Health Act 1983 found that people’s experiences and self-knowledge were mislabelled as a ‘lack of insight’. Insight, a psychiatric concept, is defined as an ability to recognise one’s mental illness, awareness of one’s symptoms and compliance with treatment. Across different jurisdictions, legal scholars have raised concerns about the influence of insight on legal provisions for psychiatric care and mental capacity assessments, given its prevalent use in psychiatry and its absence from statutory criteria. However, outside of these findings, little is known about people’s lived experiences of ‘insight’ and the law. This article draws on narrative and photo-elicitation interviews with psychiatric survivors to argue that insight is an extra-legislative proxy for regulating involuntary detention and other coercion masked as consent. Finally, this article draws on the capabilities approach to deliver a justice argument for creating real opportunities to provide informed consent in mental health settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Law in Context\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Law in Context\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744552323000174\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law in Context","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744552323000174","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《1983年精神卫生法独立审查》发现,人们的经历和自我认知被错误地贴上了“缺乏洞察力”的标签。洞察力是一个精神病学的概念,被定义为认识自己的精神疾病、意识到自己的症状并遵守治疗的能力。在不同的司法管辖区,法律学者对洞察力对精神病学护理和精神能力评估的法律规定的影响表示关切,因为它在精神病学中普遍使用,而且没有法定标准。然而,除了这些发现之外,人们对“洞察力”和法律的生活经历知之甚少。这篇文章通过对精神病幸存者的叙述和照片引出式采访来论证,洞察力是一种立法外的代理,用来规范非自愿拘留和其他伪装成同意的胁迫。最后,本文借鉴了能力方法,为在心理健康环境中创造提供知情同意的真正机会提供公正的论据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Informed consent is a bit of a joke to me’: lived experiences of insight, coercion, and capabilities in mental health care settings
The Independent Review of the Mental Health Act 1983 found that people’s experiences and self-knowledge were mislabelled as a ‘lack of insight’. Insight, a psychiatric concept, is defined as an ability to recognise one’s mental illness, awareness of one’s symptoms and compliance with treatment. Across different jurisdictions, legal scholars have raised concerns about the influence of insight on legal provisions for psychiatric care and mental capacity assessments, given its prevalent use in psychiatry and its absence from statutory criteria. However, outside of these findings, little is known about people’s lived experiences of ‘insight’ and the law. This article draws on narrative and photo-elicitation interviews with psychiatric survivors to argue that insight is an extra-legislative proxy for regulating involuntary detention and other coercion masked as consent. Finally, this article draws on the capabilities approach to deliver a justice argument for creating real opportunities to provide informed consent in mental health settings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
47
期刊最新文献
Socio-legal instabilities in Ukraine’s wartime Compensation Law for damaged and destroyed residential property Fault Lines in the Rule of Law: Europe’s Present and the Presence of its Past The Role of Judicial Associations in Resisting Rule of Law Backsliding: Hidden Pathways of Protecting Judicial Independence Amidst Rule of Law Decay Hidden rule of law discontinuities: A theoretical framework for studying rule of law backsliding Backsliding Democracy and the Slippery Slope of Conceptual Weakness
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1