实践中的心理能力第二部分:心理能力与自杀患者

IF 1.7 Q3 PSYCHIATRY BJPsych Advances Pub Date : 2023-02-28 DOI:10.1192/bja.2022.82
C. Beale, James Lee-Davey, Tennyson Lee, Alex Ruck Keene
{"title":"实践中的心理能力第二部分:心理能力与自杀患者","authors":"C. Beale, James Lee-Davey, Tennyson Lee, Alex Ruck Keene","doi":"10.1192/bja.2022.82","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article is the second of two looking at assessment of mental capacity in clinical practice. In it, we explore capacity assessments in the context of suicidal thoughts and acts. The laws governing doctors’ responsibility to suicidal patients in England and Wales are poorly understood, with tensions at the interface between the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Dynamics of the clinical encounter (including the countertransference) further exacerbate uncertainty about how clinicians should balance patients’ autonomy with protection of life. We use a case example of a patient presenting with suicidality to describe good practice, based on a balance of legal and clinical principles and up-to-date case law. We discuss the difficulty in applying the MCA in relation to patients who appear to lack a consistent and coherent sense of self and others and consider whether the MCA is fit for purpose in determining whether someone with a personality disorder diagnosis should be permitted to end their own life.","PeriodicalId":9336,"journal":{"name":"BJPsych Advances","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mental capacity in practice part 2: capacity and the suicidal patient\",\"authors\":\"C. Beale, James Lee-Davey, Tennyson Lee, Alex Ruck Keene\",\"doi\":\"10.1192/bja.2022.82\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article is the second of two looking at assessment of mental capacity in clinical practice. In it, we explore capacity assessments in the context of suicidal thoughts and acts. The laws governing doctors’ responsibility to suicidal patients in England and Wales are poorly understood, with tensions at the interface between the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Dynamics of the clinical encounter (including the countertransference) further exacerbate uncertainty about how clinicians should balance patients’ autonomy with protection of life. We use a case example of a patient presenting with suicidality to describe good practice, based on a balance of legal and clinical principles and up-to-date case law. We discuss the difficulty in applying the MCA in relation to patients who appear to lack a consistent and coherent sense of self and others and consider whether the MCA is fit for purpose in determining whether someone with a personality disorder diagnosis should be permitted to end their own life.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9336,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BJPsych Advances\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BJPsych Advances\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1192/bja.2022.82\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJPsych Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bja.2022.82","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

这篇文章是两篇关于临床实践中心理能力评估的文章中的第二篇。在这篇文章中,我们探讨了自杀想法和行为背景下的能力评估。在英格兰和威尔士,关于医生对自杀病人的责任的法律知之甚少,1983年的《精神健康法》(MHA)和2005年的《精神能力法》(MCA)之间存在矛盾。临床遭遇的动态(包括反移情)进一步加剧了临床医生应如何平衡患者自主与保护生命的不确定性。我们用一个病人自杀的例子来描述良好的做法,基于法律和临床原则和最新的判例法的平衡。我们讨论了将MCA应用于缺乏一致和连贯的自我和他人意识的患者的困难,并考虑MCA是否适合用于确定是否应该允许患有人格障碍诊断的人结束自己的生命。
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
Mental capacity in practice part 2: capacity and the suicidal patient
This article is the second of two looking at assessment of mental capacity in clinical practice. In it, we explore capacity assessments in the context of suicidal thoughts and acts. The laws governing doctors’ responsibility to suicidal patients in England and Wales are poorly understood, with tensions at the interface between the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Dynamics of the clinical encounter (including the countertransference) further exacerbate uncertainty about how clinicians should balance patients’ autonomy with protection of life. We use a case example of a patient presenting with suicidality to describe good practice, based on a balance of legal and clinical principles and up-to-date case law. We discuss the difficulty in applying the MCA in relation to patients who appear to lack a consistent and coherent sense of self and others and consider whether the MCA is fit for purpose in determining whether someone with a personality disorder diagnosis should be permitted to end their own life.
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
BJPsych Advances
BJPsych Advances PSYCHIATRY-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
75
期刊最新文献
Psychiatric evidence in UK immigration and asylum cases The role of neurocognitive testing in the assessment of fitness to stand trial Cognitive testing and the hazards of cut-offs The history of the Grange Annual Conference CR193: a framework of knowledge and support for expert witnesses
×
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