|
| volgende >> |
Tijdschrift beschrijving
Alle jaargangen van het bijbehorende tijdschrift
Alle afleveringen van het bijbehorende jaargang
Alle artikelen van de bijbehorende aflevering
Details van artikel 1 van 12 gevonden artikelen
| Titel: |
A survey of treatment for unclassified disorder among detained general and forensic patients at a large psychiatric hospital |
| Auteur: |
Haw, Camilla Stubbs, Jean Irons, Ashley |
| Verschenen in: |
The journal of forensic psychiatry & psychology |
| Paginering: | Jaargang 16 (2005) nr. 3 pagina's 494-507 |
| Jaar: |
2005-09 |
| Inhoud: |
Background: In April 2003 a Court of Appeal judgement (R v Ashworth Hospital Authority ex p B [2003]) ruled that it is unlawful to treat a patient compulsorily and against his will, unless it is for the mental disorder which he is classified to be suffering from under the Mental Health Act, 1983. Aim: To determine the proportion of patients receiving treatment for an unclassified mental disorder in a large psychiatric hospital. Method: A cross-sectional survey of detained general and forensic psychiatric inpatients was undertaken. Interviews were conducted with the responsible medical officers (RMOs) of a random sample of 60 patients detained under the single legal categories of: mental illness (N = 20), psychopathic disorder (N = 20) and mental impairment or severe mental impairment (N = 20). Results: A total of 228 patients were surveyed, of whom 188 (82%) were detained under a single legal category. In the sample of 60 patients, 10 were found to be receiving treatment for an unclassified disorder (0/20 of those with mental illness, 6/20 with psychopathic disorder and 4/20 with mental impairment or severe mental impairment). Based on these proportions, an estimated 16/228 (7%) patients were receiving treatment for an unclassified disorder). Five were restricted patients, and therefore required a mental health review tribunal (MHRT) to effect reclassification. For two patients the unclassified disorder did not meet the statutory criteria. In all 10 cases the RMO considered that if treatment for the unclassified disorder were stopped there would be a serious deterioration in the patient's mental health. In light of the judgement, patients receiving treatment for unclassified disorder are now being reclassified where appropriate. Conclusions: The judgement has significant practical implications for patients, RMOs, and MHRTs. Nationally, a large number of patients are likely to require reclassification. Some will challenge that reclassification. As a result, the workload of RMOs and MHRTs will increase. Difficulties will arise where a patient refuses treatment for an unclassified disorder and cannot be reclassified. Restricted patients pose particular difficulties, as they can only be reclassified by an MHRT. |
| Uitgever: |
Routledge |
| Bronbestand: |
Elektronische Wetenschappelijke Tijdschriften |
Details van artikel 1 van 12 gevonden artikelen
| volgende >> |