[Keep an Eye on, Control and Treat: Consent to Care at the Quebec Review Board].

IF 0.4 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Sante Mentale au Quebec Pub Date : 2022-01-01
Emmanuelle Bernheim, Guillaume Ouellet, Pierre Pariseau-Legault, Nicolas Sallée
{"title":"[Keep an Eye on, Control and Treat: Consent to Care at the Quebec Review Board].","authors":"Emmanuelle Bernheim,&nbsp;Guillaume Ouellet,&nbsp;Pierre Pariseau-Legault,&nbsp;Nicolas Sallée","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objectives The right to refuse care for accused persons found criminally not responsible on account of mental disorder or unfit to stand trial is recognized and strictly regulated by the legal mechanisms of Quebec civil law, and Canadian criminal law does not allow them to be treated against their will. Review Boards, which are responsible for ruling on and periodically re-evaluating their situation, cannot prescribe treatment, but have the authority, with the consent of the accused, to impose a condition relating to treatment. The purpose of this ethnographic study is to document the discourse and practices of the Quebec Review Board in this area. Method The research material consists of observations from the hearings of the Quebec Review Board (n = 70), file observation grids completed by defense lawyers (n = 191), interviews with psychiatrists (n = 7) and defense lawyers (n = 7) and the study of one hundred court decisions from 2018, randomly selected. Results Our study shows that the practices of the Quebec Review Board make it possible, directly or indirectly, through the ambiguity of conditions or the pressure exerted by certain treatment teams, to override the accused's refusal of care and to impose treatment. The implications of these findings for the evolution of knowledge and practices in forensic psychiatry are discussed. Conclusion While the Review Boards are supposed to manage the risk to public safety, they are in fact, in the context of the State's disengagement in social matters, exercising surveillance and control, in particular via the conditions relating to treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":44148,"journal":{"name":"Sante Mentale au Quebec","volume":"47 1","pages":"111-128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sante Mentale au Quebec","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives The right to refuse care for accused persons found criminally not responsible on account of mental disorder or unfit to stand trial is recognized and strictly regulated by the legal mechanisms of Quebec civil law, and Canadian criminal law does not allow them to be treated against their will. Review Boards, which are responsible for ruling on and periodically re-evaluating their situation, cannot prescribe treatment, but have the authority, with the consent of the accused, to impose a condition relating to treatment. The purpose of this ethnographic study is to document the discourse and practices of the Quebec Review Board in this area. Method The research material consists of observations from the hearings of the Quebec Review Board (n = 70), file observation grids completed by defense lawyers (n = 191), interviews with psychiatrists (n = 7) and defense lawyers (n = 7) and the study of one hundred court decisions from 2018, randomly selected. Results Our study shows that the practices of the Quebec Review Board make it possible, directly or indirectly, through the ambiguity of conditions or the pressure exerted by certain treatment teams, to override the accused's refusal of care and to impose treatment. The implications of these findings for the evolution of knowledge and practices in forensic psychiatry are discussed. Conclusion While the Review Boards are supposed to manage the risk to public safety, they are in fact, in the context of the State's disengagement in social matters, exercising surveillance and control, in particular via the conditions relating to treatment.

[关注、控制和治疗:魁北克审查委员会对护理的同意]。
魁北克民法的法律机制承认并严格规定了拒绝照顾因精神失常或不适合接受审判而被认定无刑事责任的被告的权利,加拿大刑法不允许对他们进行违背其意愿的治疗。审查委员会负责对他们的情况作出裁决和定期重新评价,但不能规定治疗,但有权在被告同意的情况下强加与治疗有关的条件。这项民族志研究的目的是记录魁北克审查委员会在这一领域的话语和实践。方法研究材料包括魁北克审查委员会听证会的观察结果(n = 70)、辩护律师完成的文件观察网格(n = 191)、对精神科医生(n = 7)和辩护律师(n = 7)的访谈,以及对2018年随机抽取的100份法院判决的研究。结果:我们的研究表明,魁北克审查委员会的做法可能直接或间接地通过条件含糊不清或某些治疗小组施加的压力,推翻被告拒绝治疗并施加治疗。讨论了这些发现对法医精神病学知识和实践发展的影响。虽然审查委员会本应管理对公共安全的风险,但实际上,在国家脱离社会事务的情况下,它们在行使监督和控制,特别是通过与治疗有关的条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: In 1976, the community mental health centre (Centre de santé mentale communautaire) of Saint-Luc Hospital organized the first symposium on sector psychiatry. During deliberations, the participants expressed the idea of publishing the various experiences that were then current in the field of mental health. With the help of the symposium’s revenues and the financial support of professionals, the Centre de santé mentale communautaire edited the first issue of Santé mentale au Québec in September 1976, with both objectives of publishing experiences and research in the field of mental health, as well as facilitating exchange between the various mental health professionals.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信