Hospitalisations sans consentement : repères historiques et contemporains de l’intervention judiciaire dans le contrôle des mesures

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
Alice Viterbo (Praticien hospitalier contractuel)
{"title":"Hospitalisations sans consentement : repères historiques et contemporains de l’intervention judiciaire dans le contrôle des mesures","authors":"Alice Viterbo (Praticien hospitalier contractuel)","doi":"10.1016/j.evopsy.2024.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The question of judicial control emerged with the debates surrounding the law of 30 June 1838 instituting psychiatric hospitalization. However, it was systematically rejected until the law of 5 July 2011. This article examines the conditions under which such control was introduced.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>The aim is to analyze the debates surrounding the protection of the rights of mental patients hospitalized under judicial control during the proposed reforms to compulsory hospitalization. The reasons for the exclusion of judicial control from the 1838 and 1990 legislation will first be examined, before looking at the conditions leading to judicial review in 2011.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The introduction of systematic judicial control appears to be the result of the mobilization of patients’ associations, who brought the Question Prioritaire de Constitutionnalité (QPC) before the courts. This ability to use the law reflects a more developed legal knowledge, due to the legal route taken to assert their claims. This method of imposing reform bypasses the usual channels for reform.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>The reform has therefore led to the decision to unify litigation and to a systematic hearing by the <em>juge des libertés et de la détention</em> (JLD) for any patient hospitalized without consent.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The use of the QPC as a strategy for imposing reforms in psychiatry has flourished in the years since the reform, in particular to question the legality of other psychiatric practices. However, the ability of the law to prevent these decisions from being arbitrary needs to be questioned.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":45007,"journal":{"name":"Evolution Psychiatrique","volume":"90 1","pages":"Pages 145-160"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolution Psychiatrique","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014385524000331","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","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 question of judicial control emerged with the debates surrounding the law of 30 June 1838 instituting psychiatric hospitalization. However, it was systematically rejected until the law of 5 July 2011. This article examines the conditions under which such control was introduced.

Method

The aim is to analyze the debates surrounding the protection of the rights of mental patients hospitalized under judicial control during the proposed reforms to compulsory hospitalization. The reasons for the exclusion of judicial control from the 1838 and 1990 legislation will first be examined, before looking at the conditions leading to judicial review in 2011.

Results

The introduction of systematic judicial control appears to be the result of the mobilization of patients’ associations, who brought the Question Prioritaire de Constitutionnalité (QPC) before the courts. This ability to use the law reflects a more developed legal knowledge, due to the legal route taken to assert their claims. This method of imposing reform bypasses the usual channels for reform.

Discussion

The reform has therefore led to the decision to unify litigation and to a systematic hearing by the juge des libertés et de la détention (JLD) for any patient hospitalized without consent.

Conclusion

The use of the QPC as a strategy for imposing reforms in psychiatry has flourished in the years since the reform, in particular to question the legality of other psychiatric practices. However, the ability of the law to prevent these decisions from being arbitrary needs to be questioned.
未经同意住院:司法干预措施控制的历史和当代基准
目的围绕1838年6月30日关于精神病住院制度的法律的辩论,出现了司法控制的问题。然而,在2011年7月5日的法律出台之前,它一直被系统性地拒绝。本文考察了引入这种控制的条件。方法分析我国强制住院制度改革过程中围绕司法监护精神病人权利保障的争论。首先将审查1838年和1990年立法中排除司法控制的原因,然后再研究导致2011年司法审查的条件。结果系统司法控制的引入似乎是患者协会动员的结果,他们将宪法优先问题(QPC)提交法院。这种运用法律的能力反映了一种更发达的法律知识,因为采取了法律途径来主张他们的主张。这种强加改革的方法绕过了通常的改革渠道。讨论因此,改革导致了统一诉讼的决定,并导致了由自由和变性人法官(JLD)系统地审理未经同意住院的任何病人。自改革以来,将QPC作为精神病学改革的一种策略得到了蓬勃发展,特别是质疑其他精神病学实践的合法性。然而,法律是否有能力防止这些武断的决定需要受到质疑。
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
0.70
自引率
50.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: Une revue de référence pour le praticien, le chercheur et le étudiant en sciences humaines Cahiers de psychologie clinique et de psychopathologie générale fondés en 1925, Évolution psychiatrique est restée fidèle à sa mission de ouverture de la psychiatrie à tous les courants de pensée scientifique et philosophique, la recherche clinique et les réflexions critiques dans son champ comme dans les domaines connexes. Attentive à histoire de la psychiatrie autant aux dernières avancées de la recherche en biologie, en psychanalyse et en sciences sociales, la revue constitue un outil de information et une source de référence pour les praticiens, les chercheurs et les étudiants.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信