拒绝用药:干预建议。

The Psychiatric hospital Pub Date : 1990-01-01
R A Prehn
{"title":"拒绝用药:干预建议。","authors":"R A Prehn","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The civil rights and deinstitutionalization movements of the 1960s gave rise to legal and ethical challenges to the physician's authority to prescribe psychoactive medication to patients who refuse such medication. While no definitive legal ruling has been rendered in this area--and may never be rendered--a review of the important cases to date identifies consistent themes of patient competency, the possibility of physical threat, risks versus benefits, due process, and patient advocacy, all of which form the framework for intervening with patients who choose to refuse medication while preserving their right to do so.</p>","PeriodicalId":79749,"journal":{"name":"The Psychiatric hospital","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medication refusal: suggestions for intervention.\",\"authors\":\"R A Prehn\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The civil rights and deinstitutionalization movements of the 1960s gave rise to legal and ethical challenges to the physician's authority to prescribe psychoactive medication to patients who refuse such medication. While no definitive legal ruling has been rendered in this area--and may never be rendered--a review of the important cases to date identifies consistent themes of patient competency, the possibility of physical threat, risks versus benefits, due process, and patient advocacy, all of which form the framework for intervening with patients who choose to refuse medication while preserving their right to do so.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79749,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Psychiatric hospital\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1990-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Psychiatric hospital\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Psychiatric hospital","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

20世纪60年代的民权运动和去机构化运动引发了对医生给拒绝服药的病人开精神药物的权威的法律和伦理挑战。虽然在这一领域还没有明确的法律裁决,而且可能永远不会做出裁决,但对迄今为止重要案例的回顾发现了患者能力、身体威胁的可能性、风险与收益、正当程序和患者辩护等一致的主题,所有这些都构成了对选择拒绝服药的患者进行干预的框架,同时保留了他们这样做的权利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Medication refusal: suggestions for intervention.

The civil rights and deinstitutionalization movements of the 1960s gave rise to legal and ethical challenges to the physician's authority to prescribe psychoactive medication to patients who refuse such medication. While no definitive legal ruling has been rendered in this area--and may never be rendered--a review of the important cases to date identifies consistent themes of patient competency, the possibility of physical threat, risks versus benefits, due process, and patient advocacy, all of which form the framework for intervening with patients who choose to refuse medication while preserving their right to do so.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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