Show simple item record

dc.creatorCanvin, K.en
dc.creatorBartlett, A.en
dc.creatorPinfold, V.en
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-08T23:41:16Zen
dc.date.available2016-01-08T23:41:16Zen
dc.date.created2005-08en
dc.date.issued2005-08en
dc.identifierdoi:10.1136/jme.2003.004861en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medical Ethics 2005 August; 31(8): 457-462en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Acceptability+of+compulsory+powers+in+the+community:+the+ethical+considerations+of+mental+health+service+users+on+Supervised+Discharge+and+Guardianship&title=Journal+of+Medical+Ethics+&volume=31&issue=8&date=2005-08&au=Canvin,+K.;+Bartlett,+A.;+Pinfold,+V.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jme.2003.004861en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/979987en
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: To explore mental health service users' views of existing and proposed compulsory powers. DESIGN: A qualitative study employing in-depth interviews. Participants were asked to respond to hypothetical questions regarding the application of compulsory powers under the Mental Health Act 1983 for people other than themselves. SETTING: Community setting in Southeast England. PARTICIPANTS: Mental health service users subject to Supervised Discharge/Guardianship. RESULTS: Participants considered that the use of compulsory powers was justified if there were some ultimate benefit, and if there was evidence of mental health problems, dangerousness, or a lack of insight. However, participants rejected intrusions into their autonomy and privacy. CONCLUSIONS: This paper's participants indicated that the proposed CTO may be unacceptable because it would threaten service users' autonomy. Service users' acceptance of proposed changes is conditional and they emphasised the importance of consent; there is no suggestion that consent will be required for the CTO. The findings also have implications for the exploration of mental health service users' views and how they might contribute to policy, service planning, and research.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceeweb:286860en
dc.subjectAutonomyen
dc.subjectConsenten
dc.subjectDangerousnessen
dc.subjectHealthen
dc.subjectInterviewsen
dc.subjectMental Healthen
dc.subjectPrivacyen
dc.subjectResearchen
dc.subject.classificationNeurosciences and Mental Health Therapiesen
dc.subject.classificationInvoluntary Civil Commitmenten
dc.titleAcceptability of Compulsory Powers in the Community: The Ethical Considerations of Mental Health Service Users on Supervised Discharge and Guardianshipen
dc.provenanceCitation prepared by the Library and Information Services group of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University for the ETHXWeb database.en
dc.provenanceCitation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named EWEB hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection EthxWeb hosted by DigitalGeorgetown.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885