Treatment Of The Medical Rights

What is a mental illness? Mental illnesses are disturbed thoughts, feelings, and moods that affect people’s daily functioning. Being hospitalized for having a mental illness is categorized as voluntary or involuntary where voluntary hospitalization is agreeing to be admitted to the hospital for treatment; while involuntary hospitalization is against a person’s will when he or she is harmful to him or her-self or others (NAMI). The issue with involuntary hospitalization is that is it permissible to admit someone to the hospital against his or her will. For instance, in a suicide case, those who agree to involuntary hospitalization would argue that it is a “way to uphold the right to self-determination” and an action to prevent other

Under the Mental Health Act 2014, mental illness is defined as a medical condition whereby thought, perception, mood or memories are considered to be disturbed (Vic, p. 15). But at what point does this Act deem it acceptable to override a person who is experiencing mental illness right to choice around their treatment or freedom? Likewise is the process of a compulsory treatment order or admission as an involuntary patient conducive towards an individual’s wellbeing and recovery from mental illness? This short essay aims to explore these questions through analysing the discourses of care, control and protection. The interventions imposed on the individual of forced medication, restraint and seclusion will be considered within a non-indigenous family context in contemporary Australian mores and norms surrounding cultural perceptions of mental illness and mental health displayed in policy and legislation.

Crazy by Pete Earley and a series of class videos highlight the tension between access to care and the right of refusal for mental illness patients. Core themes and patterns in the material show the difficulties between state governments and local resources. Each film and book explores the availability of voluntary community-based treatments; personal and professional ethics regarding the individual choice to refuse treatment; and community demands for consumer safety and others.

People’s rights are important, just as peoples’ safety, but what if the two contradict each other, especially when discussing people who suffer from mental illness. When we talk about severely mentally ill people, should we be more concerned about the particular person, or what the mental illness is capable of doing to the person. Debates and serious conversation have been sparked by the simple question that most people are yearning for an answer to: should the mentally ill be forced to take medication. Both sides of the argument makes points that make you think about ethics, and decent human rights.

However, many individuals who may be mentally infirm or were committed to a psychiatric facility could keep on being fit for directing and controlling their own medical care, including the privilege to consent to treatment or to refuse treatment; legal requirements vary with jurisdiction, so physicians should be generally familiar with the applicable mental health legislation in their

An article written by Carl Elliot in Mother Jones magazine tells the case of 26 year old Dan Markingson. Dan was enrolled in a psychiatric drug study at the University of Minnesota in 2003. Dan’s mother, Mary Weiss had him admitted to a hospital on November 12th because he was having delusions and threatened to kill her and other people. Dan was taken to a teaching hospital at the University of Minnesota,where Dr. Stephen Olson diagnosed him as psychotic and dangerous and unable to make decisions for treatment. A week later on November 20th , Dr. Olson asked the court to grant Dan a “stay of commitment” where the patient can leave as long as they abide by the treatment prescribed by their doctor. Olson did not practice standard treatment and

As a congressman from the state of Oregon that currently has a regulated physician assisted suicide program for the terminally ill, I am writing to you today, Mr. Blumenauer, to possibly convince you to draft a national law to legalize PAS for the United States specifically for the terminally ill. As you may know, the talk within this issue has been going around quite some time. Many americans fear that by legalizing PAS that it might create problematic issues that could lead to abuse as well as lack of advancement for medicine. Due to this fear, I feel as though you are the best person to draft this bill because you know what works and what does not. This also makes you adequate to advance this conversation currently going on about

Mason, Gardner, Outlaw, & OGrady, (2016) explains cost, quality, access and racial disparity complications persist throughout the health care system. Healthcare policies work to alleviate these problems associated with the healthcare system. The purpose of this discussion is to identify healthcare policies related to access, equity, quality, and cost. Next, I'll explain what the healthcare reform means to uninsured and underinsured individuals. Following I will identify the implication of limited access to the vulnerable population. Finally, I will describe what nurses can do to help increase awareness of the civil rights in healthcare.

As addressed above, Congress enacted the patient Self Determination Act in 1990. They determined that any healthcare organization who participates in Medicare or Medicaid have to provide patients with written information concerning their rights when it comes to their medical care. This information needs to be given to the patient upon admission and placed in a prominent place in their medical record. This is not a voluntary program, compliance is mandatory. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid can audit an organizations compliance at any time and if they are not compliant that organization will be in jeopardy of not being allowed to participate in Medicare or Medicaid.

The critics also disagree with involuntary medication because it forces submission rather then using practices directed at achieving mental health. The question is at what point does someone’s rights have to be violated in order to protect themselves and the individuals around them?

There is a basic understanding that government exists to care for the well-being of its people. On the other hand, how far should a government go in order to ensure that its citizens are healthy and able to provide to the workforce, and therefore the well-being of the country as a whole? As a part of a social welfare system that advocates for the well-being of the individual, social workers must also look at the policies in place to address the physical, emotional, and psychological well-being of the population they serve. Social workers must also assess whether the policies that are enacted follow the values that have been instilled for the betterment of the community. In order to advocate for their clients, a social worker must be knowledgeable about the additional policies in place that were noted as resolutions to the issue. Do individuals have access to better cancer diagnosis options and treatment with the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010? This literature review aims to discuss the many perspectives available in order to best answer this question.

One other limitation is using coercion to get the patient to do what he or she needs to do. Some finds this controversial, however with every action or decision there is a consequence that follows whether the consequence is positive or negative. Depending on the person’s mental illness the higher the severity the higher the risk of making harming and detrimental decisions. While many may say coercion is not the way to go there are also many that believe the mentally ill should be safe and protected while being able to integrate in society.

N H S S Tan (This Essay won the Singapore Medical Association Ethics Essay Award (Non-medical Undergraduate Category) in 2001.)

A Patient's Rights to Refuse Treatment and How it Relates to Learned Helplessness of Individuals

The health care industry continually deals with the lives of individuals and is bound by the ethical and legal aspects that influence decisions of health care professionals in their clinical practice. This essay aims to discuss the various issues and ethical dilemmas that arise with regards to the consent of consumers. In the attempt to explore these points, different literatures are used to shed light on this topic. This paper begins by defining what consent is and the role of nurses or the health care team in being an advocate of the patient when requiring consent. It moves on with the discussion of ethical frameworks, which are recognized nationally and internationally, as these carry significant influences in health care decision-making. The essay also brings out the essence of ethical theories and its relevance to consent giving. It then tackles the similarities and differences of the Code of Ethics and ethical guidelines relevant to both nursing and midwives as both professions work closely in the care of mothers, children and families. Issues and views from experienced professionals in these fields are presented and critically compared. It then considers both ethical and legal aspects, which seeks arguments and rational implications. The last topic points to the social and spiritual factors pertinent to consent that impact the society particularly on the care of patients and concludes by summarising discussed points and arguments about consent.