A paper concerning an ethical dilemma in the field of mental health
- The Gibbs model
- Should the patient be given ECT or NOT ?
- The modern Human Rights movement
- The principle of beneficence
- The service received by Kate at all times
Being subject to Section three of the Mental Health Act 1983 removes some rights taken for granted by members of today's society. Patients subject to this Mental Health Act may find it difficult to exercise the right of autonomy, and furthermore face many ethical dilemmas whilst under a Mental Health Section. This paper aims to identify and reflect on such a situation witnessed by a second year mental health student whilst on placement at an intensive support psychiatric unit.
It will analyze the legal and ethical dilemma, and relate theory to practice in the context of medical ethics. The principles of Autonomy, beneficence, and justice will be raised and a rational for these theories will be interpreted, based around the dilemma of treatment without consent.
[...] It would be only too easy to adopt regimented procedures in heretic from the Victorian era of mental health nursing, and forcibly treat patients with medication or arguably, methods of extreme treatment programs. It is necessary at times to have to establish the ethical rights of the patient versus the paternalistic approach of the service providers when considering the best treatment required. It is equally important to establish the needs of the patient and establish the benefits of not treating against the loss of any further therapeutic privilege, if forced treatment is to be executed. [...]
[...] Under the terms of the Mental Health Act, Section fifty-eight, he had a duty to call for a second opinion doctor. A detailed explanation of this act is found at the Department of Health and Welsh Office (1990). Medical ethics define autonomy as the right of the patient to decide what will happen to one self. The Human Rights Act sometimes comes into conflict with medical ethics especially in the mental health setting. The modern Human Rights movement developed in the aftermath of systematic Nazi atrocities in World War II. [...]
[...] To do good to all men, General medical council (2004) Beneficence is one of the key ethical principles called to question in many ethical dilemmas. The writings of Goold, S.Williams, B. Arnold RM (2000). Support the continual debates regarding the views of doctors, and patients whilst trying to reach a suitable solution to treat an illness or individual . Beneficence can be defined as acting to prevent evil or harm; it also requires that benefits be balanced against risks and costs. [...]