Involuntary outpatient commitment in Israel: Treatment or control?

Ajzenstadt, Mimi; Aviram, Uri; Kalian, Moshe; Kanter, Arlene S.

doi:10.1016/s0160-2527(01)00084-x

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is another related dilemma: concerns have been expressed widely for some time that the use of involuntary orders in English-speaking countries has been excessive. At the same time, research studies in these countries have indicated that more unfettered access by mental health professionals to the use of involuntary hospital admissions (Large et al 2008 ) and Community (outpatient) Treatment Orders (Ajzenstadt et al 2001;Burgess 2008 , 2009 ) has saved lives, in terms of lessening danger to self and others, and has improved clinical outcomes. This may indicate that in present circumstances, many services have not adequately systematized the skills of developing therapeutic alliances so that they would not need to resort so much to involuntary orders.…”

Section: Is There a Right To Self-determination For Individuals With mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is not a negotiating position. Sometimes the legal insistence on the right to treatment, and clinicians' insistence on providing clinical care, may be regarded as unspoken professional attempts to retain paternalistic authority over these matters, to exert social control over deviance and to protect economic interests in dealing with persons with SPMI (Ajzenstadt et al 2001). Patient advocate groups may suspect parents who seek to secure hospital admission, to argue against discharge, and to ensure effective financial management of their afflicted offspring affairs, of perpetuating parental control and dependency.…”

Section: Hidden Meanings and Miscommunications Between Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Human Rights of People with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness

Rosen¹,

Rosen²,

McGorry³

2012

Mental Health and Human Rights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human rights of people with disability Historically the mental health human rights movement derived human rights for people with mental illnesses from other rights movements. The disability rights movement co-opted techniques from women's rights and black rights movements, and in turn the mental health consumer movement took many cues from the broader disability movement. People with mental illness were relative latecomers to civil and disability rights activism. They were left out of these movements because they were still institutionalized when this movement was gathering steam, and partly because of the stigmatized views from within the movement, that individuals with psychotic disorders were too violent, volatile, or irrational, and unable to meaningfully participate in empowerment (Cook and Jonikas 2002). There is now a clearly defined advocacy sector that is overt in trying to define disability rights. Various nations have enacted disability legislation, culminating in international disability rights conventions 'in an attempt to articulate what social justice means for people with disabilities in receipt of government funded services. ' (Robin Banks-PIAC personal communication). Whereas the old paradigm for disability viewed a disabled person who cannot function because of a particular impairment, the current paradigm assumes that, whether the disability is physical or psychiatric, the person needs some specific aid or accommodation in order to function. In this 'social model' , disability is socially constructed, essentially in social and/or environmental terms (see Belfer et al. in this volume). While self-determination is an important component of the current aspirations of the recovery movement involving individuals with mental illness, claims for total self-determination seem over-idealized and unrealistic. Practical conceptions of selfdetermination and autonomy must allow for a balance with interdependence , social connectedness, and the social aspirations or will of real communities (Cook and Jonikas 2002). Consequently autonomous living with a disability becomes a dynamic interaction between the characteristics of the individual and the features of their social, cultural, natural, and built environment (Cook and Jonikas 2002). To maximize self-determination of those involved, we need to consult with individuals with psychiatric disabilities, their families, and other stakeholders regarding what this would take for each person or group.

show abstract

Section: Is There a Right To Self-determination For Individuals With mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hidden Meanings and Miscommunications Between Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Human Rights of People with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness

Rosen¹,

Rosen²,

McGorry³

2012

Mental Health and Human Rights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Groups opposed to the use of CTOs suggest that if an individual is well enough to live in the community, they are also well enough to make their own decisions regarding treatment, and should not be coerced into taking treatment (Eastman, 1997). It has also been highlighted that CTOs are questionable from a legal perspective as to whether or not they are the least restrictive and coercive form of management possible, particularly as they can be extended for prolonged periods of time (Ajzenstadt et al 2001). Concerns have thus been expressed that without more restrictions and clearer guidelines for their use that the potential exists for CTOs to be overused and perhaps may be viewed as the 'easy option' for managing more difficult clinical patients (Eastman, 1997).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical stability in the community associated with long-term approved leave under the Mental Health Act 2001

Bainbridge

Byrne

Hallahan

et al. 2014

Ir. j. psychol. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…En el Reino Unido 12 el tratamiento ambulatorio involuntario está regulado por el Acta 2007 13 Por último, otro país que también tiene regulado el TAI es Israel a través del Acta del Tratamiento de Pacientes Mentales de 1991 que capacita al psiquiatra de distrito (psiquiatra designado por el Ministerio de Salud) y encargado por ley para ordenar el tratamiento obligatorio fuera del hospital 15 . El tratamiento puede ser ordenado como una condición para el alta hospitalaria o como una alternativa a la hospitalización.…”

Section: Antecedentes Internacionales Del Taiunclassified

Tratamiento ambulatorio involuntario de carácter civil: Una revisión

Portero¹

2010

Cuad. med. forense

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEn este artículo se analiza el tratamiento ambulatorio involuntario (TAI) en España. También hacemos un breve repaso de él en el derecho internacional. En España no hay una legislación explícita del TAI, pero en el año 2004 el grupo parlamentario CIU (Convergencia i Unió) propuso una modificación del articulo 763 de la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil para autorizar el TAI. Surgió así uno de los temas más controvertidos sobre la salud mental de los últimos años estando aún sin resolver. Hay tres posiciones sobre el TAI: aquellos que argumentan a favor, los que argumentan en contra y los que consideran que no es necesaria una nueva legislación.Muchos profesionales esperan que el Tratamiento Asertivo Comunitario (TAC) minimice el denominado "síndrome de puerta giratoria". En España, el Sistema Nacional de Salud recomendó en el año 2006 este tratamiento. Palabras claves: Trastorno mental. Legislación. Tratamiento Ambulatorio Involuntario. Tratamiento Asertivo Comunitario AbstractIn this article, the Involuntary Outpatient Treatment (IOT) in Spain is analized. Also we briefly summarize the international law about it. In Spain there is not explicit legislation about OIT, but in 2004 the Parliamentary Group of CIU (Convergencia i Unió) proposed a modification of the article 763 of the Law of Civil Judgement to explicitly authorising the OIT. This arose one of the most controversial issues in mental health in the last years and nowadays it is not yet solved. There are three positions about de OIT: Those who argument for OIT, those who argument against, and those others who consider unnecessary new legislation.Many professionals hope that Assertive Community Treatment minimize the so-called "revolving door syndrome". This treatment was recommended in 2006 by The National Health System in Spain.

show abstract

Involuntary outpatient commitment in Israel: Treatment or control?

Cited by 12 publications

References 34 publications

The Human Rights of People with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness

The Human Rights of People with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness

Clinical stability in the community associated with long-term approved leave under the Mental Health Act 2001

Tratamiento ambulatorio involuntario de carácter civil: Una revisión

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About