Standards für die Behandlung im Maßregelvollzug nach §§ 63 und 64 StGB

Müller, J. L.; Saimeh, Nahlah; Briken, Peer; Eucker, Sabine; Hoffmann, K.; Köller, M.; Wolf, T.; Dudeck, Manuela; Hartl, Christina; Jakovljevic, A.-K.; Klein, Verena; Knecht, G.; Müller-Isberner, Rüdiger; Muysers, Jutta; Schiltz, Kolja; Seifert, D.; Simon, Alfred; Steinböck, Herbert; Stuckmann, W.; Weissbeck, Wolfgang; Wiesemann, Claudia; Zeidler, Reinhard

doi:10.1007/s00115-017-0382-3

Cited by 92 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Even though in its 2017 consensus statement on standards in forensic mental health care in Germany an interdisciplinary expert group emphasized that the four normative principles autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice must be the basis of any therapeutic decision (14), little is known about clinical ethics and the role of CES in forensic mental health care in Germany. Gather et al (15) found that in the federal state of North Rhine-Westphalia, only 29% of all forensic psychiatric hospitals had some kind of CES, whereas 90% of general psychiatric hospitals offered such services.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Ethics Support Services Are Not as Well-Established in Forensic Psychiatry as in General Psychiatry

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Ethics Support Services Are Not as Well-Established in Forensic Psychiatry as in General Psychiatry

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The final checklist consists of 196 items (particular process steps) subdivided into three assessment categories: risk assessment based on SPJ (130 items), granted leave process required by the legislation and recommended by experts (58 Items) and description of documentation systems (8 Items). The items were selected based on a review of the relevant literature with respect to published expert recommendations (34)(35)(36), Bavarian legal requirements for granted leave (16), and SPJ as an international standard (29,(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43). Additional items were added after expert meetings (psychologists and psychiatrists).…”

Section: Checklistmentioning

confidence: 99%

Granting Leave to Patients in Bavarian Forensic-Psychiatric Hospitals: A Survey to Describe the Current Process and Develop Guidelines

Sklenarova¹,

Neutze²,

Kretschmer³

et al. 2020

Front. Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forensic-psychiatric patients reoffending or absconding during the leave granted to them (hereafter referred to as "granted leave") have gained increased attention by researchers and the general public. The patients' right to freedom on the one hand and the need for protection of the general public from serious harm on the other hand represent broadly discussed ethical issues. Thus, demands on quality regarding decisions on patients' granted leaves might be high. Despite such requirements, research on decision-making processes regarding granting leave in forensic psychiatry is very limited and focuses primarily on particular aspects. The present study aims at providing a first overview of the decision-making processes regarding granted leave in forensic psychiatry as a whole. Furthermore, the link between the particular steps of the process and absconding should be explored. In this way, the study results should contribute to provide a theoretical framework for the development of guidelines concerning granted leave in forensic psychiatry. A combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches will be used to collect data: information about risk assessment, decisions on granted leave, and documentation systems in forensic psychiatry will be collected via semi-structured interviews and quantified for further analyses using a checklist developed for this study; data on the implementation of risk assessment tools and documented patient information will be obtained via two self-constructed questionnaires; information about the absolute number of abscondences per hospital will be obtained from the Bavarian Authority for Forensic Commitment. The sample will include staff from all 13 forensic-psychiatric hospitals in Bavaria (Germany) comprising six professional groups: hospital directors, security officers, complementary therapists, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, and nursing staff. In each hospital, at least one member of each professional group should participate in the study. In total, 151 interviews will be held. As the study goals are descriptive, there are no pre-formulated hypotheses. Developing guidelines would be the first step towards further standardization of the granted leave decisional process in Frontiers in Psychiatry | www.frontiersin.org forensic psychiatry and to make it more transparent for patients, staff members, hospital directors, and the government.

show abstract

“…Die Unterbringung im Maßregelvollzug per se stellt bereits eine Maßnahme gegen den Willen des Patienten dar und die Ziele des Maßregelvollzugs -Resozialisierung und Besserung sowie der Schutz der Bevölkerung vor gefährlichen Straftäternspiegeln die Dialektik der dortigen Behandlung wider. Zudem wird den Patienten im Maßregelvollzug häufig ein höheres Gewalt-und Gefahrenpotenzial zugeschrieben [12], aufgrund dessen eine größere Zahl an Zwangsmaßnahmen erwartet werden könnte. Die erhebliche Zunahme forensisch-psychiatrischer Patienten von ca.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Strukturmerkmale und Anwendungshäufigkeit von Zwangsmaßnahmen im deutschen Maßregelvollzug

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zusammenfassung Ziel der Studie Bundesweite Erfassung von Strukturdaten und der Anwendungshäufigkeit von Zwangsmaßnahmen im Maßregelvollzug in Deutschland. Methodik Quantitative Erhebung von Strukturmerkmalen in Maßregelvollzugseinrichtungen und Häufigkeiten und Arten von Zwangsmaßnahmen mittels postalischer Fragebögen im Rahmen der „ZIPHER“-Studie. Ergebnisse Zwangsmaßnahmen kommen in stationären Maßregelvollzugseinrichtungen bei etwa einem Viertel aller Patienten zur Anwendung, wobei Isolierungen (21,2 %) mehr als 6-mal so häufig wie Fixierungen (3,2 %) sind. Dies steht in Diskrepanz zur Allgemeinpsychiatrie, wo die Rate an Fixierungen höher ist. Schlussfolgerung Die Ergebnisse der vorliegenden Studie zeigen Besonderheiten in der Anwendungshäufigkeit von Zwangsmaßnahmen im Maßregelvollzug auf Bundesebene. Dabei wurde offenbar, dass hinsichtlich der Verfügbarkeit grundlegender Struktur- und Prozessdaten des Maßregelvollzugs in Deutschland ein erhebliches Defizit besteht.

show abstract

Standards für die Behandlung im Maßregelvollzug nach §§ 63 und 64 StGB

Cited by 92 publications

References 77 publications

Clinical Ethics Support Services Are Not as Well-Established in Forensic Psychiatry as in General Psychiatry

Clinical Ethics Support Services Are Not as Well-Established in Forensic Psychiatry as in General Psychiatry

Granting Leave to Patients in Bavarian Forensic-Psychiatric Hospitals: A Survey to Describe the Current Process and Develop Guidelines

Strukturmerkmale und Anwendungshäufigkeit von Zwangsmaßnahmen im deutschen Maßregelvollzug

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About