An patient detained under the mental health Act 1993, the decision to access treatment is made by other authorised individuals such as medical offers and police due to the person being unable to make that decision.…
The Advance Law Directive (AD) came into force in 2008 in Mexico. The law considers the possibility for competent people of making in advance decisions about ending their own life or to express their desire not to receive certain therapeutic actions before falling into a state of incompetence. However, this act excludes those individuals deemed as incompetent, such as the mentally ill. Thus, it is necessary to ponder on Psychiatric Advance Directives (PAD), in order to allow the ethical, social and legal conditions that allow the mentally ill to express their own forecasts regarding health actions they want to receive, once their cognitive ability decreases enough to express their own will. This manuscript aims to contribute to the discussion…
We all enjoy our right to autonomy, the freedom to express what can be done to us, the right for self-determination. “Autonomy is based on a person’s ability make rational choices concerning their own life and choose for themselves. They must be treated with respect without interfering with their ability to determine their own paths and make decisions for oneself” (Vaughn 9). The freedom of autonomy gives patients the right decide their healthcare decisions without the influence of the values of their physicians, their colleagues, or society (Schwartz 105).…
Recent cases have drawn attention to the issue of individual autonomy, and what is sometimes referred to as ‘the right to die’. Adult patients who are mentally competent have the right to refuse medical treatment even when that refusal can lead to worsening ill health and even death. This refusal of treatment may only be ignored when statutory law provides for treatment without consent, or a judge makes an order that overrides the patient’s consent. While this is largely accepted when patients are physically and mentally competent, it becomes a complex issue when a person is mentally competent, but due to physical incapacity are in care because they are unable to care for themselves. A person may be mentally competent but due to being a quadriplegic…
Dilemmas may arise between duty of care and an individual’s rights if a service user refuses medication or personal care. An individual may want to do something that is dangerous or risky. They have the right to have the choice to do this and I must respect their rights but I also have a duty to keep them safe.…
All organisations and authorities have a duty of care towards an Individual with dementia, GPs, Social Workers, Health Visitors, Family and Carers. All Individuals with dementia have the rights to make choices. Individuals with dementia should be encouraged to make as many decisions as possible for them; however they must be guided so they stay within the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We must assume that the Individual with dementia has capacity unless it has been assumed that they lack the capacity to make choices. We must not think that an Individual is not to be treated as unable to make a decision unless this has been established.…
2.2 Describe how to manage risks associated with conflicts or dilemmas between an individual’s rights and the duty of care…
All individuals have the right to specialist services and or support to make their own choices: Mental Health Act, Mental Capacity Act…
Universal legalisation includes duty of care under the Wrongs and Other Acts (Law of Negligence) Act (2003) and the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act (2006). Contextually based legislation for Daniel is the Mental Health Act (2014) and the Guardianship and Administration Act (1986), with the Disability Act (2006) supplementing the Guardianship and Administration Act (1986). The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act (2006), as previously discussed protects Daniel in a number of ways but especially ‘recognition of equality before the law’ (s.8), ‘protection from …inhumane and degrading treatment’ (s.10) and ‘humane treatment when deprived of liberty’ (s.22) (Fitzroy Legal Service, 2016). Daniel is through for protected against harm, stigma and discrimination practically from practitioners. The Mental Health Act (2014) regulates many aspects of mental health treatment including voluntary and involuntary treatment, assessment requirements, allowable treatments, medications and complaints. For Daniel this act will be working with him for most if not all of his life and he will require a lot of support from it, as it does with outlining his rights and the procedures to uphold his rights. The act also has within it disempowering aspects to it such as assessments which could reduce Daniels rights and choices (Chenoweth & McAuliffe, 2015; Fitzroy Legal Service, 2016; Brophy & Mcdermott, 2013; Brophy, Campbell & Healy, 2003). The Guardianship and Administration Act (1986), with the Disability Act (2006) supplementing is there if the capacity of Daniel goes to VCAT, and thus Daniel will need to be proven incompetent and with mental health related disability, as the Guardianship and Administration Act (1986), stipulates the powers and legality of guardians and the process in which the guardianship can be made and the disability act defines disability and…
Autonomy is integral to health care; however, promoting and sustaining patient autonomy may be more difficult to enact than is often suggested. According to Hewitt-Taylor (2004), the concept of autonomy becomes more complex when the patient is a child, or an adult who has learning disabilities or a mental health problem that might be considered to impinge on their ability to make informed decisions. An adult with a mental health problem, who is unable to function autonomously has to rely on their caregivers and POAs for their care. In situations like this, health care staff need to be aware of the legal as well as moral and ethical issues involved when facilitating autonomous choices for their patients (Edgar, et al., 2001). The distinction…
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 – was introduced in England and Wales in 2007 and aims to protect the rights of people whose mental capacity is in doubt and people without mental capacity. It provides the framework for making decisions on behalf of others. It tells us what to do if we are involved in the care, treatment or support of people aged 16 and over who may lack capacity to make decisions. The Act states that everyone is assumed to make decisions for themselves unless shown otherwise. If it is not clear whether someone has the capacity to make a decision concerning a specific issue an assessment of their capacity should be carried out.…
While working in care, the aim is to give the best possible standard of care to service users, but sometimes there can be a conflict beetween the individual’s or their family’s wishes and rights and the duty of care. In this case the most important thing is to decide whether the person is aware of the risks and consequences of the decision and has the capacity to make the decision. Before taking best interest decisions I have to make sure that the person definitely lacks the capacity. The person or their next of kin has an overall right and responsibility in decision making for issues relating their care, and I need their consent to deal with certain issues.…
generally, service users detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 must be told what the Act has to say about treatment for mental disorder. This includes the circumstances, if any, under which they can be treated without consent, the circumstances in which they have the right to refuse treatment, the role of second opinion appointed doctors, and, where relevant, the rules on electroconvulsive therapy. Where a particular treatment is proposed during detention, the service user has a right to be given sufficient information to ensure that he or she understands the treatment in broad terms, including its nature, likely effects and significant possible adverse outcomes, the likelihood of its success and any alternatives to it. However, the Act allows service users to be given certain treatments in an emergency, for example in response to an immediate crisis; in this situation the health professionals are not legally obliged to ascertain whether a patient is capable of consenting to the treatment, or to discuss the treatment in full. As a matter of good practice, however, notes relating to an individual's mental capacity and attitude to receiving the treatment should be recorded on his or her medical file. Mind has produced an outline guide to the Mental Health Act…
A dilemma may arise between the duty of care and an individual’s rights when the basic human rights and freedoms of the individual are put to challenge, this could be the persons own concept of “mental capacity” against that of a care plan or risk assessment, or simply giving the individual a choice, but at the same time understanding the need to keep the individual safe. A dilemma may also manifest when there is a need to divulge information about the individual but is also in the individual’s best interest, or where there may be a public safety concern.…
The demand for information has risen from not only third party payers but in fact has risen from governmental entities. Patients now have to consent in order to accept health care treatment. As a result from the demand for patient information has brought forth a huge development between the law and medicine. There’s also the term informed consent. This is used in law to indicate that the consent a patient gives falls under certain minimum standards. Any informed consent can be said to have been given based upon a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications, and future consequences of an action.…