Author:
Guenna Holmgren Amina,von Vogelsang Ann-Christin,Lindblad Anna,Juth Niklas
Abstract
Restraint is regularly used in somatic healthcare settings, and countries have chosen different paths to regulate restraint in somatic healthcare. One overarching problem when regulating restraint is to ensure that patients with reduced decision-making capacity receive the care they need and at the same time ensure that patients with a sufficient degree of decision-making capacity are not forced into care that they do not want. Here, arguments of justice, trust in the healthcare system, minimising harm and respecting autonomy are contrasted with different national regulations. We conclude that a regulation that incorporates an assessment of patients’ decision-making capacity and considers the patient’s best interests is preferable, in contrast to regulations based on psychiatric diagnoses or regulations where there are no legal possibilities to exercise restraint at all in somatic care.
Subject
Health Policy,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science)
Reference49 articles.
1. Beauchamp TL , Childress JF . Principles of biomedical ethics 8th ed. New York: Oxford university press, 2019.
2. Council of Europe . Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2007.
3. The Constitution of Sweden (Regeringsform) . Stockholm: Ministry of Justice, 1974: 152.
4. Nurses’ decision-making in cases of physical restraint: a synthesis of qualitative evidence
5. Tannsjo T . Coercive Care: Ethics of Choice in Health and medicine. London: Routledge, 1999. doi:10.4324/9780203004845