Behind the screen of voluntary psychiatric hospital admissions: A qualitative exploration of treatment pressures and informal coercion in experiences of patients in Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom

Author:

Klingemann Justyna1ORCID,Świtaj Piotr1,Lasalvia Antonio2,Priebe Stefan3

Affiliation:

1. Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, Warsaw, Poland

2. Section of Psychiatry, Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences, University of Verona, Verona, Italy

3. Unit for Social and Community Psychiatry (World Health Organisation Collaborating Centre for Mental Health Services Development), Queen Mary University of London, London, UK

Abstract

Background: Despite the extensive research and intense debate on coercion in psychiatry we have seen in recent years, little is still known about formally voluntarily admitted patients, who experience high levels of perceived coercion during their admission to a psychiatric hospital. Aims: The purpose of the present research was to explore forms of treatment pressure put on patients, not only by clinicians, but also by patients’ relatives, during admission to psychiatric hospitals in Italy, Poland and the United Kingdom. Methods: Data were obtained via in-depth, semi-structured interviews with patients ( N = 108) diagnosed with various mental disorders (ICD-10: F20–F49) hospitalised in psychiatric inpatient wards. Maximum variation sampling was applied to ensure the inclusion of patients with different socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. The study applied a common methodology to secure comparability and consistency across participating countries. The qualitative data from each country were transcribed verbatim, coded and subjected to theoretical thematic analysis. Results: The results of the analysis confirm that the legal classifications of involuntary and voluntary hospitalisation do not capture the fundamental distinctions between patients who are and are not coerced into treatment. Our findings show that the level of perceived coercion in voluntary patients ranges from ‘persuasion’ and ‘interpersonal leverage’ (categorised as treatment pressures) to ‘threat’, ‘someone else’s decisions’ and ‘violence’ (categorised as informal coercion). Conclusion: We suggest that the term ‘treatment pressures’ be applied to techniques for convincing patients to follow a suggested course of treatment by offering advice and support in getting professional help, as well as using emotional arguments based on the personal relationship with the patient. In turn, we propose to reserve the term ‘informal coercion’ to describe practices for pressuring patients into treatment by threatening them, by making them believe that they have no choice, and by taking away their power to make autonomous decisions.

Funder

the European Commission 7th Framework Programme

Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3