Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Beneficial Coercion in Psychiatric Care

Insights from African Ethico‐Cultural System

Bibliographic Data

ID19516487
AuthorsCornelius Ewuoso (0000-0001-7219-5554, corresponding author)
Year2018
Volume18
Issue2
Pages91-97
Publication date2018-06-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueDeveloping World Bioethics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1471-8731 • E-ISSN: 1471-8847
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/dewb.12137
PMID27990738
OpenAlexW2563213538
LanguageEN
Citations received5

There is a ‘catch 22’ situation about applying coercion in psychiatric care. Autonomous choices undeniably are rights of patients. However, emphasizing rights for a mentally‐ill patient could jeopardize the chances of the patient receiving care or endanger the public. Conversely, the beneficial effects of coercion are difficult to predict. Thus, applying coercion in psychiatric care requires delicate balancing of individual‐rights, individual well‐being and public safety, which has not been achieved by current frameworks. Two current frameworks may be distinguished: the civil liberty approach and the Stone model. Both frameworks are restrictive, and not respectful of human dignity. In a civil liberty approach, individuals who are severely mentally‐ill but not dangerous would be denied care because they do not meet the dangerousness threshold or because the use of coercion will not lead to rebirthing of autonomy. This is unsatisfactory. Albeit involuntary interventions such as talk therapies, peer‐support etc., may not always lead to rebirthing of autonomy or free patients from mental illness; they can however help to maintain the dignity of each mentally ill patient. In place of these frameworks, this study proposes a new ethical framework for applying coercion in psychiatric care that is respectful of human dignity. Specifically, it draws on insights from the African ethico‐cultural system by using the Yoruba concept Omo‐olu‐iwabi to develop this new framework. This way, the study shows that only a more respectful approach for applying coercion in psychiatric care can lead to the careful balancing of the competing interests of individual's rights, individual's well‐being and public safety

Autonomy · Dignity · Human rights · Political science · Psychiatry · Psychological intervention · Ethics in medical practice · Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints · Law · Medicine · Nursing · Patient Dignity and Privacy · Psychology

  • Patient confidentiality, the duty to protect, and psychotherapeutic care

    Open Access•G W Bowersock, Cornelius Ewuoso•Metamedicine•2021

  • Cross-cultural bioethics

    Open Access•James E Sabin•Metamedicine•2021

  • An African Relational Approach to Healthcare and Big Data Challenges

    Open Access•Cornelius Ewuoso•Science and Engineering Ethics•2021

  • Mental health laws in Africa

    Open Access•Deborah Oyine Aluh, Wisdom Joe Igbokwe et al.•Cambridge Prisms Global Mental…•2026

  • Solidarity, Afro-communitarianism, and Covid-19 vaccination

    Open Access•Cornelius Ewuoso, Tom Obengo et al.•Journal of Global Health•2022

Citations per year1
Citation span2021 - 2026 (6)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae