정신보건법의 주요 쟁점 조항에 대한 선진국과의 사례 비교
Comparison of Major Procedures of Korean Mental Health Law with Other Developed Countries
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구는 우리나라 정신보건법의 바람직한 개정을 위해 현재 거론되고 쟁점조항과 일본, 스코틀랜드, 호주, 미국 등의 정신보건법 관련조항을 비교하였다. 국내 정신보건법은 정신보건법에 요구되는 국제적인 지침을 대부분 충족하고 있으나 실제 운영 면에서는 한국의 문화적인 측면과 인권보호를 위한 사회적 비용이라는 측면에서 우리만의 특성을 보이고 있다. 시설보다는 사회에서의 치료와 정신질환 자의 인권보호를 강조하는 방향으로 국내 정신보건법의 몇가지 근본적인 개혁이 필요하다고 판단된다.
Abstract
Objectives: The Mental Health Act is an initiative aimed at changing and shaping mental health services and protecting human rights of persons with mental disorders. Since the Mental Health Act was legislated in 1995, four amendments have been made according to the issues that arose from public concerns. However, there are still many debates about the human rights protection of the mentally ill. This study aimed to provide information regarding major aspects of the Mental Health Act by comparing them among several developed countries. Methods: Current Mental Health Acts of the state of Michigan in the United States, Scotland in England, the state of Victoria in Australia, and Japan were reviewed. Issues regarding the Korean Mental Health Act were collected from seminar materials, news media contents, and mental health professionals. Results: The definition of subjects in Korean Mental Health Act was more inclusive than other countries and was derived from a medical classification of mental illness. Family members or guardians were granted important responsibilities for deciding the involuntary admission of mentally ill patients in Korea and Japan. In Western countries, Mental Health Review Tribunals or courts have the primary responsibility for important decisions about mentally ill patients. The regulation of immediate discharge after request by voluntarily admitted patients was not enacted in all countries except Korea. The mandatory procedure for involuntary admission in Western countries includes an individual case review with personal interview by a Mental Health Review Tribunal or court. Conclusion: The Korean Mental Health Act appears to meet the basic standards of Guidelines from international organizations. Our traditional culture and inherent health systems seem to influence the legal regulation of mental health service and might be related to the problems of human rights protection of mentally ill patients in Korea.
참고문헌 (34)
- Boerma B, "One year of the Act: a Tribunal view of the first twelve month of the NSW Mental Health Act 1990", Aust Health Rev, 15, pp.435~448 (1992)
- Lee DM, "A Study on the Treatment of Mentally Disorder Criminal", Law Rev, 25, pp.397~420 (2007)
- Jang YM, "A Study on the Commitment of the Mentally Ill", Kor Inst Crim Justice Policy, pp.1~141 (1995)
- Ovadia T, "Steps on the road to a national mental health policy", Ment Health Rev, 1 (1991)
- "WHO"[URL]
- "Ministry of Government Legislation; c1997-2007"[URL]
- Suh TW, "Mental Health Policy and Law in Korea", Health welfare Policy Forum, 123, pp.42~56 (2007)
- Chung IW, "Judgement of Continuing Hospitalization in the Treatment of Chronic Mentally-Ill Patients", J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc, 38, pp.1282~1292 (1999)
- 서미경, "정신장애인의 인권보장과 제한에 관한 연구", 한국사회복지학, 55, pp.231~254 (2003), 한국사회복지학회
- "Korean Mental Health Act"[URL]
- "Japan. The Law concerning Mental Health and Welfare for Mentally Disabled Persons", ~ (2003)
- "Mental Health(Care and Treatment)(Scotland) Act"[URL]
- "Vitorian Legislation and Parliament Documents. Mental Health Act"[URL]
- "Michigan, United States. Mental Health Code, Michigan State"[URL]
- Report of the National Inquiry into the Human Rights of People with Mental Illness, "Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission", ~ (1993)
- President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, "Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America", ~ (2003)
- van Opstal JA, "Proposal for a treatment law based on the Scottish model", Tijdschr Psychiatr, 49, pp.719~728 (2007)
- "The Civil Law of Korea"[URL]
- Jonathan DP, "Cure and Control: Medical Model Dominance and Empowerment-based Philosophy in American Mental Health Care", 박사, pp.2002
- Doyal L, "Mental health legislation should respect decision making capacity", BMJ, 331, pp.1467~1469 (2005)
- World Health Organization, "Mental Health Legislation & Human Rights", 2003, ~
- Richardson G, "Doctors on tribunals. A confusion of roles", Br J Psychiatry, 176, pp.110~115 (2000)
- Watson A, "Mental health courts and the complex issue of mentally ill offenders", Psychiatr Serv, 52, pp.477~481 (2001)
- Bloch S, "Psychiatric Ethics, 3rd Edition" (1999), Oxford University Press
- Chodoff P, "Involuntary hospitalization of the mentally ill as a moral issue", Am J Psychiatr, 141, pp.384~389 (1984)
- Gallagher IIIB, "The Sociology of Mental Illness" (2002), Prentice Hall
- 가토 히사다케, "현대윤리에 관한 15가지 물음" (1999), 서광사
- Business report of the Central Mental Health Supporting Committee (2007), "The Central Mental Health Supporting Committee", Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs, ~ (2007)
- 서미경, "정신보건시설에서의 정신장애인 권리침해에 관한 연구 - 국가인권위원회 진정사례를 중심으로 -", 정신보건과 사회사업, 29(29), pp.330~367 (2008), 한국정신보건사회복지학회
- Jenkins R, "Developing National Health Policy" (2002), Psychology Press
- White Paper on the Reform of the Mental Helath Act 1983: Letter from the Chiar of the College's Public Policy Committee, "Royal College of Psychiatrist", Royal College of Psychiatrist, ~ (2001)
- Shin YJ, "Legislative Study on the improvement of human rights for people with mental illness" (2006), National Human Rights Commission of Korea
- General Assembly resolution of United Nation 46, "119", Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and the Improvement of Mental Health Care, 1991
- Wards of the State, "A National Sutdy of Public Guardship" (2005), University of Kentucky