유엔장애인권리협약과 정신장애인 강제입원 : 강제입원 금지에 대한 비평
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Compulsory Admission of Persons with Mental Illness : A Critique of Prohibition of Compulsory Admission
2
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) has often been cited as the basis for the abolition of involuntary hospitalization for persons with mental illness. Although the UNCRPD itself does not refer explicitly to the abolition of involuntary hospitalization, the General Comment prohibited all compulsory admission without adequate explanation. While the disability status alone may not justify the denial of legal capacity, the existence of impaired decision-making ability can raise issues regarding whether involuntary admission can be justified in the best interest of persons with mental illness. The General Comment, however, argues that involuntary admission does not comply with the CRPD which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disabilities. This statement defies logic since the issue is whether the existence of impaired decision-making ability may be an exceptional case. It is also against the principles of beneficence to withhold treatment for persons with mental illness just for self-determination when poor outcomes are anticipated if left untreated. The concept of supported decision making suggested by the General Comment is also ambiguous, and not clearly distinguishable from substitute decision making. Another reason for the prohibition of involuntary admission relates to doubt concerning the accuracy of assessment of mental capacity, which implies adequate assessment may justify involuntary admission. In practice, it is not always complicated to assess mental capacity in order to make treatment-related decisions. The third reason concerns the argument that psychiatric treatments lack empirical evidence concerning effectiveness. Scientific evidence supporting the effectiveness of psychiatric treatment is abundant. The rights of persons with mental illness are important ethical issues. However, it is doubtful whether the blanket prohibition of compulsory admission is appropriate and ethical. Critical review of the UNCRPD and the General Comment is urgent for timely treatment and for the well-being of persons with mental illness.
Abstract
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) has often been cited as the basis for the abolition of involuntary hospitalization for persons with mental illness. Although the UNCRPD itself does not refer explicitly to the abolition of involuntary hospitalization, the General Comment prohibited all compulsory admission without adequate explanation. While the disability status alone may not justify the denial of legal capacity, the existence of impaired decision-making ability can raise issues regarding whether involuntary admission can be justified in the best interest of persons with mental illness. The General Comment, however, argues that involuntary admission does not comply with the CRPD which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disabilities. This statement defies logic since the issue is whether the existence of impaired decision-making ability may be an exceptional case. It is also against the principles of beneficence to withhold treatment for persons with mental illness just for self-determination when poor outcomes are anticipated if left untreated. The concept of supported decision making suggested by the General Comment is also ambiguous, and not clearly distinguishable from substitute decision making. Another reason for the prohibition of involuntary admission relates to doubt concerning the accuracy of assessment of mental capacity, which implies adequate assessment may justify involuntary admission. In practice, it is not always complicated to assess mental capacity in order to make treatment-related decisions. The third reason concerns the argument that psychiatric treatments lack empirical evidence concerning effectiveness. Scientific evidence supporting the effectiveness of psychiatric treatment is abundant. The rights of persons with mental illness are important ethical issues. However, it is doubtful whether the blanket prohibition of compulsory admission is appropriate and ethical. Critical review of the UNCRPD and the General Comment is urgent for timely treatment and for the well-being of persons with mental illness.
참고문헌 (29)
- National Human Rights commision of the Republic of Korea, "Release of information receipt number 17-Jeong-0002: Mental health petition receipt status by types(recent 5 years)", ~
- "The shackles of persons with mental illness ‘involuntary admission to the mental hospital’" (2014)[URL]
- Legislation and Judiciary Committee, "The 342th the second Legislation and Judiciary Commitee minutes of the 19th National Assembly of Korea", National Assembly Minutes, ~ (2016)
- "Inevitability of the human rights protection and the hospitalization process strengthening of the persons with mental illness" (2017)[URL]
- Dawson J, "A realistic approach to assessing mental health laws’ compliance with the UNCRPD", Int J Law Psychiatry, 40, pp.70~79 (2015)
- McSherry B, "The concept of capacity in Australian mental health law reform: going in the wrong direction?", Int J Law Psychiatry, 40, pp.60~69 (2015)
- Kim MC, "Unconstitutionality of Mental Health Act Article 24 forced admission", Hum Rights Law Studies, 2, pp.424~447 (2016)
- 신권철, "정신보건법상 강제입원제도의 문제점과 개선방안 ― 물화(物化)되는 인격적 주체성의 복원을 중심으로 ―", 서울법학, 22(2), pp.637~679 (2014), 서울시립대학교 법학연구소[DOI]
- "Republicans defeat ratification of the U.N.’s ‘rights of persons with disabilities’ treaty in senate" (2012)[URL]
- Wildeman S, "Protecting rights and building capacities: challenges to global mental health policy in light of the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities", J Law Med Ethics, 41, pp.48~73 (2013)
- World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry, "Implementation manual for the united nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities", World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry, ~ (2008)
- Desai NG, "Antipsychiatry: meeting the challenge", Indian J Psychiatry, 47, pp.185~187 (2005)
- Szmukler G, "Mental health law and the UN Convention on the rights of Persons with Disabilities", Int J Law Psychiatry, 37, pp.245~252 (2014)
- Sessums LL, "Does this patient have medical decision-making capacity?", JAMA, 306, pp.420~427 (2011)
- Kim YR, "Rethink the verdict" (2015), Changbi Publishers
- Stern TA, "Massachusetts general hospital comprehensive clinical psychiatry" (2016), Elsevier
- Mill JS, "On liberty" (2009), Moonyebooks
- Mill JS, "On liberty" (1859), Norton
- Beauchamp TL, "Principles of biomedical ethics" (2001), Oxford University Press
- Freeman MC, "Reversing hard won victories in the name of human rights: a critique of the General Comment on Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities", Lancet Psychiatry, 2, pp.844~850 (2015)
- Szmukler G, "UN CRPD: equal recognition before the law", Lancet Psychiatry, 2, pp.e29~ (2015)
- Improvement plan of hospitalization and discharge on Mental Health Act, "Shin KC", Ministry of Health and Welfare, ~ (2014)