Patient Autonomy Research Paper
The concept of patient autonomy is directly linked to the concept of patient choice. According to Beauchamp and Childress (1994) autonomous patients are capable of understanding and acting intentionally without controlling influences or manipulation. Intrinsic in the principle of autonomy is the right to self determination on which is anchored the idea that an individual is entitled to make decisions about their current treatment as well as about any future treatment for when they become incapacitated. For mental health patients this right is protected through the introduction advance statements (NICE, 2005), advance directives and advance decisions. Though often used interchangeably there are clearly differences between the three. An advance
statement on the one hand is term that is broadly used as a description of wishes for future treatment, including treatment preferences and refusals. It also covers preferences on important aspects of personal/private and home life as well as the appointment of maker. (Henderson et al, 2008). An advance directive on the other hand was previously used as a term to described specific treatment refusals (Williams and Rigby, 2004). Today it is imbedded in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 as ‘advance decision to refuse treatment’ (Jankovic et al, 2010).
Patient X exercised autonomy in her desire to put in a place an advanced directive as well as making an advance statement in stating her treatment preferences. Though the MCA 2005 protects the right of patients to make advance directives and choose preferred treatment options, the Mental Health Act 2005 on the other hand overrides this for patients detained under certain sections of the act.
The MHA 2005 allows treatment for psychiatric conditions. However, patients cannot be treated under the act for physical conditions not related to mental illness against the patient’s wishes. As argued by Selinger (2009) this aspect of the law creates a complex dilemma for health care staff, leaving patients with complex mental health problem like Patient X with the competence by law to refuse life saving treatment.
statement on the one hand is term that is broadly used as a description of wishes for future treatment, including treatment preferences and refusals. It also covers preferences on important aspects of personal/private and home life as well as the appointment of maker. (Henderson et al, 2008). An advance directive on the other hand was previously used as a term to described specific treatment refusals (Williams and Rigby, 2004). Today it is imbedded in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 as ‘advance decision to refuse treatment’ (Jankovic et al, 2010).
Patient X exercised autonomy in her desire to put in a place an advanced directive as well as making an advance statement in stating her treatment preferences. Though the MCA 2005 protects the right of patients to make advance directives and choose preferred treatment options, the Mental Health Act 2005 on the other hand overrides this for patients detained under certain sections of the act.
The MHA 2005 allows treatment for psychiatric conditions. However, patients cannot be treated under the act for physical conditions not related to mental illness against the patient’s wishes. As argued by Selinger (2009) this aspect of the law creates a complex dilemma for health care staff, leaving patients with complex mental health problem like Patient X with the competence by law to refuse life saving treatment.