دانلود مقاله ISI انگلیسی شماره 126928
ترجمه فارسی عنوان مقاله

بررسی تجربیات درمان روانپزشکی اجباری: یک مطالعه کیفی چند مرحله ای در یک کاناپه شهری کانادایی

عنوان انگلیسی
Exploring experiences with compulsory psychiatric community treatment: A qualitative multi-perspective pilot study in an urban Canadian context
کد مقاله سال انتشار تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی
126928 2018 9 صفحه PDF
منبع

Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)

Journal : International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, Volume 57, March–April 2018, Pages 122-130

پیش نمایش مقاله
پیش نمایش مقاله  بررسی تجربیات درمان روانپزشکی اجباری: یک مطالعه کیفی چند مرحله ای در یک کاناپه شهری کانادایی

چکیده انگلیسی

As medical, ethical and clinical effectiveness debates about the use of compulsory psychiatric treatment continues, it is important to further explore the actual experiences and perspectives of all relevant stakeholders in community treatment orders (CTOs). This qualitative pilot study engaged a total of twenty-seven clients, their family members, and care providers in Toronto, Canada. Semi-structured, one-on-one interviews were conducted between February and July 2013 and analyzed using thematic analysis. Top key themes from all the participants identified include, among others: 1) clients' experiences of coercion while treated under CTO, but a preference for CTOs compared to involuntary hospitalization, nevertheless; 2) limited real opportunities for collaboration in treatment decisions expressed by clients and family members; 3) acceptance of the potential for clinical recovery on CTOs while debating the role of CTO in a broader recovery journey by all stakeholders; 4) general preservation of therapeutic relationships between clients and care providers, while acknowledging the tension of taking on an “enforcer” role by providers; and 5) existence of different avenues for asserting agency by clients. The findings of this research illuminate the nuanced, complex, and adaptive perspectives held by different stakeholders, point to the importance of preserving and enhancing procedural justice in their use, and alert the field to incorporate recovery-based approaches in this controversial practice that is a widely and commonly used clinical tool across many jurisdictions.