The Victoria Government Department of Human Services (2012) stated “the freedom to make decisions which affect our lives is a fundamental right that each of us should enjoy”. The decisions we make in our lives represent who we are and how we want to be perceived by the world – whilst taking into consideration our own morals, beliefs and goals. Supported decision-making (SDM) is a process by which “a third-party assists or helps and individual with an intellectual or cognitive disability to make a legally enforceable decision for oneself” (Kohn & Blumenthal, 2013). May & Rea (2014) stated that “supported decision-making assumes that all people, regardless of their ability or disability, have some capacity to be involved in decision making”. …show more content…
Limitations recognised throughout the SDM process were related to risk of further deterioration in the Consumer’s mental state. As the Consumer was slowly taken off his medications, in a safe clinical manner, his presentation deteriorated. The Consumer’s sleep pattern worsened due to the elevation in his mood, there was a noted increase in impulsivity and poor boundaries with others on the inpatient unit, leading to the Consumer becoming vulnerable. There was a prominent increase in erratic and aggressive towards others, leading to the assault of a staff member on the inpatient unit and subsequently required the use of restrictive interventions. The decline in mental state resulted in the Consumer’s father, case manager and treating team coming together for a family meeting with the Consumer present in which the previous medications the Consumer had been previously prescribed were recommenced in an attempt to re-stabilise his presentation, unfortunately this was a substituted decision made by the consumer’s father and treating tream. Although there were numerous beneficial experiences for the Consumer through the supported decision-making process, the deterioration in mental state and the concern relating to exposure of vulnerability and openness to manipulation by others could not be overlooked (Office of the Public Advocate Systems Advocacy, 2014). Dignity of risk relates to the Consumers right be able to make decisions that can involve a level of risk, however the duty of care of the primary nurse and treating team was to ensure that safeguards are in place to minimise risk of harm to the Consumer and/or others that may be effected by the decision made (Victoria Government Department of Human Services,
In the case of Lyons v Queensland [2016] HCA 38, Ms Lyons, who is profoundly deaf and requires assistance from Australian Language Interpreters (AUSLAN), was excluded from jury duty on the grounds of her impairment. Lyons held that her exclusion from serving on a jury was unlawful discrimination prohibited by the Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (QLD) (A.D.A). After being summoned for jury duty, she notified the deputy registrar that she would require the assistance of an AUSLAN.
These days’ patients can either opt out of treatment or health care options in general because the healthcare system has undergone so much scrutiny for many incidents that still go on, because there’s not a day that goes by without see these drug compensation commercials. Compensation for patients whom have suffered the side effects of drugs that were tested on them with vague explanations of how it would work, and we see human beings die off of such careless inhumane acts. Patients should be constantly reminded of their rights, like how the police read one’s Miranda before they arrested it should be the first thing a care giver makes sure his or her patient knows before they agree to any type of treatment that just
In doing so, doctors also disregarded the patients’ autonomy in their decision to have themselves committed for their altered mental state. Invalidating the patients claim and affecting their trust, which is the pinnacle of the patient-doctor relationship. With psychiatric patient even more so because there must be a level of trust in the person’s claim and in their determination, that they might be having a breakdown. A beneficial scenario for the parties involves would have been if the doctors’ actions promoted more good, or beneficence, and gave Jessie better tools to cope with his PTSD. Instead, of taking an inactive approach, which allowed the situation to escalate to the point he became a danger to himself and others.
A person cannot be categorised as not able to make a decision, until all steps to assist them to make a decision have been exhausted. If capable, everyone has the right to make a decision that could be deemed “unwise” (Mental Capacity Act, 2005), even if
NHS and community care act 1990: sets out the duties of local authorities to assess an individual’s needs and ensure that each individual receives the required services to which they are entitled. Human rights act 1998: sets out an individual’s rights and freedoms under the law. Carers act 2004: ensures carers are identified and informed of their rights and that their needs for education, training, employment and leisure are taken into consideration. Mental capacity act 2005: provides the legal framework for acting and making decisions on behalf of those who lack the mental understanding to do so themselves. Safeguarding vulnerable groups act 2006: ensures unsuitable persons are barred from working with vulnerable adults and that employers
I believe her actions to switch the drugs were intentional, but I do not believe her motive was not to harm him because the medication was switched with over-the-counter pills. It was her drug habit that caused her to lose control of what was more important. I knew that this case was going to call for restoration of health for Mr. B. and planning an intervention for the caregiver. Future Practice Implications
Another example of clinical practice that raises legal, moral and ethical conflict when a PWD refuse to take prescribed medication is ‘therapeutic lying’. Therapeutic lying is the practice of deliberately deceiving patients by giving false information for intentions considered to be in the best interest of the patient. Considerably, research revealed that in RACF, almost 96% of all staff acknowledges lying to a PWD. Additionally, 66% of psychiatrist evaluated had sanctioned the use of therapeutic lying with a PWD by carers (Culley et al., 2013; Sprinks, 2013). Factors that contribute to the propagation of this deceptive practice include: (1) medication compliance; (2) ease the PWD and family stress; (3) improve compliance; (4) to save time;
If I am to make decision for person who lacks capacity this must be at this be in their interest and not to mine. The factors are- Mental conditions- mental capacity Physical conditions – communication abilities Availability, or lack of options Awareness of choices Age Participation Engagement 3.2 It’s a legal requirement that consent is established before any intervention or care giving activity begins.
Judgement is a decision or opinion that many people form. Everyday people are judging other people and they treat other people based off their judgement. This becomes a conflict when people start judging disable people. When someone see’s a disable person and assumes they can’t do certain things that normal people can do. Judging somebody buy their disability is a major theme in the short stories “Cathedral” and “The Life You Save Maybe Your Own” and also in my own life.
THE MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 - outlines people’s rights to make decisions, particularly in the case of people who lost the mental capacity to do that for themselves and includes THE BEST
Healthcare professionals must work on the assumption that every patient has the capacity to make decisions about their care, and to decide whether to agree to, or refuse, an examination or treatment. However, in the case that patients are deemed to be lacking capacity the Mental Capacity Act (2005), The Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act (2000) legislations must be followed (General Medical Council, 2008). Gaining consent before providing care or treatment to any patient is very important because patient requires
The practice of health care includes many scenarios that have to do with making adequate decisions when it comes to a patient’s life, and the way they are treated. Having an ethical code in all health care organizations is very important, because it helps health care workers with reaching a suited and ethical decision when it comes to the patient. In health care, patient will always be put first, and their autonomy will always be respected. Nevertheless, when there is a situation where a patient might be in harm, or might be making their condition worse because of the decisions they made. Health care workers will always be there to
In this specific case study they took a psychiatric patient, Mr. A, who had been diagnosed with depression. He had been taking anti-depressants for his condition and after seeing the patient for a while doctors had concluded
The Mental Capacity Act 2007 primary purpose is to provide a legal framework for acting and making decisions on behalf of adults who lack the capacity to make particular decisions for themselves. The five principles are outlined in section of the Act. These are designed to protect people who lack capacity to make particular decisions" but also to maximise their ability to make decisions" or to participate in decision-making process" as far as they are able to do
And a disabled person’s ambition is like all other human beings, the looks of pity and compassion negatively affect that ambition. People should embrace the disabled person and give them a helping hand, and they should have laws, which defend their rights, which should be respected. However, most societies do not have laws that ensure an equal life for the disabled population. It is a shame that the rights of the disabled people has turned many times to mere slogans.