Persuasion or coercion? An empirical ethics analysis about the use of influence strategies in mental health community care (original) (raw)
Related papers
American Journal of Bioethics, 2023
Treatment pressures are communicative strategies that mental health professionals use to influence the decision-making of mental health service users and improve their adherence to recommended treatment. Szmukler and Appelbaum describe a spectrum of treatment pressures, which encompasses persuasion, interpersonal leverage, offers and threats, arguing that only a particular type of threat amounts to informal coercion. We contend that this account of informal coercion is insufficiently sensitive to context and fails to recognize the fundamental power imbalance in mental healthcare. Based on a set of counterexamples, we argue that what makes a proposal coercive is not whether service users will actually be made worse off if they reject the proposal, but rather whether they have the justified belief that this is the case. Whether this belief is justified depends on the presence of certain contextual factors, such as strong dependency on professionals and the salient possibility of formal coercion.
BMC Medical Ethics, 2014
Background: In recent years, the attention on the use of coercion in mental health care has increased. The use of coercion is common and controversial, and involves many complex ethical challenges. The research question in this study was: What kind of ethical challenges related to the use of coercion do health care practitioners face in their daily clinical work? Methods: We conducted seven focus group interviews in three mental health care institutions involving 65 multidisciplinary participants from different clinical fields. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We analysed the material applying a 'bricolage' approach. Basic ethical principles for research ethics were followed. We received permission from the hospitals' administrations and all health care professionals who participated in the focus group interviews. Results: Health care practitioners describe ethical dilemmas they face concerning formal, informal and perceived coercion. They provide a complex picture. They have to handle various ethical challenges, not seldom concerning questions of life and death. In every situation, the dignity of the patient is at stake when coercion is considered as morally right, as well as when coercion is not the preferred intervention. The work of the mental health professional is a complicated "moral enterprise". The ethical challenges deserve to be identified and handled in a systematic way. This is important for developing the quality of health care, and it is relevant to the current focus on reducing the use of coercion and increasing patient participation. Precise knowledge about ethical challenges is necessary for those who want to develop ethics support in mental health care. Better communication skills among health care professionals and improved therapeutic relationships seem to be vital. Conclusions: A systematic focus on ethical challenges when dealing with coercion is an important step forward in order to improve health care in the mental health field.
Different forms of informal coercion in psychiatry: a qualitative study
BMC Research Notes
Objectives The objective of the study was to investigate how mental health professionals describe and reflect upon different forms of informal coercion. Results In a deductive qualitative content analysis of focus group interviews, several examples of persuasion, interpersonal leverage, inducements, and threats were found. Persuasion was sometimes described as being more like a negotiation. Some participants worried about that the use of interpersonal leverage and inducements risked to pass into blackmail in some situations. In a following inductive analysis, three more categories of informal coercion was found: cheating, using a disciplinary style and referring to rules and routines. Participants also described situations of coercion from other stakeholders: relatives and other authorities than psychiatry. The results indicate that informal coercion includes forms that are not obviously arranged in a hierarchy, and that its use is complex with a variety of pathways between differen...
Invocation of coercion context in compliance communication — power dynamics in psychiatric care
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 2006
This article draws on observations from ethnographic fieldwork to develop a theoretical understanding of the power dynamics in psychiatric care. The aim is to analyze how psychiatric clinicians solve compliance problems by invoking “coercion context”. It is suggested that clinicians take a rather instrumental approach to laws regulating coercive intervention. Clinicians may invoke a coercion context even with voluntary patients. For example, they may use wordings that connote coercion, or they may make use of how treatment wards are set up to accommodate involuntary patients, thus stalling voluntary patients who cannot exit through locked doors. A coercion context can also be invoked to solve mundane practical problems, e.g. when clinicians talk about “coerced showers”. The management of information and maintaining a suitable “awareness context” with regards to coercion is an essential feature in clinical attempts to achieve compliance from patients.In conclusion, the notion of coercion context helps explain the confusing findings from previous research about patients' apparent misconceptions of their formal legal status. Furthermore, it is argued that research that rely on decontextualised, objectifications of “coercion” risk to miss the meaning coercion is assigned in everyday clinical practice.
Community Mental Health Journal, 2014
The emphasis on care in the community in current mental health policy poses challenges for community mental health professionals with responsibility for patients who do not wish to receive services. Previous studies report that professionals employ a range of behaviors to influence reluctant patients. We investigated professionals' own conceptualizations of such influencing behaviors through focus groups with community teams in England. Participants perceived that good, trusting relationships are a prerequisite to the negotiation of reciprocal agreements that, in turn, lead to patient-centred care. They described that although asserting professional authority sometimes is necessary, it can be a potential threat to relationships. Balancing potentially conflicting processesone based on reciprocity and the other on authority-represents a challenge in clinical practice. By providing descriptive accounts of micro-level dynamics of clinical encounters, our analysis shows how the authoritative aspect of the professional role has the potential to undermine therapeutic interactions with reluctant patients. We argue that such micro-level analyses are necessary to enhance our understanding of how patient-centered mental health policy may be implemented through clinical practice.
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 2015
Purpose Whilst formal coercion in psychiatry is regulated by legislation, other interventions that are often referred to as informal coercion are less regulated. It remains unclear to what extent these interventions are, and how they are used, in mental healthcare. This paper aims to identify the attitudes and experiences of mental health professionals towards the use of informal coercion across countries with differing sociocultural contexts. Method Focus groups with mental health professionals were conducted in ten countries with different sociocultural contexts (Results Five common themes were identified: (a) a belief that informal coercion is effective; (b) an often uncomfortable feeling using it; (c) an explicit as well as (d) implicit dissonance between attitudes and practice-with wider use of informal coercion than is thought right in theory; (e) a link to principles of paternalism and responsibility versus respect for the patient's autonomy. Conclusions A disapproval of informal coercion in theory is often overridden in practice. This dissonance occurs across different sociocultural contexts, tends to make professionals feel uneasy, and requires more debate and guidance.
Informal coercion in inpatient mental healthcare: a scoping review protocol
BMJ open, 2024
Introduction Comprehending informal coercion, which encompasses a wide range of phenomena characterised by subtle and non-legalised pressures, can be complex. Its use is underestimated within the continuum of coercion in mental health, although its application may have a negative impact on the persons involved. A better understanding of informal coercion is crucial for improving mental healthcare and informing future research. This scoping review aims to explore the nature, extent and consequences of informal coercion in mental health hospitalisation to clarify this phenomenon, establish its boundaries more clearly and identify knowledge gaps. Methods and analysis Following the methodological framework from the Joanna Briggs Institute, this scoping review will encompass 10 key steps. Literature searches will be conducted in electronic databases, including CINAHL, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses. Then, a search in grey literature sources (Open Grey, Grey Guide), psychiatric and mental health journals, government agencies and among the references of selected studies will be conducted. The research will include all literature focusing on informal coercion with inpatients aged 18 and above. Data will be extracted and analysed descriptively, mapping the available knowledge and identifying thematic patterns. The quality of included studies will be assessed using appropriate appraisal tools. An exploratory search was conducted in November 2023 and will be updated in December 2023 when the selection of relevant evidence will begin. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required as this study involves the analysis of existing published literature. The findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and presentations at relevant conferences. They will be shared with people living with mental disorders and professionals working in mental healthcare.
Methods of Influencing the Decisions of Psychiatric Patients: An Ethical Analysis
Harvard Review of Psychiatry , 2013
Recognizing patients’ vulnerability to impediments in decision making and to excessive paternalism and coercion, psychiatrists and mental health professionals often struggle with when, how, and how much to influence their patients’ decisions. Thus, the primary purpose of this article is to provide a clinically grounded typology of methods of influence and ethically justified, practical guidance for decision-making about influencing patients. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Medline, PsycINFO, SCOPUS and Philosopher’s Index for articles related to building an ethical framework for assessing methods of influence on psychiatric patients’ decision-making. Seven methods of influence were identified for inclusion into the typology including the provision of direct recommendations, appeals to patients’ values and goals, appeals to norms, intentional framing of information and options, offering concrete incentives, leveling concrete threats, and deception. Ethically relevant factors that should shape decision-making processes about influence include patient decision-making capacity, strength of evidence regarding clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the proposed management strategies, the evidence concerning a patient’s longstanding values and goals, and the magnitude of harm relative to benefit including from the attempt to influence itself. Application of this typology should help guide health care professionals in the complicated process of working to balance the clinical application of this typology should fulfilling professional obligations to protect potentially vulnerable psychiatric patients with promoting patients’ autonomy while avoiding excessive paternalism.