Dementia, Treatment Decisions, and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities. A New Framework for Old Problems

被引:13
作者
De Sabbata, Kevin [1 ]
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Athena Inst, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
dementia; legal capacity; healthcare; autonomy; decisions; ARTICLE; 12; ADVANCE DIRECTIVES; MENTAL-CAPACITY; INFORMED-CONSENT; MAKING CAPACITY; ASSESSMENT-TOOL; LEGAL CAPACITY; COMMUNICATION; INTERESTS; PHYSICIAN;
D O I
10.3389/fpsyt.2020.571722
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has been at the center of considerable debate in the field of mental health. The discussion has caught up in particular after the publication of General Comment No. 1 in which the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities proposes a particularly radical interpretation of Article 12 of the Convention. Such a document has triggered skeptic and at times hostile reactions especially by psychiatrists, together with some positive comments. In this context, there is sometimes the tendency to focus only on the problematic aspects of the rights and support based model proposed by the CRPD and its Committee, forgetting that also "pre-CRPD" legislations on legal capacity present significant shortcomings. In this contribution I focus on the paradigmatic case of treatment decisions of people living with dementia with the aim to show how a number of provisions emerging from the CRPD and General Comment No. 1 can contribute to overcome the issues characterizing the traditional model of legal capacity and consent to treatment. First, I provide a brief overview of the provisions contained in the CRPD and General Comment No.1, summarizing the debate in this area. Then, I move to the case of treatment decisions of people living with dementia, analysing the main issues posed by the traditional model of capacity still characterizing European legislations. I will show how such problems and the solutions previously advanced by academics and practitioners resound in many ways with those identified by the CRPD and its Committee. In the second part, I analyse one by one the main provisions proposed by the CRPD and the Committee, studying how they can be applied in the area of treatment decisions of people living with dementia. In this context I point out the possible interpretations of the various provisions and their pros and cons, also referring to ongoing initiatives providing an insight on how such norms might work in practice.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 132 条
[71]   Self-harm, capacity, and refusal of treatment: Implications for emergency medical practice. A prospective observational study [J].
Jacob, R ;
Clare, ICH ;
Holland, A ;
Watson, PC ;
Maimaris, C ;
Gunn, M .
EMERGENCY MEDICINE JOURNAL, 2005, 22 (11) :799-802
[72]  
Jacoby R., 2006, FOUND YEARS, V1, P15, DOI DOI 10.1053/S1744-1889(06)70039-1
[73]   Respecting the margins of agency: Alzheimer's patients and the capacity to value [J].
Jaworska, A .
PHILOSOPHY & PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 1999, 28 (02) :105-138
[74]   Supported Decision Making in Serious Mental Illness [J].
Jeste, Dilip V. ;
Eglit, Graham M. L. ;
Palmer, Barton W. ;
Martinis, Jonathan G. ;
Blanck, Peter ;
Saks, Elyn R. .
PSYCHIATRY-INTERPERSONAL AND BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES, 2018, 81 (01) :28-40
[75]   Physician as partner or salesman? Shared decision-making in real-time encounters [J].
Karnieli-Miller, Orit ;
Eisikovits, Zvi .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2009, 69 (01) :1-8
[76]  
Keeling Amanda, 2016, Nurs Stand, V30, P38, DOI 10.7748/ns.30.30.38.s45
[77]  
Keys M., 2009, Eur. Yearb. Disabil. Law, V1, P59
[78]  
King L, 2014, LAW ETHICS DEMENTIA, P283
[79]   CODEMamb - an observational communication behavior assessment tool for use in ambulatory dementia care [J].
Knebel, Maren ;
Haberstroh, Julia ;
Kuemmel, Anne ;
Pantel, Johannes ;
Schroeder, Johannes .
AGING & MENTAL HEALTH, 2016, 20 (12) :1286-1296
[80]  
Krones T, 2014, INT LIBR ETH LAW NEW, V54, P193, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-7377-6_13