IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v15y2023i2p145-154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic violations of patients’ rights and safety: forced medication of a cohort of 30 patients in Alaska

Author

Listed:
  • Gail Tasch
  • Peter C Gøtzsche

Abstract

BackgroundPsychiatric patients’ human rights are often violated when forced treatment orders are issued.MethodsWe assessed the records for 30 consecutive petitions for mental health commitment in which an involuntary medication order was requested, from Anchorage, Alaska.ResultsIn 29 cases, the commitment petition was granted. The forced medication order was granted in 27 of the 30 cases. In 26 cases, in violation of previous Supreme Court rulings, the patients’ desires, fears, wishes and experiences were ignored even when the patients were afraid that the neuroleptics might kill them or when they had experienced serious harms such as tardive dyskinesia. The ethical and legal imperative of offering a less intrusive treatment was also ignored. Benzodiazepines were not offered. Psychotherapy was not offered or mentioned in 15 cases. The providers claimed, contrary to the evidence, that psychotherapy does not work.DicussionThe legal procedures can best be characterized as a sham, in which the patients are defenseless. The power imbalance and abuse were extreme, and several of the psychiatrists who argued for forced treatment obtained court orders for administering drugs and dosages that were dangerous. We suggest forced medication be abandoned.

Suggested Citation

  • Gail Tasch & Peter C Gøtzsche, 2023. "Systematic violations of patients’ rights and safety: forced medication of a cohort of 30 patients in Alaska," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 145-154, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:145-154
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2023.2183428
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2023.2183428
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2023.2183428?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:15:y:2023:i:2:p:145-154. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.