Medical, judicial, and statutory regulation of ECT in the United States.
The standards for ECT recommended by an APA task force report and those embodied in federal court orders and state statutes and regulations are compared. The authors conclude that there is serious boundary and role confusion owing to progressive intrusion of state authority into areas traditionally held to lie in the domain of medical judgment and clinical care. In spite of comprehensive safeguards promulgated by the psychiatric community, overregulation by legislatures and courts is commonplace, interposing law between physicians and patients and resulting in delays or denials of service while failing to resolve critical legal issues involving competence and consent.
D000293:Adolescent; D002648:Child; D004565:Electroconvulsive Therapy / Q000592:standards*; D033161:Government Regulation; D006300:Health Services Misuse / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D033222:Judicial Role; D007603:Jurisprudence; D007878:Legislation as Topic; D007883:Legislation, Medical; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000628:therapy; D033242:Minors; D010344:Patient Advocacy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D014481:United States