Involuntary psychiatric interventions: a breach of the Hippocratic oath?
In this article the author argues that involuntary psychiatric interventions are inherently dangerous and potentially harmful to their subjects, thus challenging the Hippocratic ethical principle of "first do no harm." Damages arising from coercion in common clinical situations are analyzed, as well as the motives of psychiatrists for persistently promoting an expansion of involuntary interventions. Alternative strategies to coercion are explored.
Stastny
P
P
Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA.
D026686:Beneficence; D003068:Coercion; D003134:Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric Disorders; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D006625:Hippocratic Oath; D006801:Humans; D008605:Mental Health Services / Q000941:ethics* / Q000592:standards; D028642:Persons with Psychiatric Disorders / Q000523:psychology*; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000941:ethics*