Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A Cross Cultural Comparison of Attitude of Mental Healthcare Professionals Towards Involuntary Treatment Orders

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Psychiatric Quarterly Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate East-West cultural attitudes of mental healthcare professionals (MHPs) towards Involuntary Treatment Orders (ITOs) among Taiwan, England, Wales, and New Zealand. Data on Taiwanese MHPs’ views of ITO regime were collected from the National Psychiatric Disease Mandatory Assessment and Community Care Review Committee (N = 176). A national survey instrument was designed to assess the level of support for ITOs among senior clinicians and to determine their views on the importance of various factors in decision-making, the mechanisms through which coercion may work, impediments to its use, and its perceived impact on patients and therapeutic relationships. A descriptive analysis was carried out with data presented as appropriate for the distribution and a t-test was used to detect any differences by respondents. Risk reduction was ranked the most important factor in use of ITOs and reasons for discharging an order. Female respondents had higher approval ratings, with 85 % of agreeing that ITOs were of benefit to the therapeutic relationship, assured long-term stability, and increased medication compliance. The results suggest that clinicians decide the use of ITOs largely based on the risk management, both in terms of starting and ending an order. However, the use of ITOs vary which reflected in the practice. Given this variation in the use of enabling legislation, multidisciplinary input in decision-making is an essential safety mechanism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Syse A: Psykisk helsernloven med kommentar. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk 20, 2004

  2. Wang KY: A review of mental health policy in Taiwan: types of elite and the decision-making process. Chinese Journal of Mental Health 10:29–47, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dawson J, Romans S: The use of community treatment orders in New Zealand: early findings. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 35:190–195, 2002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Manning C, Molodynski A, Rugkasa J, Dawson J, Burns T: Community treatment orders in England and Wales: national survey of clinicians’ view and use. The Psychiatrist 35:328–333, 2011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Romans S, Dawson J, Mullen R, Gibbs A: How mental health clinicians view community treatment orders: a national New Zealand survey. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 38:836–841, 2004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pan Z, Xie B, Zheng, Z: A survey on psychiatric hospital admission and relative factors in China. Journal of Clinical Psychological Medicine (China) 13: 270–272, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Shao Y, Xie B, Wu Z: Psychiatrists’ attitudes towards the procedure of involuntary admission to mental hospitals in China. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 58(4):440–447, 2012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Brooks RA: US psychiatrists’ beliefs and wants about involuntary civil commitment grounds. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 29:13–21, 2006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Luchins DJ, Cooper AE, Hanrahan P, Rasinski K: Psychiatrists’ attitudes toward involuntary hospitalization. Psychiatric Services 55:1058–1060, 2004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Roberts C, Peay J, Eastman N: Mental health professionals’ attitudes towards legal compulsion: report of a National Survey. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health 1:71–81, 2002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pearson V: Law, rights, and psychiatry in the people’s republic of China. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 15:409–423, 1992

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Diseth R, Bøgwald KP, Høglend P: Attitudes among stakeholders towards compulsory mental health care in Norway. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 34:1–6, 2011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Falkum E, Forde R: Paternalism, patient autonomy, and moral deliberation in the physician-patient relationship: attitudes among Norwegian physicians. Social Science & Medicine 52:239–248, 2001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the National Taiwan University. NTU103R390324.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hui-Ching Wu.

Ethics declarations

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 (5).

Conflict of interest

Drs. Ming-Hong Hsieh, Hui-Ching Wu, Frank Huang-Chih Chou, Andrew Molodynski declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants for being included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hsieh, MH., Wu, HC., Chou, F.HC. et al. A Cross Cultural Comparison of Attitude of Mental Healthcare Professionals Towards Involuntary Treatment Orders. Psychiatr Q 88, 611–621 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-016-9479-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-016-9479-2

Keywords

Navigation