O direito à internação psiquiátrica no sistema de saúde brasileiro: as representações sociais do Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo / The right to psychiatric admission in the Brazilian health system: the São Paulo Court of Justice' social representations

Este artigo teve como objetivo analisar as representações sociais do Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo sobre o direito à internação psiquiátrica no sistema de saúde brasileiro. Os dados foram coletados do sítio eletrônico do tribunal paulista, a partir de 184 acórdãos de ações julgadas em segunda instância, proferidos em razão de recursos de apelação e publicados no período de janeiro de 1998 a dezembro de 2012, referentes às internações psiquiátricas pleiteadas no Sistema Único de Saúde e no sistema de saúde suplementar. Os métodos empregados para análise dos resultados foram a estatística descritiva e o discurso do sujeito coletivo. Aplicou-se, ainda, a Teoria das Representações Sociais como referencial teórico de interpretação dos discursos elaborados. No Sistema Único de Saúde, a internação reclamada em juízo foi a compulsória, representada, majoritariamente, como medida de proteção da dignidade da pessoa com transtorno mental e, minoritariamente, como violência contra essa mesma dignidade. No sistema suplementar, a representação judicial assumiu o enfoque consumerista, consubstanciado na abusividade da cláusula limitativa da internação psiquiátrica e no direito superior à vida. O direito à saúde, vislumbrado nas decisões judiciais, resumiu-se ao direito de acesso aos serviços de saúde e ao direito à doença. A compreensão do Poder Judiciário, nos dois sistemas investigados, foi a do direito à saúde como o direito ao bem de saúde pleiteado em juízo, o que coloca muitos desafios para os sistemas de saúde e para o Poder Judiciário frente à consolidação dos ideais da reforma psiquiátrica estatuída pela Lei n. 10.216/2001.

The current research sought to present the social representations of judges from the São Paulo Court of Justice about the law regarding psychiatric admissions. Data were collected through the court website, from 184 judgments including all the decisions published between January 1998, and December 2012, regarding psychiatric admissions claimed to both the Brazilian Public Health System, and the private insurance health system. As methods, the author used descriptive statistics and the collective subject speech. The Social Representations Theory was applied as a theoretical framework to interpret the collected speeches. Considering Brazilian Public Health System, the admissions claimed on the court were compulsory and judges presented the psychiatric admissions, mostly, as a protection measure of people with mental disorders dignity and, at a lower degree, as a violence against this same dignity. With respect to the private insurance health system, the judicial representation was related to the consumerist approach, supported by the abuse of a clause restricting the time for psychiatric admissions and its contradiction with the right to life. The right to health was characterized in the decisions as the right of access to health services and the right to be ill. The comprehension of the judges in both investigated systems related the right to health to the right to a health as a good claimed in court, imposing many challenges to health systems and the Judiciary Power in order to consolidate the principles of the psychiatric reform brought by Law n. 10.216/2001.

Famílias, gênero e hospitalizações psiquiátricas compulsórias / Families, gender and compulsory psychiatric hospitalizations

RESUMO Objetivo: Os papéis relacionados a cuidados nos grupos familiares têm sido, historicamente, uma atribuição de mulheres. Este artigo aborda as especificidades de gênero no cuidado com pacientes no contexto de avaliações por demandas de hospitalizações psiquiátricas compulsórias, a fim de verificar se, nesse contexto, as tarefas de cuidado são, ainda, atribuídas predominantemente a mulheres. Métodos: Este é um estudo observacional, descritivo, de casos múltiplos, que acompanhou 80 atendimentos de famílias em avaliações em processos de hospitalização psiquiátrica compulsória de junho de 2020 a fevereiro de 2022, no município de Alvorada-RS. Resultados: Mulheres estiveram diretamente envolvidas, como requerentes, em 78% dos casos. Em apenas 18 atendimentos não havia mulheres presentes como acompanhantes, mas 14 desses casos não tiveram qualquer rede familiar ou social identificada. A participação predominante de mulheres não pode ser associada à renda do familiar e nem a características dos pacientes ou de sua condição clínica. Em análise de entrevistas de seguimento com familiares, reitera-se que o ato de cuidar se mantém atribuído às mulheres. O acúmulo de papéis a serem desempenhados também foi evidenciado. Conclusões: A delegação do cuidado gera sobrecarga nas mulheres, gerando sentimentos como medo, apreensão e insegurança. Capacitação e sensibilização de equipes para um olhar sistêmico e de gênero, propondo ativamente a inclusão de demais familiares e redistribuição de tarefas, parece fazer parte das possibilidades de cuidado com quem cuida também nesse contexto.

ABSTRACT Objective: Care roles in family groups have historically been assigned to women. This paper addresses gender specificities in patient care in the context of assessments due to compulsory psychiatric hospitalizations, in order to verify whether, in this context, care tasks are still predominantly assigned to women. Methods: This is an observational, descriptive, multiple-case study that followed 80 family visits in evaluations in compulsory psychiatric hospitalization processes from June 2020 to February 2022, in the city of Alvorada-RS. Results: Women were directly involved, as applicants, in 78% of cases. In only 18 consultations there were no women present as companions, but 14 of these cases did not have any family or social network identified. The predominant participation of women can not be associated with family income or characteristics of patients or their clinical condition. In the analysis of follow-up interviews with family members, it is reiterated that the act of caring remains attributed to women. The accumulation of roles to be performed was also evidenced. Conclusions: the delegation of care generates overload in women, generating feelings such as fear, apprehension and insecurity. Training and sensitization of teams for a systemic and gender perspective, actively proposing the inclusion of other family members and the redistribution of tasks, seems to be part of a possible caregivers caring strategy also in this context.

Contemplation of Legal Status of the Committee for the Appropriateness of Hospitalization Related to Involuntary Admission / 신경정신의학

The revised Mental Health Act, in which the legal status and role of “the committee for the appropriateness of hospitalization” as an administrative committee, which has been launched since June 2017, is discussed. The German and British laws were reviewed in comparison with the Korean laws, focusing on the similarities and differences among the laws and which parts require revision. This study reported that patient care should be considered not only from a constitutional point of view, but also from a health care point of view. Self-determination and medical paternalism are both important but generally incompatible values. In recent days, objective and fair diagnosis from medical experts have been challenging. The current Mental Health Act was inevitably revised to actively accept the decisions of the Constitutional Court and apparently guarantee the basic rights of people in the future. The pros and cons of “the committee for the appropriateness of hospitalization” and which parts need to be revised to perform its role properly as a guardian of the admission procedure are assessed. This should reflect the current reality of the mental health medical community. In addition, a face-to-face examination should be made in principle. Nevertheless, the basic rights of the mentally ill are not guaranteed based on current law because of the shortage of budget and human resources. The final option maybe the introduction of a judicial system on involuntary admission. Legitimacy and professionalism are engagements that should be adhered to when treating psychiatric patients.

Juridicização engajada da adolescência: sobre um caso de internação psiquiátrica compulsória / Engaged juridicization of adolescence: about a case of psychiatric compulsory admission

Resumo Com o objetivo de compreender um caso de internação psiquiátrica compulsória (IPC) infantojuvenil, foi desenvolvida uma etnografia com agentes institucionais dos setores educação, justiça e saúde nos poderes executivo e judiciário. A metodologia de pesquisa consistiu em (1) entrevistas com defensoras, psicólogas, psiquiatras e peritos; (2) análise documental de ata escolar, autos processuais e prontuário médico. Frisamos que algumas pesquisas têm se centrado em "adolescentes drogaditos" internados compulsoriamente, apontando para uma "judicialização do cuidado em saúde mental". Desse modo, visou-se responder à seguinte questão de pesquisa: as IPC às quais Clara fora submetida também poderiam ser compreendidas como parte desse processo? Procurou-se mostrar que a jovem é caracterizada pelas versões institucionais como uma "adolescente-psiquiátrica" por alguns, e "um risco para si e para terceiros" por outros. Assim, torna-se um "caso emblemático" para uma rede de cuidados, após episódios de "agressão", "tentativas de suicídio" e "fugas" que suscitaram audiências, encaminhamentos, internações e abrigamentos. Por fim, os resultados apontam para um processo de juridicização engajada da adolescência.

Abstract With the objective of understanding a case of psychiatric compulsory admission (IPC) of a child/adolescent, an ethnography was developed with institutional agents from the education, justice and health sectors, in the executive and judicial branches. The research methodology consisted of (1) interviews with public defenders, psychologists, psychiatrists and experts; and (2) documentary analysis of school minutes, procedural records and medical records. We emphasize that some researches have been focused on "teenage drug abuse" compulsorily hospitalized, pointing to a "judicialization of mental health care". In this way, the aim was to answer the following research question: could the IPCs to which Clara had been submitted also be understood as part of this process? It was sought to show that the girl is characterized by the institutional versions as a "psychiatric-teenager" by some, and "a risk for herself and for others" by others. Thus, it becomes an "emblematic case" for a network of care, after episodes of "aggression", "suicide attempts" and "escapes" that aroused hearings, referrals, hospitalizations and shelterings. Finally, the results point to a process of engaged juridicization of adolescence.

Contemplation of Legal Criteria of Psychiatric Compulsory Admission: Including an Introduction of US Case Which Can be Referred to the Assessment of the Appropriateness of Hospitalization in Korea / 신경정신의학

The Korean Mental Health Act has been radically reformed recently in order to improve psychiatric patients' human rights by regulating the compulsory admission process. However, the expert group brought up questions about difficulties in practice and incoherence in its philosophy before the Act was implemented. There are already discussions concerning the next revision of the Act. In such a situation, lessons can be learned from the experiences of other countries. Articles on psychiatric compulsory admission were comprehensively reviewed with the focus on legal criteria, and found that current trends worldwide include a move towards broad diagnostic criteria, use of capacity and treatability test, and treatment in the interest of health rather than safety. In addition, we introduce the Whittington scale, an assessment tool for the appropriateness of hospitalization used in the Connecticut Mental Health Center, US, as a reference for the similar procedure being implemented soon in Korea.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Compulsory Admission of Persons with Mental Illness: A Critique of Prohibition of Compulsory Admission / 신경정신의학

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) has often been cited as the basis for the abolition of involuntary hospitalization for persons with mental illness. Although the UNCRPD itself does not refer explicitly to the abolition of involuntary hospitalization, the General Comment prohibited all compulsory admission without adequate explanation. While the disability status alone may not justify the denial of legal capacity, the existence of impaired decision-making ability can raise issues regarding whether involuntary admission can be justified in the best interest of persons with mental illness. The General Comment, however, argues that involuntary admission does not comply with the CRPD which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disabilities. This statement defies logic since the issue is whether the existence of impaired decision-making ability may be an exceptional case. It is also against the principles of beneficence to withhold treatment for persons with mental illness just for self-determination when poor outcomes are anticipated if left untreated. The concept of supported decision making suggested by the General Comment is also ambiguous, and not clearly distinguishable from substitute decision making. Another reason for the prohibition of involuntary admission relates to doubt concerning the accuracy of assessment of mental capacity, which implies adequate assessment may justify involuntary admission. In practice, it is not always complicated to assess mental capacity in order to make treatment-related decisions. The third reason concerns the argument that psychiatric treatments lack empirical evidence concerning effectiveness. Scientific evidence supporting the effectiveness of psychiatric treatment is abundant. The rights of persons with mental illness are important ethical issues. However, it is doubtful whether the blanket prohibition of compulsory admission is appropriate and ethical. Critical review of the UNCRPD and the General Comment is urgent for timely treatment and for the well-being of persons with mental illness.

La ley de salud mental en Inglaterra / The mental health act in England

Introduction: People can become extremely vulnerable during episodes of severe mental ill health. Their ability to protect themselves can become impaired. They can also pose significant risks to the safety of others through their erratic or hostile behaviour. It could be actually argued that it is precisely during a mental health crisis when explicit legal safeguards are of critical importance for the protection of people's rights, including their dignity and autonomy. Method: An outline is provided of how the Mental Health Act operates in England, with particular reference to involuntary admissions to hospital as well as the right of appeal through the Mental Health Review Tribunal. Results: The roles of medical professionals, Approved Mental Health Professionals, the Nearest Relative as well as the type of evidence that professionals must submit to the Mental Health Review Tribunal and how this evidence is challenged are discussed. Conclusions: The independent legal review of the involuntary detention of a person in hospital is discussed both regarding the protection of human rights it provides as well as in terms of its impact on promoting higher standards of care.

Introducción: Las personas afectadas de un episodio severo de enfermedad mental pueden encontrarse en un estado de alta vulnerabilidad, incluyendo el ser incapaces de protegerse. Durante estos episodios, dichas personas pueden también suponer un riesgo significativo para otros debido, por ejemplo, a una conducta errática u hostil. En este artículo se arguye que es durante estos períodos de crisis cuando se requiere de disposiciones legales explícitas que protejan los derechos, la dignidad, y la autonomía de dichas personas. Métodos: Se provee de un resumen de cómo funciona la Ley de Salud Mental en Inglaterra, con particular referencia a la hospitalización involuntaria así como al derecho de apelación que los pacientes tienen contra dicha hospitalización, la que es vista por el Tribunal de Salud Mental. Resultados: Se discuten los roles de los médicos, de los denominados Profesionales Aprobados de Salud Mental (AMHP) y del Familiar Más Cercano (Nearest Relative), así como el tipo de evidencia que todos los profesionales deben presentar ante el Tribunal de Salud Mental y cómo dicha evidencia es cuestionada en detalle tanto por el abogado del paciente como por los miembros del Tribunal de Salud Mental. Conclusión: Se discute la importancia del hecho de que la hospitalización involuntaria es sometida a una revisión legal independiente de la profesión médica. En particular, se hace referencia al efecto de dicho derecho de apelación en términos tanto de la protección de los derechos humanos de los pacientes así como de la mejoría de los estándares de la calidad de los servicios de psiquiatría.

Medicoethical Aspect of Involuntary and Compulsory Admission / 신경정신의학

Involuntary and compulsive admission can damage a patient's autonomy from a medicoethical aspect, but the patient who cannot understand information and explanations from a psychiatrist due to impaired judgment and lacks insight can have impaired judgment in certain circumstances. The decision making of a patient without substantial autonomy in a psychotic or intoxicated state can be justly neglected by the psychiatrist for the patient's sake. Compulsory admission is generally permitted only in case that a patient presents a danger to himself or others, which is not of a benefit to the patient not in danger because of the loss of the opportunity to take appropriate treatment. This enables psychiatrists not to abuse medical paternalism and to protect from the damage to patient's autonomy and civil right. Compulsive admission can be ethically justified to keep the principle of the least restrictive treatment and the patient's right to appropriate treatment. Psychiatrists should help enhance the patient's underestimated autonomy on the basis of the limited paternalism.