Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
J Am Geriatr Soc ; 70(11): 3070-3079, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2136977

ABSTRACT

Guardianship may pose an ethical dilemma for physicians, who must balance protecting vulnerable patients from potential safety concerns with respecting their autonomy. Older adults with dementia are particularly susceptible to loss of independence and the ability to participate in medical decision making. To have the capacity for medical decision making, individuals must understand relevant information, appreciate their circumstances, demonstrate reasoning, and express a consistent choice free from coercion. Although capacity assessments are usually task-specific, geriatricians and other specialists may be asked to comment on capacity more globally. These determinations may be used to support a Petition for the Appointment of a Guardian of a Legally Incapacitated Adult, the legal process of pursuing guardianship in probate court. Assigned guardians may be known to the incapacitated individual (e.g., a family member or friend) or may be professional guardians with no prior relationship to the ward. Guardians are encouraged to use substituted decision-making, taking into account the ward's previously expressed values and preferences. Although a number of viable alternatives to guardianship exist, numerous systemic barriers may prevent these from being fully explored. The ongoing need for guardianship should be periodically revisited and reassessed. Data about guardians and wards is shockingly sparse, as there are no centralized databases. Laws and regulations for guardianships vary significantly between states. Physicians can serve as important allies and advocates for patients with cognitive impairment at risk of incapacity, can help preserve their autonomy for as long as possible, and ensure appropriate protections are in place if the patient does lose their decision-making ability.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Legal Guardians , Humans , Aged , Clinical Decision-Making
2.
3.
Psychiatr Pol ; 55(3): 585-598, 2021 Jun 30.
Article in English, Polish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1395317

ABSTRACT

Within the scope of mental health protection, numerous practical problems arise concerning the issue of providing health services to a minor. Admission of a minor to a psychiatric hospital is associated in practice with numerous doubts. This part of the article describes the conditions of admission to hospital with the consent of the patient. It distinguishes and accurately describes situations where a minor is under or over 16 years of age. In addition, it explains situations where there is a contradiction of declarations of will by legal guardians in relation to admission, their inability to perform legal acts, or a contradiction of the statements of the minor and guardian. It also addresses the aspect of receiving written consent during the COVID-19 epidemic.


Subject(s)
Commitment of Mentally Ill/legislation & jurisprudence , Informed Consent/legislation & jurisprudence , Legal Guardians/legislation & jurisprudence , Minors/legislation & jurisprudence , Patient Admission/legislation & jurisprudence , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Hospitals, Psychiatric/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Mental Disorders/therapy , Poland
4.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0244049, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-999828

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To explore parents' and guardians' views and experiences of accessing National Health Service (NHS) general practices for routine childhood vaccinations during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in England. DESIGN: Mixed methods approach involving an online cross-sectional survey (conducted between 19th April and 11th May 2020) and semi-structured telephone interviews (conducted between 27th April and 27th May 2020). PARTICIPANTS: 1252 parents and guardians (aged 16+ years) who reported living in England with a child aged 18 months or under completed the survey. Nineteen survey respondents took part in follow-up interviews. RESULTS: The majority of survey respondents (85.7%) considered it important for their children to receive routine vaccinations on schedule during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, several barriers to vaccination were identified. These included a lack of clarity around whether vaccination services were operating as usual, particularly amongst respondents from lower income households and those self-reporting as Black, Asian, Chinese, Mixed or Other ethnicity; difficulties in organising vaccination appointments; and fears around contracting COVID-19 while attending general practice. Concerns about catching COVID-19 while accessing general practice were weighed against concerns about children acquiring a vaccine-preventable disease if they did not receive scheduled routine childhood vaccinations. Many parents and guardians felt their child's risk of acquiring a vaccine-preventable disease was low as the implementation of stringent physical distancing measures (from March 23rd 2020) meant they were not mixing with others. CONCLUSION: To promote routine childhood vaccination uptake during the current COVID-19 outbreak, further waves of COVID-19 infection, and future pandemics, prompt and sustained national and general practice level communication is needed to raise awareness of vaccination service continuation and the importance of timely vaccination, and invitation-reminder systems for vaccination need to be maintained. To allay concerns about the safety of accessing general practice, practices should communicate the measures being implemented to prevent COVID-19 transmission.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/immunology , Legal Guardians/psychology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Parents/psychology , Vaccination/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , England , Female , Humans , Immunization/psychology , Male , Middle Aged , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL