RESUMO
Under certain conditions, coercive interventions in psychotic patients can help to regain insight and alleviate symptoms, but can also traumatize subjects. This study explored attitudes towards psychiatric coercive interventions in healthy individuals and persons suffering from schizophrenia, schizoaffective or bipolar disorder. The impact of personal history of coercive treatment on preferences concerning clinical management of patients unable to consent was investigated. Six case vignettes depicting scenarios of ethical dilemmas and demanding decisions in favour of or against coercive interventions were presented to 60 healthy volunteers and 90 patients. Structured interviews focusing on experienced coercion were performed in conjunction with the Coercion Experience Scale and the Admission Experience Survey. Symptom severity, psychosocial functioning and insight into illness were assessed as influencing variables. Student's t tests compared patients' and controls' judgments, followed by regression analyses to define the predictive value of symptoms and measures of coercion on judgments regarding the total patient sample and patients with experience of fixation. Patients and non-psychiatric controls showed no significant difference in their attitudes towards involuntary admission and forced medication. Conversely, patients more than controls significantly disapproved of mechanical restraint. Subjective experience of coercive interventions played an important role for the justification of treatment against an individual's "natural will". Factors influencing judgments on coercion were overall functioning and personal experience of treatment effectiveness and fairness. Qualitative and quantitative aspects of perceived coercion, in addition to insight into illness, predicted judgments of previously fixated patients. Results underline the importance of the quality of practical implementation and care, if coercive interventions cannot be avoided.
