In this article, an intervention aimed at improving quality of care to prevent seclusion in psychiatry by focusing on the first five minutes at admission is analyzed from a care ethics perspective. Two cases are presented from an evaluation study in a psychiatric hospital. In both cases, the nurses follow the intervention protocol, but the outcome is different. In the first case, the patient ends up in the seclusion room. In the second case, this does not happen. Analyzing the cases (...) from a care ethics perspective, we conclude that applying the intervention in the right way implies more than following the steps laid down in the protocol. It requires a new way of thinking and acting, resulting in new relationships between nurses and patients. Care ethics theory can help clarify what good care is actually about and keep in mind what is needed to apply the intervention. Thus, care ethics theory can be highly practical and helpful in changing and improving healthcare practice. (shrink)

Background: In spite of a national strategy for reducing coercion in the mental health services, Norway still has a high rate of involuntary treatment compared to other European countries. It is therefore crucial to study various parties involved in involuntary treatment in order to reduce coercion. Research question: How do patients and staff in a Norwegian locked psychiatric ward experience coercion? Research design: Participant observation and interviews. Participants: A total of 12 patients and 22 employees participated in this study. Ethical (...) considerations: This study is accepted by the National Committee for Medical Health Research Ethics. Findings: The participants experienced coercion in different ways. Patients often felt inferior, while many of the staff felt guilty for violating patients’ dignity, although they ascribed responsibility for their actions to the “system.” The main themes are (1) corrections and house rules, (2) coercion is perceived as necessary, (3) the significance of material surroundings, and (4) being treated as a human being. Discussion: The discussion draws upon the concepts of vulnerability, guilty conscience, and ethical sensitivity, related to the staffs’ divergent views on coercion. Conclusion: Especially among staff, there are divergent views of coercion. Professionals being physically and emotionally close to the patient are more likely to understand him or her as a unique person with individual needs. If patients are kept at a distance, professionals as a group change to understand patients as members of a group with common needs and common restrictions. (shrink)

The use of patient restrictions (e.g. involuntary admission, seclusion, restraint) is a complex ethical dilemma in psychiatric care. The present study explored nurses’ (n = 22) and physicians’ (n = 5) perceptions of what actually happens when an aggressive behaviour episode occurs on the ward and what alternatives to seclusion and restraint are actually in use as normal standard practice in acute psychiatric care. The data were collected by focus group interviews and analysed by inductive content analysis. The participants believed (...) that the decision-making process for managing patients’ aggressive behaviour contains some in-built ethical dilemmas. They thought that patients’ subjective perspective received little attention. Nevertheless, the staff proposed and appeared to use a number of alternatives to minimize or replace the use of seclusion and restraint. Medical and nursing staff need to be encouraged and taught to: (1) tune in more deeply to reasons for patients’ aggressive behaviour; and (2) use alternatives to seclusion and restraint in order to humanize patient care to a greater extent. (shrink)