The Mental Health Act (MHA) (2007) defines a mental disorder as ‘any disorder or disability of the mind’. Individuals treated for mental illnesses against their will are said to be sectioned under the MHA. People sectioned under the MHA can have suicidal tendencies, cause self-harm, appear agitated, frightened, depressed or suffer with psychotic episodes (Mind, 2013). Isaacs (2012) cites restraint being used as an intervention to manage a patient’s behaviour within psychiatric units due to violence, aggression, disruptive behaviour, agitation, dementia, confusion and alcohol or drug intoxication. Adverse events, including death have been shown to directly correlate with the use of restraint within mental healthcare settings (Duxbury, J. and
…show more content…
Healthcare professionals are duty bound to adhere to the ethical principles of; beneficence (to do good), non-maleficence (to do no harm), respect for autonomy and justice, ensuring that these moral obligations are at the centre of doing the right thing for the patient (Beauchamp, T.L. 2003). In the case of Rocky Bennett, it is the nurse’s duty to protect the patient and others from further harm. Whilst physical restraint is immoral, it could be argued that restraining Rocky in order to protect the patient and others, fulfils the nurse’s duty based on the moral principle of beneficence; therefore justifying physical restraint. However, a deontological approach does not consider how to approach conflicting duties and is not concerned with the welfare of others (Penslar, R 1995). Limitations of deontology is that there is no rational foundation for defining duty. A nurses’ duty is to do good (beneficence), applying restraint to a patient is considered to be harming (non-maleficence) the patient, therefore a nurse is faced with conflicting duties. It is obvious that a patient’s autonomy conflicts with the therapeutic aims of restraint and the duty to protect, as well the nurse’s duty to protect the patient from harm. Penslar (1995) states that deontology is a limiting ethical theory because there is no logical basis for defining
Healthcare professionals are duty bound to adhere to the ethical principles of; beneficence (to do good), non-maleficence (to do no harm), respect for autonomy and justice, ensuring that these moral obligations are at the centre of doing the right thing for the patient (Beauchamp, T.L. 2003). In the case of Rocky Bennett, it is the nurse’s duty to protect the patient and others from further harm. Whilst physical restraint is immoral, it could be argued that restraining Rocky in order to protect the patient and others, fulfils the nurse’s duty based on the moral principle of beneficence; therefore justifying physical restraint. However, a deontological approach does not consider how to approach conflicting duties and is not concerned with the welfare of others (Penslar, R 1995). Limitations of deontology is that there is no rational foundation for defining duty. A nurses’ duty is to do good (beneficence), applying restraint to a patient is considered to be harming (non-maleficence) the patient, therefore a nurse is faced with conflicting duties. It is obvious that a patient’s autonomy conflicts with the therapeutic aims of restraint and the duty to protect, as well the nurse’s duty to protect the patient from harm. Penslar (1995) states that deontology is a limiting ethical theory because there is no logical basis for defining