Scholarlink

<p>The 2023 amendment to the Austrian UbG (Unterbringungsgesetz, compulsory admission act) represents a&#xa0;significant step toward placing greater emphasis on patient rights in psychiatric care. Against this backdrop, this article examines the issue, under what conditions may medical treatment against the declared will of patients be permissible. With the aid of three case studies, the advantages and limitations of new and established legal instruments are discussed: the use of preliminary court rulings illustrates the therapeutic and legal added value of a&#xa0;structured, externally reviewed procedure. The formation of a&#xa0;circle of supporters illustrates the opportunities of supported decision-making but also its practical limitations. Chronic courses of illness highlight systemic challenges and difficulties in providing sustainable treatment. It is clear that dealing with involuntary medical treatment for patients who are incapable of making decisions represents a&#xa0;complex area of tension between legal frameworks, clinical practice, and ethical considerations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Das Behandlungsrecht zwischen Autonomie und Zwang: Chancen und Herausforderungen durch die Novelle des Unterbringungsgesetzes

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月3日

查看全文
  • Charlotte Reiff,
  • Katharina Hufnagl,
  • Nina Gasperi

摘要

The 2023 amendment to the Austrian UbG (Unterbringungsgesetz, compulsory admission act) represents a significant step toward placing greater emphasis on patient rights in psychiatric care. Against this backdrop, this article examines the issue, under what conditions may medical treatment against the declared will of patients be permissible. With the aid of three case studies, the advantages and limitations of new and established legal instruments are discussed: the use of preliminary court rulings illustrates the therapeutic and legal added value of a structured, externally reviewed procedure. The formation of a circle of supporters illustrates the opportunities of supported decision-making but also its practical limitations. Chronic courses of illness highlight systemic challenges and difficulties in providing sustainable treatment. It is clear that dealing with involuntary medical treatment for patients who are incapable of making decisions represents a complex area of tension between legal frameworks, clinical practice, and ethical considerations.