PB Evidence-Based Mental Health
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Psychiatric Bulletin (2003) 27: 437. doi: 10.1192/pb.27.11.437-a
© 2003 The Royal College of Psychiatrists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Atkinson, J. M
Right arrow Articles by Garner, H. C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Atkinson, J. M
Right arrow Articles by Garner, H. C
Psychiatric Bulletin (2003) 27: 437
© 2003 The Royal College of Psychiatrists


Correspondence

Advance directives in mental health

Jacqueline M Atkinson, Senior Lecturer and Helen C Garner, Research Assistant

Division of Community Based Sciences, University of Glasgow,1 Lillybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8RZ

In discussions about our recent research in advance directives in mental health a number of people indicated that they would put in an advance directive refusal of certain medication because they were ‘allergic’ to it. Any patient who tells a treating doctor they are allergic to, say, penicillin should be confident that they would not receive this drug. Some psychiatric patients, however, believed that telling a doctor they were ‘allergic’ to a particular drug would not prevent them being given it. This raises the question of what they mean by ‘allergic’. If patients mean that it causes, to them, unacceptable side-effects but have learnt that this is not an acceptable reason to psychiatrists for not prescribing it, they may be seeking what they believe to be a more acceptable ‘medical’ reason.

Advance statements are included in the new Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 and may appear in new legislation in England and Wales. To serve their purpose, they need to be written clearly and unambiguously. If patients cite allergy as a reason for not receiving a drug and this can be overturned by a doctor who has a different understanding of what allergy means, the advance directive will not serve its purpose. It is more appropriate that psychiatrists work with patients to encourage them to express their concerns, accept them as legitimate and seek to overcome them, as many undoubtedly do, rather than patients adopt a possibly inappropriate term in an attempt to make their views heard.

Declaration of interest

Dr Atkinson and Ms Garner are in receipt of a research grant from the Nuffield Foundation funded to research advance directives.





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an eLetter
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Atkinson, J. M
Right arrow Articles by Garner, H. C
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Atkinson, J. M
Right arrow Articles by Garner, H. C


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals