This essay will look at whether it is ethical to use restraint while treating a person with a mental illness such as schizophrenia, bi-polar and anorexia. So, what is meant by ethical? Ethics means the principles we go by, being honest, being respectful, not hurting one another and treating each other as equals, what is right and what we consider to be wrong. When treating the mentally ill there can be different forms of restraint used such as physical restraint which refers to restricting an individual’s movement, Chemical restraint is giving a patient a pill or injection to make them more compliant and mechanical restraint is using straps and restrictive devices such as straight jackets. For the purpose of this essay physical restraint will …show more content…
Staff was using the utilitarian theory in this instance believing the 'greater good for the greatest amount.' They thought restraining the man would be in everybody's best interest as if he had become violent he may of hurt himself and others around him. However the disadvantage of this approach is that they couldn't predict the consequences of his death, even if the consequences seemed more likely at the time but because in their view the good consequences outweighed the bad they chose to use restraint. Kant's theory would disagree with this and he would say the utilitarian approach used by staff was wrong and unethical simply because he believed they broke fundamental rules, such as not to harm another person. He would have said that even though staff were trying to protect the man and others around him their action was wrong because they were doing it to make the largest amount of people happy and this doesn't always make the action right. For it to be ethical Kant would say the action had to be good and restraining somebody to the point they died was far from 'good will'. Kant would suggest other less offensive methods would suffice …show more content…
She is admitted into hospital due to starving herself. Her family are very worried and she is restrained and forced fed against her wishes. This breaches the woman's right to freedom from degrading treatment and torture [The Human Rights Act,1998] for example Inhuman treatment is ill-treatment which causes you severe mental or physical suffering. The ill-treatment doesn't have to be deliberate or inflicted on purpose. [Citizen's Advice Bureau]
It also breaches her right to freedom of making her own health decisions without the intervention of public bodies such as hospitals. This was ignored and the woman was humiliated and violated. It also affected her physiologically.
The utilitarian approach the staff used was ethical to the doctors and family of the woman who was terrified she was going to die unless she ate something. It seemed to be the lesser evil and produced more good than bad consequences. However Kant would argue that the action itself wasn't ethical and despite it bringing happiness to the woman's family and saving her life, it was still wrong because the woman suffered and her wishes were not