...
首页> 外文期刊>British journal of nursing: BJN >Deprivation of liberty and covert medicines: practice implications
【24h】

Deprivation of liberty and covert medicines: practice implications

机译:剥夺自由和隐蔽药物:实践意义

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The UK Supreme Court's judgment in Cheshire West and Chester Council v P [2014] has had a huge impact on the promotion of human rights of vulnerable patients. The ruling emphasises the positive duty on the state and its organisations, such as the NHS, to have in place procedures that independently confirm that the human rights of vulnerable patients in hospitals and other care settings are being applied in the same way as for any other human being. The Supreme Court ensured that the state was obliged to verify independently the care arrangements of iulnerable incapable adults by introducing a more inclusive determination of an objective deprivation of liberty that has seen a tenfold increase in the use of the Mental Capacity Act2005 deprivation of liberty safeguards Health & Social Care Information Centre HSCIC, 2015).
机译:英国最高法院在柴郡西部和切斯特委员会V P [2014]对促进弱势患者的人权产生了巨大影响。 该裁决强调国家及其组织的积极义务,如NHS,以便在适当的程序中,独立证实医院和其他护理环境的弱势患者的人权正在与其他任何其他方式相同的方式应用 人。 最高法院确保该国有义务通过引入更具包容性剥夺自由的客观剥夺自由的目标剥夺自由的自由度,这些国家独立验证了Iulnation无法无法无法安全的成年人的护理安排,这些人可以在使用的心力下降2005年剥夺自由保护自由的剥夺自由卫生保障卫生 &社会护理信息中心HSCIC,2015)。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号