Preferences of Individual Mental Health Service Users Are Essential in Determining the Least Restrictive Type of Restraint

American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (1):19-22 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Crutchfield and Redinger (2024) propose that the use of a chemical restraint that affects only a particular conscious state is ethically permissible if, and only if, (1) it is the least restrictive...

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,035

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Limitations of Principlism.Jed P. Mangal & Nathan S. Scheiner - 2024 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (1):17-19.
Chemical Restraints and the Basic Liberties.David Birks - 2024 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (1):22-24.
On Being Conscious as a Basic Liberty.Peter Shiu-Hwa Tsu & Shunsuke Sugimoto - 2024 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (1):24-26.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-01-13

Downloads
28 (#777,755)

6 months
13 (#226,751)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Citations of this work

Basic Liberties, Consent, and Chemical Restraints.Parker Crutchfield & Michael Redinger - 2024 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 15 (2).

Add more citations