Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgments
Abstract Background Physical restraint (PR) is used to ensure the safety of care recipients. However, this causes an ethical dilemma between the autonomy and dignity of the recipients and the provision of effective treatment by health workers. This study aimed to analyze legal and ethical situations...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2024-02-01
|
| Series: | BMC Nursing |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01781-8 |
| _version_ | 1797275274392371200 |
|---|---|
| author | Seung Gyeong Jang Won Lee Jeongmin Ha Sungkyoung Choi |
| author_facet | Seung Gyeong Jang Won Lee Jeongmin Ha Sungkyoung Choi |
| author_sort | Seung Gyeong Jang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Physical restraint (PR) is used to ensure the safety of care recipients. However, this causes an ethical dilemma between the autonomy and dignity of the recipients and the provision of effective treatment by health workers. This study aimed to analyze legal and ethical situations related to the use of PR using written judgments. Methods This study uses a qualitative retrospective design. Qualitative content analysis was performed on South Korean written judgments. A total of 38 cases from 2015 to 2021 were categorized. The types of court decisions and ethical dilemma situations were examined according to the four principles of bioethics, and the courts’ judgments were compared. Results Written judgments related to PR were classified into three types according to the appropriateness of PR use, the presence or absence of duty of care, and legal negligence. Ethical dilemmas were categorized into three situations depending on whether the four principles of bioethics were followed. The courts’ decisions regarding the ethical dilemmas differed depending on the situational factors before and after the use of PR and the conflicting conditions of the ethical principles. Conclusions Health workers should consider legal and ethical requirements when determining whether to use PR to provide the care recipient with the necessary treatment. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-07T15:11:55Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-46d9393a0cd94574a9358fdebb1b6971 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1472-6955 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-07T15:11:55Z |
| publishDate | 2024-02-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Nursing |
| spelling | doaj.art-46d9393a0cd94574a9358fdebb1b69712024-03-05T18:36:26ZengBMCBMC Nursing1472-69552024-02-0123111010.1186/s12912-024-01781-8Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgmentsSeung Gyeong Jang0Won Lee1Jeongmin Ha2Sungkyoung Choi3Department of Nursing, Inje UniversityDepartment of Nursing, Chung-Ang UniversityDepartment of Nursing, Dong-A UniversityDepartment of Nursing, Catholic Kwandong UniversityAbstract Background Physical restraint (PR) is used to ensure the safety of care recipients. However, this causes an ethical dilemma between the autonomy and dignity of the recipients and the provision of effective treatment by health workers. This study aimed to analyze legal and ethical situations related to the use of PR using written judgments. Methods This study uses a qualitative retrospective design. Qualitative content analysis was performed on South Korean written judgments. A total of 38 cases from 2015 to 2021 were categorized. The types of court decisions and ethical dilemma situations were examined according to the four principles of bioethics, and the courts’ judgments were compared. Results Written judgments related to PR were classified into three types according to the appropriateness of PR use, the presence or absence of duty of care, and legal negligence. Ethical dilemmas were categorized into three situations depending on whether the four principles of bioethics were followed. The courts’ decisions regarding the ethical dilemmas differed depending on the situational factors before and after the use of PR and the conflicting conditions of the ethical principles. Conclusions Health workers should consider legal and ethical requirements when determining whether to use PR to provide the care recipient with the necessary treatment.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01781-8Restraint, physicalEthical dilemmasEmpirical literatureDissent and disputesJurisprudenceMalpractice |
| spellingShingle | Seung Gyeong Jang Won Lee Jeongmin Ha Sungkyoung Choi Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgments BMC Nursing Restraint, physical Ethical dilemmas Empirical literature Dissent and disputes Jurisprudence Malpractice |
| title | Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgments |
| title_full | Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgments |
| title_fullStr | Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgments |
| title_full_unstemmed | Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgments |
| title_short | Is physical restraint unethical and illegal?: a qualitative analysis of Korean written judgments |
| title_sort | is physical restraint unethical and illegal a qualitative analysis of korean written judgments |
| topic | Restraint, physical Ethical dilemmas Empirical literature Dissent and disputes Jurisprudence Malpractice |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-01781-8 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT seunggyeongjang isphysicalrestraintunethicalandillegalaqualitativeanalysisofkoreanwrittenjudgments AT wonlee isphysicalrestraintunethicalandillegalaqualitativeanalysisofkoreanwrittenjudgments AT jeongminha isphysicalrestraintunethicalandillegalaqualitativeanalysisofkoreanwrittenjudgments AT sungkyoungchoi isphysicalrestraintunethicalandillegalaqualitativeanalysisofkoreanwrittenjudgments |