The Ethics of Mechanical Restraints

As mechanical restraints have never been proven effective in clinical practice, they should not be used routinely. They should be considered a non‐validated therapy requiring consent

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Hastings Center report Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. 22 - 25
Main Authors Moss, Robert J., La Puma, John
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.01.1991
The Hastings Center
Hastings Center
Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences
Subjects
Aged
Analysis
Behavior Control
Bioethics
Care and treatment
Disclosure
Elderly
Ethics, Medical
Geriatrics
Hospital beds
Humans
Informed consent
Long term health care
Medical ethics
Medical practice
Mental health
Mental institutions
Mentally Ill Persons
Nursing homes
Older adults
Patient care
Patients
Physical restraint
Physical trauma
Professional ethics
Psychiatric hospitals
Reasonable care
Restraint of patients
Restraint, Physical
Risk Assessment
Therapeutic Human Experimentation
Therapy
United States
United States
Professional Patient Relationship
Analytical Approach
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:As mechanical restraints have never been proven effective in clinical practice, they should not be used routinely. They should be considered a non‐validated therapy requiring consent
Bibliography:ark:/67375/WNG-8MQKMX9L-J
istex:D45BBD62614615492AB36F61B795810C37D705F0
ArticleID:HAST4093
John La Puma
Robert J. Moss
is co‐director, Section of Geriatric Medicine, and Clinical Ethics Scholar‐in‐Residence, Lutheran General Hospital.
is director, Center for Clinical Ethics, Lutheran General Hospital, Park Ridge, III.
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0093-0334
1552-146X
DOI:10.2307/3563342