J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc.  2019 Feb;58(1):38-46. 10.4306/jknpa.2019.58.1.38.

Contemplation of Legal Status of the Committee for the Appropriateness of Hospitalization Related to Involuntary Admission

• Park JI
• Park HJ
• Kwon DH

• KMID: 2439026
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4306/jknpa.2019.58.1.38

Abstract

The revised Mental Health Act, in which the legal status and role of "the committee for the appropriateness of hospitalization" as an administrative committee, which has been launched since June 2017, is discussed. The German and British laws were reviewed in comparison with the Korean laws, focusing on the similarities and differences among the laws and which parts require revision. This study reported that patient care should be considered not only from a constitutional point of view, but also from a health care point of view. Self-determination and medical paternalism are both important but generally incompatible values. In recent days, objective and fair diagnosis from medical experts have been challenging. The current Mental Health Act was inevitably revised to actively accept the decisions of the Constitutional Court and apparently guarantee the basic rights of people in the future. The pros and cons of "the committee for the appropriateness of hospitalization" and which parts need to be revised to perform its role properly as a guardian of the admission procedure are assessed. This should reflect the current reality of the mental health medical community. In addition, a face-to-face examination should be made in principle. Nevertheless, the basic rights of the mentally ill are not guaranteed based on current law because of the shortage of budget and human resources. The final option maybe the introduction of a judicial system on involuntary admission. Legitimacy and professionalism are engagements that should be adhered to when treating psychiatric patients.

Keyword

Compulsory admission; Mental health act; Committe for appropriateness of admission

MeSH Terms

Budgets
Delivery of Health Care
Diagnosis
Hospitalization*
Humans
Illegitimacy
Jurisprudence*
Mental Health
Mentally Ill Persons
Paternalism
Patient Care
Professionalism

Reference

1. Jung YH. J.S. Mill freedom theory. Seoul: Sansu Ya;2005. p. 29.

2. Cha BJ, Yun JW, Yun JY. Now again, the Constitution. Goyang: Rogopolis;2017. p. 91.

3. Min BR. The right to self-determination and paternalism. Chonnam National University Institute for Legal Studies, Treatises of Law. 2012; 32:149–173.

4. Hong SS. When a speech becomes a sword. Seoul: Across;2017. p. 100–104.

5. Knpa.or.kr [homepage on the Internet]. A statement of opinion for the revision of “Mental health promotion and welfare service support” Act. Seoul: updated 2016 May 16. cited 2016 May 20. Available from: http://www.knpa.or.kr.

6. Kim H, Ahn YM, Park JI. Contemplation of legal criteria of psychiatric compulsory admission: including an introduction of US case which can be referred to the assessment of the appropriateness of hospitalization in Korea. J Korean Neuropsychiatr Assoc. 2018; 57:43–51.

7. Lee EH, Kim W. Deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill due to the amendment of mental health act: strategies against an influx into community. Kyunggi Research Institute, Issue and Analysis. 2017; 279:1–20.

8. Seong NI, Ahn KH, Kim HS. A study on the concept and scope of the basic rights. Seoul: The Constitutional Court of Korea Constitutional Court Review;1995. p. 15–16. p. 26

9. Park GC. Mental Health Act legislation system in Germany and compulsory admission for the mentally ill. Ewha Law Journal. 2014; 19:357–395.

10. Kim KW. The significance of self-determination in the Constitution. Korean Law Association. 2005; 20:161–179.

11. Kim MJ. Legislation evaluation and improvement measures regarding the mental health act: focusing on the problems of involuntary commitment regulations. Ewha Law Review. 2011; 1:177–200.

12. Shin KC. The meaning and future tasks of unconstitutionality in compulsory admission. Seoul Law Rev. 2017; 24:1–45.

13. Ha MH. Mandatory admission and control of mental health law: focusing on the necessity of introducing review of legality for confinement [dissertation]. Seoul: Korea University;2005.

14. Lee DJ. Re-establishing Mental Health Welfare Law for respecting human rights and deinstitutionalization. Seoul: The Korean Medical Association Research institute for healthcare policy;2018. p. 78. p. 157.

15. Park IH. Mental Health Promotion Act from the perspective of human rights and inclusion of persons with mental disabilities. Korean Soc Law Med. 2016; 17:209–279.