No sex policy

I was reading through my mental illness text for uni (which i will post latter if asked, its not in the house) and i came across an "ethical delelma"

The issue was "you see male patient with Hep B atempting to initiate unprotected sexual relations with some female patients. You talk to him and he tells you he still intends to persue a sexual relationship with them. your facillity has a zero sex policy. what do you do?"

My first thought was, hang on, what the fuck. What right does any care facillity have to impose a zero sex policy on there patients?

For the moment ignore the fact that he is Hep B, that just leads to an issue of "do you disclose to his potentual sexual partners concidering you have an ethical duty to them as well as him. The issue which got up my nose was specifically the zero sex policy

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Since hep b is a contagious and dangerous disease I would definitely inform the woman in question and I would arrange for him to be quarantined until he is no longer contagious and make sure people have thier hep b vac up to date.

A zero sex policy isn't necessarily immoral in and of itself any more than other patient requirments might be, but it isn't terribly realistic in a coed facility, especially if it is long term in-patient and the patients have any degree of spare time or freedom.

It also doesn't seem relevant to the issue involved.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

how is it not relivent?

Your forgetting that this is a mental health facillity and there for its quite likly the patient was detained against there will. There for there freedoms are already curtailed and there problems are mental not bacterial (for the most part). ie its not as simple as "Well strap him down, pump him full of antibotics and then he is someone elses problem", your actions and policies can have a hugly detramental impact on there recovery. Infact that same book states that "nurses dont provide treatment, nurses ARE the treatment". Any limits you put on there autonomy can have serious implications for the treatment complience AND on there receptiveness for that treatment.

Basically how is this statment correct?

"A zero sex policy isn't necessarily immoral in and of itself any more than other patient requirments might be"

any move you make to limit autonomy is immoral unless you can prove nessacity for it especially on a patient who has had there autonomy stripped away from the start

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

i agree with zero sex policy while in an institution such as this.

 

why?
how does it benifit patient care?

This is what im asking, not what should be done in this situation where I would have no hesitation in informing the women of his statis as having Hep B

 

attraction when it is mutual is one thing, but sexual intimacy tends to complicate things and if people are emotionally fragile state then it is best to abstain until they work out their personal issues.

 

really?

your evidence for this?
because i have innumberable texts which say that sex increases seritonin which has a positive impact on depression. Futher more the DSM has as one of its criteria for diognosing depression as "markedly decreased interest in sexual activity"

 

lol....sure

 

How do you know they are going to have unprotected sex? Why not supply a condom?

 

http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/sex_relationships/facts/depressrelation.htm

http://www.beyondblue.org.au/index.aspx?link_id=105.898&oid=820

 

i agree but thats not really the point of the thread (which was to discuss if a no sex policy is acceptable, i really need to stop giving you guys so much background on my threads, you keep running away from the issues)

 

Asguard,

Depressed people usually loose interest in everything. That doesnt mean that people who are institutionalized due to mental health issues should be having sex with one another. Most likely this will lead to more problems overall, best to abstain during the duration of in-patient treatment.

As to the chemicals being released during sex: this is very short period and temporary. Dont confuse sex with the benefits of companionship.

 

what if it was a no choclate policy, would you surport that too?

Im interested to hear about your interactions with the mental illness sector BTW, what was your experiance of being detained against your will ect?

 

They shouldn't even be allowed to talk to each other.

 

me?

 

i tend to support policies being in place because they are there for a reason. my own feeling is that sex is the last thing you would encourage in a mental hospital. it is no big deal though, because relationships can still be developed and the two involved can learn to appreciate one another in a more meaningful, fulfilling way.

also my days of being rebellious for the sake of it are long over and i dont miss them.

 

who said i was rebelling for the sake of it. I happen to abscribe to the school of thought that concidering these people have less choice in wether to be there or not than prisioners do in jail that every freedom removed must have a strong reason to surport it AND evidence backing that up. Especially as its a health care facillity

 

well for one thing the staff at these facilities have enough to deal with. i can only imagine the problems if the patients were encouraged to fornicate. sex is very emotional and complex, this is exacerbated if the parties involved have emotional issues. emotional problems can occur at times in life and these facilities are meant to deal with that so i am not being judgmental. my own feeling is to separate the men and women completely. maybe that is done though.

 

so the staff are more important that the patients they are treating?

You do realise that my grandfather could request a beer while dying on the oncology ward dont you? What if the patients all got drunk there? dont the staff have enough to deal with without drunk patients?

The basis of any health care is choice, you have the right to reffuse to consent to any treatment you dont desire. This is exactly what has been removed from these people, there choice, they have no option to leave, they have no ability to refuse to consent to any treatment. If they refuse (and rember the largest segmant are in there for depression not for psycosis) they can be strapped down and injected against there will.

 

i understand what you are saying but sometimes people dont always know what is best for themselves and then decisions need to be made for them. this is done to try and help them. if anything you would want to diminish sexual desires at these periods and concentrate on other matters. the goal is to achieve as stress free of an environment as possible while the subject recuperates.