verplichte opname omtrend am?

[Fantôme]

Fade of Light schreef op 06-07-2003 @ 21:45:
ja, das inderdaad wel mooi. Hoewel we nog niet echt tot een uitkomst waren gekomen (mocht dat sowieso ooit gebeuren) dan is het iig duidelijk dat er geen vijandigheid bedoelt was

op bepaalde punten ben ik het wel met je eens.
je noemt een paar dingen waardoor opname bter zou zijn.
maar ik vind mijn 'tegenpunten' zwaarder wegen. dat is ook logisch, anders was ik het wel met je eens

... schreef op 02-07-2003 @ 12:52:
zover ik weet hebben mensen die aan am doen geen stemmen in hun hoofd die zeggen dat het niet mag. i mean.. het ging om am toch. of doelde je daar nu even niet op?

rocaliaan lieke schreef dat ze ALTIJD tegen gedwongen opnames was, en daar was ik het niet mee eens, dit ging dus even niet om alleen am-gevallen. was misschien niet zo duidelijk, sorry

[shy girl]

ik am ongeveer anderhalf jaar..meer sporadischen niet eg ernstig, maar k beschouw het toch wel als een redelijk groot probleem..tis nie normaal lijkt me..
ik heb hier hulp voor gehad,en nu wille ze da k met therapie stop omdat ze denken dat k het zelf kan en eruit kom dak sterk genoeg ben geworden..maar kdoe het nog steeds en ben er eg nie vanaf ofzow..dus ja je ziet wel dat als je nog steeds am doet dat ze daar nie altijd veel waarde aan hechten..dan moet het al echt ernstig zijn..zegt mn psych ook nog ..ja het kan best nog lang duren am..maar uiteindelijjk kom je er zelf uit en denk je ernie eens meer aan..maa ik zie dat nie zow hoor. strax heb ik eindelijk een s een vriend en dan ziet ie de littekens en dan vraagt ie weer wat dat is. blabla kweet ut niet misscihe heeft iemand tips?

[Guy,Interrupted]

En, als je opname of therapie echt 'verplicht' is bij am(, zonder suïcdale pogingen) hoe zit het dan met puntje 6 van Deb Martinsons "bill of rights".


The Bill of Rights for Those who Self-Harm
> 1.. The right to caring, humane medical treatment.
> Self-injurers should receive the same level and quality of care that a
>person presenting with an identical but accidental injury would receive.
>Procedures should be done as gently as they would be for others. If
>stitches are required, local anesthesia should be used. Treatment of
>accidental injury and self-inflicted injury should be identical.
>
> 2.. The right to participate fully in decisions about emergency
>psychiatric treatment (so long as no one's life is in immediate danger).
> When a person presents at the emergency room with a self-inflicted
>injury, his or her opinion about the need for a psychological assessment
>should be considered. If the person is not in obvious distress and is not
>suicidal, he or she should not be subjected to an arduous psych evaluation.
>Doctors should be trained to assess suicidality/homicidality and should
>realize that although referral for outpatient follow-up may be advisable,
>hospitalization for self-injurious behavior alone is rarely warranted.
>
> 3.. The right to body privacy.
> Visual examinations to determine the extent and frequency of
>self-inflicted injury should be performed only when absolutely necessary
>and done in a way that maintains the patient's dignity. Many who SI have
>been abused; the humiliation of a strip-search is likely to increase the
>amount and intensity of future self-injury while making the person subject
>to the searches look for better ways to hide the marks.
>
> 4.. The right to have the feelings behind the SI validated.
> Self-injury doesn't occur in a vacuum. The person who self-injures
>usually does so in response to distressing feelings, and those feelings
>should be recognized and validated. Although the care provider might not
>understand why a particular situation is extremely upsetting, she or he can
>at least understand that it *is* distressing and respect the self-injurer's
>right to be upset about it.
>
> 5.. The right to disclose to whom they choose only what they choose.
> No care provider should disclose to others that injuries are
>self-inflicted without obtaining the permission of the person involved.
>Exceptions can be made in the case of team-based hospital treatment or
>other medical care providers when the information that the injuries were
>self-inflicted is essential knowledge for proper medical care. Patients
>should be notified when others are told about their SI and as always,
>gossiping about any patient is unprofessional.
>
> 6.. The right to choose what coping mechanisms they will use.
> No person should be forced to choose between self-injury and treatment.
>Outpatient therapists should never demand that clients sign a no-harm
>contract; instead, client and provider should develop a plan for dealing
>with self-injurious impulses and acts during the treatment. No client
>should feel they must lie about SI or be kicked out of outpatient therapy.
>Exceptions to this may be made in hospital or ER treatment, when a contract
>may be required by hospital legal policies.
>
> 7.. The right to have care providers who do not allow their feelings
>about SI to distort the therapy.
> Those who work with clients who self-injure should keep their own fear,
>revulsion, anger, and anxiety out of the therapeutic setting. This is
>crucial for basic medical care of self-inflicted wounds but holds for
>therapists as well. A person who is struggling with self-injury has enough
>baggage without taking on the prejudices and biases of their care
>providers.
>
> 8.. The right to have the role SI has played as a coping mechanism
>validated.
> No one should be shamed, admonished, or chastised for having
>self-injured. Self-injury works as a coping mechanism, sometimes for people
>who have no other way to cope. They may use SI as a last-ditch effort to
>avoid suicide. The self-injurer should be taught to honor the positive
>things that self-injury has done for him/her as well as to recognize that
>the negatives of SI far outweigh those positives and that it is possible to
>learn methods of coping that aren't as destructive and life-interfering.
>
> 9.. The right not to be automatically considered a dangerous person
>simply because of self-inflicted injury.
> No one should be put in restraints or locked in a treatment room in an
>emergency room solely because his or her injuries are self-inflicted. No
>one should ever be involuntarily committed simply because of SI; physicians
>should make the decision to commit based on the presence of psychosis,
>suicidality, or homicidality.
>
> 10.. The right to have self-injury regarded as an attempt to
>communicate, not manipulate.
> Most people who hurt themselves are trying to express things they can
>say in no other way. Although sometimes these attempts to communicate seem
>manipulative, treating them as manipulation only makes the situation worse.
>Providers should respect the communicative function of SI and assume it is
>not manipulative behavior until there is clear evidence to the contrary.




*wist overigens niet dat 't topic nog steeds gaande was. 't hoofdonderwerp is niet "ik snijd, help me", dus deze discussie mag je wel voeren... toch?



Jongen, Verstoord

[Guy,Interrupted]

De bron is: http://www.selfinjury.org/docs/brights.html

[Eend]

me blackrose schreef op 30-06-2003 @ 16:03:
hangt er vanaf wat voor opname, als je echt een behandel-opname hebt dan wel ja, maar bijvoorbeeld op een crisis is het programma juist zo ingesteld dat je een beetje tot rust kan komen. veel kamermomenten, creatieve activiteiten, koken, als je naar buiten mag een buitenactiviteit, muziek enz. het grootste therapie gedeelte op een dag is de dag afsluiting die 15 min. duurt.

mjah, dat snap ik, maar das dan een gesloten afdeling, ik ben open afdelingen gewent...nahjah, we hadden het beide over een andere afdeling