Reducing Restrictive Interventions

Running head:
Author Name(s)
Institutional Affiliation(s)
Author Note

1
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to discuss how MHA (2014) and a recovery framework informs the
regulation of the use of restrictive interventions restrictive interventions. The law requires that
therapeutic environments to refrain from procedures of restrictive practices while focusing on the
patients’ recovery. If restrictive interventions have to be used, they should always come as they
last result. The restrictive interventions not only cause physical harm, but they also cause patients
and their carers unnecessary psychological trauma. This paper would be discussing the various
provisions that MHA has put in its push to promote reductive restrictive interventions.
Keywords: Restrictive Interventions, Human Rights, Seclusion, Bodily Restraints

2
The Mental Health Act (MHA) was effected on 1st July 2014 in Victoria. This act was
promulgated by the Victoria Government to protect the rights, freedom, dignity, and integrity of
people suffering from mental illnesses. This Act not only protects the rights of mental health
patients, but it also grants them the right to make medical decisions that affects their mental
(Parliament of Victoria, 2014). Further, this Act encourages communication between doctors and
consumers. Along with the responsibility of informing the patients about their illness, the doctors
will also need to inform the family members and caregivers about the patients care plan (N. H. S.
Confederation, 2018). Before the Act came into place, these responsibilities were not legally
required of the practitioners and they could provide them upon their discretion.
Core Features of the MHA
The MHA encourages the consumers of mental health services to participate in decision
making processes regarding their treatment, diagnoses, and recovery. Also, this act recognizes
that mental consumers are people who have rights, and their integrity, dignity and human rights
deserves respect and protection. It prevents corrupt practitioners from exploiting the patients.
The acts put some more priority to minors suffering from mental illnesses. The importance of
children’s safety, care and well-being is placed at the fore-front.
The doctors have the responsibility of providing educating and information to the
consumers. A very fundamental provision is the emphasis on the importance of treatment and
recovery procedures provided to the patients. The act stress that such services must ensure that
no rights of the patient that are breached. The care and treatment provided to the patients are to
be provided in a holistic approach focusing on recovery and must be individualized for every
patient. A general approach should not be taken in the treatment for every patient.

3
From the past studies, some of these features have been found to be very important in the
in concern for mental health services. For instance, the study of (Chan, Webber, & Hayward,
2013) analyzed the use of restrictive interventions on minors and young adults. The results of
this study found that there is a great number of children who are subjected to restrictive
interventions. Another study conducted by (Brady, Spittal, Brophy, & Harvey, 2017) to weigh the
overall perception of the benefits of restrictive interventions among consumers. Despite the fact
that there were a few reported benefits, very few patients love the experience. This study was
part of the literatures that find no rationale in the use of restrictive interventions.
In the study of (Webber, McVilly, & Chan, 2011), restrictive interventions were being
used as a strategy instead of a last resort. The interest of these authors for this study was inspired
by their previous study that had shown that the use of restrictive interventions was very common
(Webber, McVilly, Stevenson, & Chan, 2010). The authors undertook a study to confirm the
perceived serious harm as the reason for the prevalence rates of cases in restrictive intervention.
However, the conclusion of this study was that restrictive interventions were being used as health
intervention strategy.
Above all these reasons that demonstrates the best interest of MHA, the work of
(McSherry, 2017) emphasize on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(CRPD). In article 3, the work of (McSherry, 2017) clarifies the issue of respect for individuals’
autonomy and inherent dignity and individual as explained in CRPD.
Restrictive Interventions
Restrictive interventions are regulated in part 6 of the MHA. With respect to mental
health, restrictive interventions are certain medical procedures that limit or restrict a patient
suffering from mental illness some rights such as the freedom of movement, speech, etc.