This page was translated automatically from Turkish. Read the original

Bu sayfa, 26. Dünya Psikiyatri Kongresi'nde sunulan çalışmanın yapay zekâ desteğiyle hazırlanmış Türkçe özetidir. Çalışmanın sahibi sunan yazarlardır; atıf için orijinal kaynağa başvurun.

SO444

Restraint Practices in Psychiatric Services in Türkiye: A Kantian Ethical and Legal Analysis

RESTRAINT PRACTICES IN PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES IN TURKEY: A KANTIAN ETHICAL AND LEGAL ANALYSIS

Within a Kantian framework, restraint can be justified only under exceptional circumstances; the absence of comprehensive mental health legislation in Türkiye may facilitate the normalization of coercive practices.

The aim of this study is to critically examine the ethical and legal legitimacy of restraint in psychiatric care through Kantian ethics and to propose a rights-based alternative for the Turkish context. The method is a conceptual ethical analysis grounded in Kant's moral philosophy; the concepts of autonomy, human dignity, and the categorical imperative, along with Article 432 of the Turkish Civil Code and common methods such as physical restraint, seclusion, forced medication, and restrictions on communication, are analyzed in relation to clinical practice. According to the analysis, restraint risks violating the principle of treating the individual as an end in themselves, particularly when coercion takes precedence over autonomy; although the legal framework legitimizes these interventions on grounds of safety and protection, their ethical legitimacy remains contested. The poster states that restraint can be ethically justified only under exceptional circumstances, when the criteria of imminent and serious harm, strict necessity, proportionality, the shortest possible duration, and last resort are met. It emphasizes that routine restraint conflicts with Kantian ethics because it risks turning the patient into an instrument of risk management or institutional control rather than treating them as an autonomous person with inherent dignity. The analysis finds that compulsory psychiatric interventions in Türkiye are primarily based on the Turkish Civil Code, that comprehensive mental health legislation is absent, and that unclear safeguards may encourage risk-oriented and paternalistic practices. It therefore recommends a shift from paternalism to rights-based care, prioritizing supported decision-making and psychiatric advance directives; it identifies the psychiatric team as central to this transformation through ethical reflection, therapeutic communication, de-escalation, advocacy, and person-centered care. The poster contains no numerical data; the ethics of care is presented as a complementary perspective that draws attention to vulnerability, dependency, and empathy.

Tüm WCP 2026 özetleri