Applying ethical principles to restraint practice
Laura Jane Smethurst Recently graduated, Nottingham Trent University
Laura Jane Smethurst describes how to ensure that restraint is used safely, ethically and as a last resort when handling difficult behaviour
There are about 1.14 million people in the UK who have a learning disability, of whom more than 20% have a co-morbid mental health issue (Cooper et al 2007) often resulting in the need for help from mental health services. Within inpatient services, physical interventions are frequently used if de-escalation techniques have failed during episodes of challenging behaviour. The effects and ethical issues of these physical interventions on people with learning disabilities are often overlooked. This article considers four ethical principles – respect for autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence and justice – and how physical restraint breaches these principles. The author concludes that restraint practices cannot be removed altogether and makes five recommendations to ensure safer practice.
Learning Disability Practice.
19, 1, 23-26.
This article has been subject to double-blind review and has been checked using antiplagiarism software
Conflict of interest
Received: 24 September 2015
Accepted: 29 October 2015
Want to read more?
Already subscribed? Log in
Unlock full access to RCNi Plus today
Save over 50% on your first 3 months
Your subscription package includes:
- Unlimited online access to all 10 RCNi Journals and their archives
- Customisable dashboard featuring 200+ topics
- RCNi Learning featuring 180+ RCN accredited learning modules
- RCNi Portfolio to build evidence for revalidation
- Personalised newsletters tailored to your interests
Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now