Against Ulysses contracts for patients with borderline personality disorder

AbstractPatients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) sometimes request to be admitted to hospital under compulsory care, often under the argument that they cannot trust their suicidal impulses if treated voluntarily. Thus, compulsory care is practised as a form of Ulysses contract in such situations. In this normative study we scrutinize the arguments commonly used in favour of such Ulysses contracts: (1) the patient lacking free will, (2) Ulysses contracts as self-paternalism, (3) the patient lacking decision competence, (4) Ulysses contracts as a defence of the authentic self, and (5) Ulysses contracts as a practical solution in emergency situations. In our study, we have accepted consequentialist considerations as well as considerations of autonomy. We conclude that compulsory care is not justified when there is a significant uncertainty of beneficial effects or uncertainty regarding the patient ’s decision-making capacity. We have argued that such uncertainty is present regarding BPD patients. Hence, Ulysses contracts including compulsory care should not be used for this group of patients.

Source: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy - July 15, 2020 Category: Medical Ethics Source Type: research