Abstract
Potential ethical dilemmas occur between rights and needs within the context of least restrictive alternative for psychiatric patients. This concept has been viewed primarily as a mechanism for limiting paternalistic interference and promoting individual dignity and autonomy. In addition, it has implied some possible conflicts in supporting such a well intentioned concept as least restrictive alternative without more reflection on the complexities involved.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of psychosocial nursing and mental health services
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
