Between the cross and the sword

Authors

  • Adriana Pinto de Mello IPF; Projeto Qorpo Santo; Grupo de Trabalho para Reabilitação Psicossocial dos Paeientes

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.19949

Keywords:

psychiatry, public policy, community psychiatry

Abstract

This study is the report of the history and activities of the project Qorpo Santo, a collective and institutional project which proposes alternatives for discharge and reintegration in the community for long hospitalized patients in compliance with Measure of Security in the Forensic Psychiatric Institute Maurício Cardoso (IPF), in Porto Alegre-RS. This is an experiment in which the existence of different views presents various possibilities for readings and interventions. Taking as reference the Law of the Psychiatric Reform, the study aims to question the mental health care to the judiciary patient. The management proposal is on the one hand, the promotion of patient autonomy, the redemption of his word, their accountability for their actions and their choices and, secondly, the patient's legal recognition as a citizen, user of the health system and individual with rights.

References

Amarante P. Saúde Mental e Atenção Psicossocial. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2007.

Barros FO. PAI-PJ - Projeto de Atenção Interdisciplinar ao Paciente Judiciário. Cadernos de Textos. III Conferência Nacional de Saúde Mental. Ministério da Saúde. Brasília, dezembro de 2001.

Brasil. Ministério da Saúde/Ministério da Justiça. Seminário Nacional para a Reorientação dos Hospitais de Custódia e Tratamento Psiquiátrico: Relatório Final. Brasília, setembro de 2002.

Lancetti A. Clínica Peripatética São Paulo: Hucitec, 2006.

Legislação em Saúde Mental: 1990-2004. Ministério da Saúde. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde, 2004.

Lobosque AM. Experiências da Loucura Rio de Janeiro: Garamond, 2001.

Rauter C. Criminologia e Subjetividade no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Revan, 2003.

Downloads

Published

2010-04-01

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 1 (2010)

Section

Original Research

License

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis