CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1Disability Rights and RepresentationHealth, Medicine and SocietyHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints

The Alchemy of Agency: Reflections on Supported Decision-Making, the Right to Health and Health Systems as Democratic Institutions

Yamin, Alicia Ely·2021·Mental Health, Legal Capacity, and Human Rights
DOI 10.1017/9781108979016.004
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

There has been little interdisciplinary discussion between the global health and disability rights fields regarding the relevance of article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) to States parties’ obligations to respect, protect and fulfill the right to health under international law. While disability rights advocacy has focused largely on coerced treatment and abuses in facilities, the global health and development communities’ attention has been focused on unmet need for mental health care. This chapter argues that conceptualizing health in terms of rights, just as disability, requires upending aspects of the biomedical and conventional public health paradigms. In turn, once the incompatibility of health and disability rights is dispelled, implementing supported decision-making (SDM) for persons with psychosocial disability reveals important aspects needed for constructing health systems as inclusive democratic social institutions more broadly. SDM and substituted decision-making should not be seen as dichotomous options when a crisis arises, but rather in terms of a range of options available for a range of disabilities, which is supported by the financing and organization of the health system.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/9781108979016.004

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Supportive decision-making supports the rights of people with disabilities by allowing the person, through accommodations and supports, to partake in decision-making about their life instead of appointing a guardian to decide on their behalf.

    “Supportive decision-making supports the rights of people with disabilities by allowing the person with a disability to, through various accommodations and supports, partake in the decision-making process about their life instead of appointing a guardian to make all the decisions on behalf of a person with a disability (Yamin, 2021).”

    From Challenging Involuntary Treatment and Confinement in Canada Through the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) (2024) · cites this paper as Yamin, 2021

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yamin, A. E.
Corresponding author
Yamin, Alicia Ely
ORCID
Yamin, Alicia Ely
Venue
Mental Health, Legal Capacity, and Human Rights
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Published
2021-08-31
Pages
17-28
DOI
10.1017/9781108979016.004
OpenAlex
W3195351985
Cited by
1
References
22
Citations by year
2023: 1
FWCI
1.03
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health, Medicine and Society
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Keywords
supported decision-making, substituted decision-making, right to health, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Article 12 CRPD, psychosocial disability, disability rights, global health, mental health services, coercion in mental health care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review