In 2–3 pages, address the following:
• Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a hold is released.
• Explain the differences among emergency hospitalization for Assessment/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state.
• Explain the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts.
• Select one of the following topics, and explain one legal issue and one ethical issue related to this topic that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies: patient autonomy, EMTALA, confidentiality, HIPAA privacy rule, HIPAA security rule, protected information, legal gun ownership, career obstacles (security clearances/background checks), and payer source.
• Identify one evidence-based suicide risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.
• Identify one evidence-based violence risk assessment that you could use to screen patients.
NRNP_6675_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
NRNP_6675_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIn 2–3 pages, address the following: • Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a hold is released. 15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response includes a thorough and well-organized explanation of student’s state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. 13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response includes an accurate explanation of student’s state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. 11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response includes a somewhat vague or inaccurate explanation of student’s state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. 10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of student’s state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult emergencies. Or the response is missing.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain the differences among emergency hospitalization for Assessment/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 15 to >13.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for Assessment/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 13 to >11.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response includes a well-organized explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for Assessment/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 11 to >10.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response includes a somewhat vague explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for Assessment/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. 10 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response includes a vague explanation of the differences among emergency hospitalization for Assessment/psychiatric hold, inpatient commitment, and outpatient commitment in your state. Or the response is missing.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome• Explain the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 10 to >8.0 pts
Excellent 90%–100%
The response includes an accurate and concise explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 8 to >7.0 pts
Good 80%–89%
The response includes an accurate explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 7 to >6.0 pts
Fair 70%–79%
The response includes a somewhat vague or incomplete explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. 6 to >0 pts
Poor 0%–69%
The response includes a vague or inaccurate explanation of the difference between capacity and competency in mental health contexts. Or the response is missing.
—
The laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies vary by state. In my state, any licensed physician, psychologist, or advanced practice nurse can hold a patient for up to 72 hours for an emergency Assessment. This can be extended for an additional 14 days with a court order. The patient can be released from the emergency hold by the treating physician or by a court order. The patient can be picked up by a designated family member or legal guardian after the hold is released.
In my state, there are several different types of commitments for psychiatric emergencies. Emergency hospitalization for Assessment, also known as a psychiatric hold, is a short-term commitment for patients who are in crisis and need to be stabilized. Inpatient commitment is a longer-term commitment for patients who require more intensive treatment and cannot be safely cared for in an outpatient setting. Outpatient commitment is a less restrictive option for patients who are able to receive treatment on an outpatient basis and do not require hospitalization.
In mental health contexts, capacity refers to a person’s ability to make decisions about their own healthcare. Competency refers to a person’s ability to understand the nature and consequences of their decisions and to make choices that are in their best interest.
One legal issue that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies is patient autonomy. This refers to a patient’s right to make decisions about their own healthcare and to refuse treatment. This can be a complex issue in psychiatric emergencies, as patients may not be capable of making informed decisions about their treatment.
An ethical issue that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies is confidentiality. This refers to the patient’s right to have their personal information kept private and not shared with others without their consent. This can be a complex issue in psychiatric emergencies, as healthcare providers may need to share information with other providers in order to provide appropriate care.
One evidence-based suicide risk assessment that I could use to screen patients is the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). This assessment is used to evaluate a patient’s risk of suicide and includes questions about suicidal thoughts, plans, and behaviors.
An evidence-based violence risk assessment that I could use to screen patients is the Historical-Clinical-Risk Management-20 (HCR-20). This assessment is used to evaluate a patient’s risk of violence and includes questions about a patient’s history, clinical presentation, and risk factors.
