Drawing on an analysis of the French mental health system, this essay examines four presumptions about mental health care dominant in the United States: (1) the required abolition of the hospital for psychiatric deinstitutionalization; (2) the substitutability of public and private financing; (3) the importance of a “dangerousness” criterion for involuntary commitment procedures; and (4) the need for an ever-expanding scope of care. These claims hold little weight when subjected to comparative scrutiny, and the essay closes by discussing the implications of these revelations for US mental health care policy and ethics.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Issues, ethics and legal aspects
- Health Policy
- History and Philosophy of Science