American Psychiatric Nurse Association (APNA)

From viewing the American Psychiatric Nurse Association (APNA), this paper presents divergent views on the topics of seclusion and restraints in which I am seeking to prove that ethical principles do not morally uphold psychiatric patient’s rights constitutionally as well as the engagement of unjust practices seen in improving patient outcomes.
According to March and Caple (2014) who conducted an evidence based care sheet on this cause, argued that seclusions and restraints impose on the autonomy of human begins. To support their reasoning, they obtained personal stories from patients affected by this incident. Based off their involvements, many remarked that they suffered from traumatized events throughout the process (March & Caple, 2014). With that being recognized as a credible piece of evidence, it is evident to grasp that their ethical rights were not being morally upheld due to the fact that they are positioned in a pool of having a mental illness. From my defense, March and Caple (2014) proposition does incorporate what my thesis aims because their indications
From what I gathered, both sources intended to share like outcomes because each side collectively defended my thesis. They both accentuated within their evidence that ethical principles were seen to antagonize patient’s rights because of their uncontrolled behaviors gave health professional the legal authority to hold them against their will. For many years, this ongoing topic of seclusion and restraints has questioned its effectiveness and how unjust practices are resulting in poor patient outcomes. To add, the APNA position statement and the evidence based care sheet similarity aligned ethical principles and concepts in a positive aspect by initiating that they are seeking ways to reduce or eliminate seclusion and restraints for the safety of