Democratic equality in the patient / psychiatrist relationship as an instrument for the exercise of freedom beyond treatment adherence

Abstract

Psychiatric treatment might contribute to the disregard of the patient as a person, and might stimulate degrading judgments of their capacity. The objective of the paper, based on juridical-descriptive and juridical-propositional theoretical processes, is to identify practical measures for the adequate adherence and therapeutic management, to enable democratic equality as coined in Elizabeth Anderson’s theory. The study shows that the need for protecting the patient must stir away from a recurring reverse effect: disparagement.  Therefore, facilitating the emergence of their volition is appropriate, even if inferred, regarding the adequate strategy of psychiatric treatment, with repercussions stemming from the anti-asylum movement and from the panorama of disabilities theory transformed by Brazil’s Disability Inclusion Act. As a result it is proposed that the option for caring measures, independently from the patient’s disability and in view of normative parameters, should be privileged and informed by the psychiatrist in the phase of access, sheltering or follow up. The study is important because it helps to respect the patient’s dignity. And so, the exercise of freedom becomes feasible beyond the mere adherence to psychiatric treatment.