Task: With assaults against health staff increasing, many health services have adopted a policy of ‘zero tolerance’ for aggression and violence in health care settings.At the same time, there is an...

Running Head: PSYCHIATRY AND MANAGEMENT         1
PSYCHIATRY AND MANAGEMENT        2
AGGRESSION, VIOLENCE AND ZERO TOLERANCE: PREVENTIVE STRATEGIES
Table of Contents
Introduction    3
The Core Values of Zero Tolerance Policy    3
Strategic Level Intervention and Psychiatry    5
The Approach of Medicinal Perceptions    6
The Impact of Environment over the Strategies    6
Therapy based Decisions and Interventions    8
Conclusion    9
References    9
Introduction
    In the common context of the care delivery models, the overall mental wellbeing of the individuals in one of the most challenging issues that healthcare professionals have to confront (Price et al, 2018; Pekurinen et al, 2017). There can be some inherent attributes to the process of the achieving ideal state of care in the psychiatry settings. In the context of the patients, they are likely to develop aggression and violence which affects the course of treatment and at the same time, it threatens the safety of the clinical professionals involved in the care procedure. The mental disorder and the development of aggression are interlinked that consequently result in violent activities on behalf of the patients. It ultimately affects the social recognition of the violent patients as they might face social isolation, which makes their image portrayed negatively.
    For any psychiatry setting, it is quite challenging at managerial as well as strategic level to imply the various types of retrains over the violent patients without violating the ethical boundaries (Pekurinen et al, 2017). The process of accepting zero tolerance policy against the violent behaviour is one of such measures. The following is the critical appraisal of the zero tolerance policy at strategic level in psychiatry settings.
The Core Values of Zero Tolerance Policy
    In the context of implying zero tolerance policy and its relation with the managerial decisions in psychiatry settings, the clinical expert have to undergo several life threatening conditions when their patients grow violent (Hopkins, Fetherston & Morrison, 2018). It is one of the most common perceptions that the patients having serious mental disorder can develop aggression in their behavioural approach and it can be personally harmful to those who attend the patients (Bay, Gale & Swain, 2018). In some of the cases, as they have been registered over the past two decades, the clinical experts were injured in the emergency rooms when they were attending the seriously affected patients. The emergency rooms, as per the new implications of the policies and interventions, are perceived as hazardous places. Safeguarding the personal and professional liabilities at the same time has become sensitive and requires the application of the zero tolerance policy correctly (Bay, Gale & Swain, 2018).
    Moreover, the National Insurance Security Act of 2013 guides basically the clinical experts about what restrictive practices they can offer to the patients. These guidelines thrive to maintain the safety of the clinical experts in psychiatry settings especially when the experts have to deal with the extremely aggressive and violent behaviour of the patient (Bay, Gale & Swain, 2018). However, in the process of safeguarding the professional interests of the experts, the Act has some controversial points that disregard the zero tolerance policy and using the restrains as the final alternative is one of them.
    In the context of the above, the Act recommends various types of restrains to be applied on the patient. These restrains range from psychological to physical one and the later is more important while having physical examination of the patient (Pekurinen et al, 2017). The Act states that all these restrictive practices are subjected to the ethically sensitive behaviour therefore; zero tolerance policy does not align with this procedure. There is a thin line of difference drawn between the two. Zero tolerance here is stated as the stricter rules than using the retrains as the final option (Hopkins, Fetherston & Morrison, 2018).
    As an example for the above sensitive usage of restrains, the staff and clinical experts are allowed to use chemical or mechanical or both kinds of restrains over a patient that has showcased extremely violent behaviour. The mechanical or physical retrains are applied to limit the physical abilities of the patient with a view to ensure that he or she does not harm anyone. The application of the chemical restrains as an action to fulfil zero tolerance policy is the procedure of applying specific sedatives over patient. The administering of the drugs and medication is done thereafter. The Child and Young Persons Act of 1998, for example, permits the use of physical restrains over children and young adults, in case...