Abstract
Coercion appears to be an integral component of psychiatry, particularly forensic psychiatry, and its use strongly influences the way the public sees this specialty. Coercion takes place when individuals are placed in hospital involuntarily and entails measures taken against their will during admission. The use of coercion is, however, increasingly scrutinised with a clear shift in perspectives from a medical- to a rights-based approach. A number of laws and declarations have been passed on a national and international level restricting the use of coercive measures. Particular aspects of psychiatric care and coercion have been met with particular concerns, e.g. electroconvulsive treatment and solitary confinement, and some forms of coercion may amount to inhumane and degrading treatment. The importance of thorough reporting of the use of coercive measures to allow for analysis and evaluation has been emphasised. The introduction of individual complaints procedures allowing patients to raise concerns about their treatment has further led to an improvement of conditions in psychiatric institutions. This chapter will outline the key hard and soft international and European law, including the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the European Convention on Human Rights, and their application to forensic psychiatry. Key cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights are reviewed.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bak, J., & Aggernaes, H. (2012). Coercion within Danish psychiatry compared with 10 other European countries. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 66(2), 297–302.
Bublitz, J. C. (2011). Habeas Mentem? Psychiatrische Zwangseingriffe im Maßregelvollzug und die Freiheit gefährlicher Gedanken. Zugleich Besprechung von BVerfG, Beschl. v. 23.3.2011–2 BvR 882/09. Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik, 10(8–9), 714–733.
Callaghan, S., Ryan, C., & Kerridge, I. (2013). Risk of suicide is insufficient warrant for coercive treatment for mental illness. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 36(3), 374–385.
Committee for the Prevention of Torture (2010). 20th General Report, Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
Committee for the Prevention of Torture (2012). Forty-seventh session (31 October–25 November 2011), forty-eighth session (7 May–1 June 2012), General Assembly. United Nations, New York.
Committee for the Prevention of Torture (2013). Forty-ninth session (29 October–23 November 2012), fiftieth session (6–31 May 2013), General Assembly. United Nations, New York.
Committee for the Prevention of Torture (2015). CPT standards, Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
Committee on Bioethics (2015a). Draft explanatory report to the additional protocol to the convention on human rights and biomedicine concerning the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder with regard to involuntary placement and involuntary treatment. DH-BIO/INF (2015)8, Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
Committee on Bioethics (2015b). Working document concerning the protection of human rights and dignity of persons with mental disorder with regard to involuntary placement and involuntary treatment, 22 June 2015, DH-BIO/INF, Council of Europe, Strasbourg.
Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2015). Concluding observations on the initial report of Germany, CRPD/C/DEU/CO/1, 13 May.
Dawson, J., & Kämpf, A. (2006). Incapacity principles in mental health laws in Europe. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 12(3), 310–331.
Dougin, A. M. (1998). Legal protection in psychiatry. The jurisprudence of the organs of the European convention on human rights. European Psychiatry, 13(3), 101–106.
European Commission (2005). Green paper improving the mental health of the population: Towards a strategy on mental health for the European Union, COM(2005) 484, Brussels, 14 October 2005.
European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2012). Involuntary placement and involuntary treatment of persons with mental health problems. Luxembourg: Publication Office of the European Union.
Gooding, P., & Flynn, E. (2015). Querying the call to introduce mental capacity testing to mental health law: Does the doctrine of necessity provide an alternative? Laws, 4, 245–271.
Georgieva, I. (2012). Coercive interventions during inpatient psychiatric care. Patient’s preference, prevention and effects. Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam.
Jacobs, P. (2010). Food for thought: The CPT and force-feeding of prisoners on hunger strike. In M. Groenhuijsen, T. Kooijmans, & T. de Roos (Eds.), Fervet Opus. Liber Amicorum Anton van Kalmthout (pp. 103–112). Antwerpen: Maklu.
Kallert, T. W., Rymaszewska, J., & Torres-Gonzalez, F. (2007). Differences of legal regulations concerning involuntary psychiatric hospitalization in twelve European countries: Implications for clinical practice. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 6(2), 197–207.
Kämpf, A. (2010). Involuntary treatment decisions: Using negotiated silence to facilitate change? In P. Weller & B. McSherry (Eds.), Rethinking rights-based mental health laws (pp. 129–150). Portland, OR: Hart.
Kinzig, J. (2010). Das Recht der Sicherungsverwahrung nach dem Urteil des EGMR in Sachen M. gegen Deutschland. Neue Zeitschrift für Strafrecht, 30(5), 233–239.
Lindemann, M. (2007). Anmerkung Oberlandesgericht Hamburg, Unzulässigkeit von Disziplinarmaßnahmen ohne Gesetzesgrundlage. Recht & Psychiatrie, 25(4), 203–206.
Méndez, J. E. (2013). Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. A/HRC/22/53, United Nations, New York.
Molodynski, A., Rugkasa, J., & Burns, T. (2010). Coercion and compulsion in community mental health care. British Medical Bulletin, 95(1), 105–119.
Morgan, R., & Evans, M. (1994). Inspecting prisons. The view from Strasbourg. British Journal of Criminology, 34(2), 141–159.
Niveau, G., & Materi, J. (2007). Psychiatric commitment: Over 50 years of case law from the European court of human rights. European Psychiatry, 22(1), 59–67.
Rushforth, J. (2014). Ethics and the use of coercion in the treatment of psychiatric patients. Themis: Research Journal of Justice Studies and Forensic Science, 2(1), 99–112.
Saimeh, N. (2013). Zwangsbehandlung in der forensischen Psychiatrie—Anforderungen an die Praxis. In H. Pollähne & C. Lange-Joest (Eds.), Heilung erzwingen? Medizinische und psychologische Behandlung in Unfreiheit (pp. 143–156). Berlin: Lit.
Saks, E. R. (1986). The use of mechanical restraints in psychiatric hospitals. Yale Law Journal, 95(6), 1836–1856.
Sörensen, D. (2013). Human rights and compulsory psychiatric treatment. Recommendations, Danish Institute for Human Rights, Copenhagen.
Steinert, T. (2011). Nach 200 Jahren Psychiatrie: Sind Fixierungen in Deutschland unvermeidlich? Psychiat Prax, 38(7), 348–351.
Stewart, D., Bowers, L., Simpson, A., & Tziggili, M. (2009). Manual restraint of adult psychiatric inpatients: A literature review. London: City University.
Szasz, T. (2007). Coercion as cure. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Verbeke, P., Vermeulen, G., Meysman, M., & Vander Beken, T. (2015). Protecting the fair trial rights of mentally disordered defendants in criminal proceedings: Exploring the need for further EU action. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 41(1), 67–75.
World Health Organization (2005). Resource book on mental human rights and legislation. Geneva: WHO.
Wyder, M., Bland, R., Herriot, A., & Crompton, D. (2015). The experiences of the legal processes of involuntary treatment orders: Tension between the legal and medical frameworks. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 38(1), 44–50.
Zetterberg, L., Sjöström, S., & Markström, U. (2014). The compliant court—Procedural fairness and social control in compulsory community care. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 37(3), 543–550.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Albrecht, HJ. (2016). Legal Aspects of the Use of Coercive Measures in Psychiatry. In: Völlm, B., Nedopil, N. (eds) The Use of Coercive Measures in Forensic Psychiatric Care. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26748-7_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26748-7_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26746-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26748-7
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)