This report provides a compendium of good practices to promote voluntary measures in mental health care and support. It draws from practices submitted to the DH-BIO Secretariat by delegations representing the 47 Member States of the Council of Europe (COE) as well as civil society stakeholders. The compendium fulfils the aim set out in the DH-BIO Strategic Action Plan on Human Rights and Technologies in Biomedicine 2020-2025 to:

assist member States [by developing] a compendium of good practices to promote voluntary measures in mental healthcare, both at a preventive level and in situations of crisis, by focusing on examples in member States.

 

The practices may directly aim to reduce, prevent, or even eliminate coercive practices in mental health settings, and others will indirectly result in similar outcomes by advancing the general aim to promote voluntary mental health care and support.

The compendium is not meant as an exhaustive list of leading practices in COE Member States. Instead, it is meant as an initial step toward compiling practices aimed at promoting voluntary mental healthcare and support, and reducing and preventing coercion in mental health settings. More generally, the materials promote compliance with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), notwithstanding debates about coercion in mental healthcare which will be noted in Part 1(B) of the report.

Înapoi Workbook for Hospitals and Wards to Reduce Coercion and Increase Occupational and Patient Safety: Combining Six Core Strategies and Safewards – Finland

In 2016, the Finnish National Institute for Health and Welfare published a working paper to help ‘hospitals and wards providing involuntary psychiatric care to reduce the use of coercion against patients and to increase occupational and patient safety’ (Makkonen et al., 2016, p.6). The Finnish language workbook outlines ways to ensure the ‘patient's sovereignty is respected as much as possible’ within the law and includes ‘operating models for the prevention of coercive measures, based on research evidence and solid practical experience’ (Makkonen et al., 2016, p.6). The practices are: the Six Core Strategies (discussed above), the ‘application of psychiatric patient intent, and assessment methods of violence risk,’ methods of preventing seclusion and restraint, and the Safewards model.

According to the authors, ‘[a]ll levels of psychiatric care and treatment systems play an important role in reducing coercive measures’ (Makkonen et al., 2016, p.6). Further:

The workbook describes the importance of versatile outpatient care in reducing coercive measures. The expertise and attitudes of hospital staff in addition to the care culture and space solutions are in a major role in reducing coercive measures and increasing safety. The workbook presents concrete solutions to improve staff expertise and to promote the application of a care culture that reduces the need for coercion. The photos show how the minimalistic environment of the isolation room has been made more humane at relatively low cost. Based on the stories of people who have been involved with coercion, readers have a chance of getting some idea of how patients subjected to it feel. Coercion should not be reduced at the expense of occupational and patient safety. Both of these viewpoints are described in the last chapter. Reducing coercion is a continuous process, and hopefully this workbook will have a sequel in the form of a cookbook-style guide in reducing coercion.

No materials concerning the success of the initiative, or the relative rates of coercion before and after the publication of the workbook were identified.

  • Diminuer la taille du texte
  • Augmenter la taille du texte
  • Imprimer la page
EXAMPLES OF PRACTICES
Community-Based
Hospital-Based
Hybrid
Other
Country
Albania
Andorra
Armenia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Belgium
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Georgia
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
International
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Monaco
Montenegro
North Macedonia
Norvège
Pays-Bas
Poland
Portugal
Republic of Moldova
Romania
San Marino
Serbia
Slovak Republic
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Türkiye
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Reset Filter