Dressing Harald, Salize Hans-Joachim
Zentralinstitut für Seelische Gesundheit, Mannheim.
Psychiatr Prax. 2004 Jan;31(1):34-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2003-812569.
A standardised and systematic analysis of commitment laws in the EU-Member States is still missing. This study aimed at gathering, describing and analysing information on the differences or similarities of legal frameworks for involuntary placement and treatment of mentally ill patients across the European Union Member States.
Information was gathered by means of a detailed questionnaire filled in by experts from all EU Member States. Legal criteria for compulsory admission, details of the assessment and decision process of compulsory admission and epidemiological data are outlined.
Although common patterns among Member States can be identified upon comparison of crucial legislative or procedural details, these patterns are far from being consistent across all analysed items or approaches. With regard to compulsory admission quotas no significant influence of legal commitment criteria and the involvement of judicial authorities could be found but Member States with an obligatory inclusion of a legal representative during the commitment procedure showed significantly lower compulsory admission quotas.
Results of this study show the strong necessity for further research in this field. Common international health reporting standards as annually updated involuntary placement rates detailed for regular and emergency cases seem to be essential.
欧盟成员国仍缺乏对强制收治法律的标准化和系统性分析。本研究旨在收集、描述和分析欧盟成员国关于精神疾病患者非自愿安置和治疗法律框架的差异或相似之处的信息。
通过由所有欧盟成员国专家填写的详细问卷收集信息。概述了强制入院的法律标准、强制入院评估和决策过程的细节以及流行病学数据。
尽管在比较关键立法或程序细节时可以确定成员国之间的共同模式，但这些模式在所有分析项目或方法中远非一致。关于强制入院配额，未发现法律强制收治标准和司法当局参与有显著影响，但在强制收治程序中强制要求有法律代表参与的成员国的强制入院配额显著较低。
本研究结果表明该领域有进一步研究的强烈必要性。每年更新的针对常规和紧急情况详细列出的非自愿安置率等通用国际健康报告标准似乎至关重要。
