Alexandrov Nikita V, Schuck Natalie
Global Health Law Groningen Research Centre, Department of Transboundary Legal Studies, Faculty of Law, University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
Global Health Law Groningen Research Centre, Department of Transboundary Legal Studies, Faculty of Law, University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2021 May-Jun;76:101685. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2021.101685. Epub 2021 Mar 15.
The Netherlands became State Party to the United Nation Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2016, a treaty that holds great promise for promoting and protecting human rights of persons with mental disorders. Yet, the Dutch government also made explicit reservations to the Convention. On 1 January 2020, the Netherlands introduced a new mental health law, the Compulsory Mental Health Care Act (CMHCA), which aims to strengthen the legal status of persons with psychiatric illnesses. To which extent does the new Dutch mental health law comply with the regulations as outlined in the CRPD? In this article, we examine how coercive interventions, specifically the elements of competence, involuntary treatment and involuntary admission are regulated in the domestic legislation and compare them to the CRPD approach. A normative analysis combined with literature review helps to understand the law, reveal the gaps and uncover the barriers that remain. Is there a need to reassess the domestic legal provisions allowing for coercive treatment, and if so, what advancements are required? After all, should the CRPD be strictly adhered to at all times?
荷兰于2016年成为《联合国残疾人权利公约》(CRPD)的缔约国,该条约在促进和保护精神障碍患者人权方面前景广阔。然而,荷兰政府也对该公约明确提出了保留意见。2020年1月1日,荷兰出台了一项新的精神卫生法,即《强制精神卫生保健法》(CMHCA),旨在加强精神疾病患者的法律地位。新的荷兰精神卫生法在多大程度上符合CRPD中概述的规定?在本文中,我们研究了强制干预措施,特别是行为能力、非自愿治疗和非自愿住院等要素在国内立法中的规定,并将其与CRPD的方法进行比较。规范性分析与文献综述相结合有助于理解该法律,揭示差距并发现仍然存在的障碍。是否有必要重新评估允许强制治疗的国内法律规定,如果是,需要哪些改进?毕竟,是否应该始终严格遵守CRPD?