HUN-REN Centre for Social Sciences, Toth Kalman u. 2-4, 1097 Budapest, Hungary; University of Galway, Centre for Disability Law and Policy, University Road, H91 TK33 Galway, Ireland.
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2024 May-Jun;94:101965. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.101965. Epub 2024 Mar 3.
This article explores how the European Court of Human Rights has applied the norms of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in the area of mental health law. The European Court was initially receptive to the CRPD, including the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities' call for a repeal of legislation permitting involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation, but later distanced itself from it. The CRPD has nevertheless influenced how the European Court approached (a) involuntary hospitalisation, (b) separating detention from treatment, (c) restraints and other forms of ill-treatment in institutions, and (d) disability-neutral detention based on disability. Despite the two treaty bodies' different jurisprudential methodology and their different assumptions about the role of medical and legal professionals, the CRPD can continue to influence the European Court in areas such as less restrictive alternatives to coercive treatment, the relevance of capacity, and the importance of personal integrity for mental health treatment.
本文探讨了欧洲人权法院在精神卫生法领域如何适用《联合国残疾人权利公约》（CRPD）的规范。欧洲人权法院最初对 CRPD 持开放态度，包括联合国残疾人权利委员会呼吁废除允许非自愿精神病院住院的立法，但后来与 CRPD 保持了距离。然而，CRPD 仍然影响了欧洲法院对待以下方面的方式：（a）非自愿住院治疗；（b）将拘留与治疗分开；（c）在机构中使用约束和其他形式的虐待；（d）基于残疾的无差别拘留。尽管两个条约机构的法理方法不同，并且对医疗和法律专业人员的角色有不同的假设，但 CRPD 可以继续在诸如非强制性治疗的限制较少的替代方法、能力的相关性以及个人完整性对精神卫生治疗的重要性等领域影响欧洲法院。
