This report Minister Edith Schippers (VWS), on behalf of Secretary Klaas Dijkhoff (V & J) to the House. Boaters today comes with a series of tightening its bill compulsory mental health care. This law enables the treatment of patients with a mental disorder centrally rather than their accuracy.
Time out procedure
With regular reports particularly in the larger cities about people who are very exhibit disturbed behavior, but that does not immediately cause an acute danger to themselves or others. Or people who are considered dangerous by their family and surroundings, but managed to hide during a conversation with a psychiatrist. These people can not be imposed emergency measure, because before that get an immediate threat should be, but sometimes it is not known whether the immediate threat is there, simply because people refuse to cooperate in research. In order to determine the nature of the disorder and the severity of the hazard (acute or not), there comes a time out procedure which consists of two parts:
An observation measure is possible make to observe someone three days – and do at the same time file search and consult the family / relatives – where there is a very strong suspicion that he has a serious mental disorder and there is a suspicion that carry the risk for the person himself or his environment exists. As the severity of the hazard can be identified and, if necessary, still be hit a crisis measure, or any other form of assistance to be deployed. In an observation measure is still no treatment.
In addition, this law allows, prior to a crisis measure 18 hours compulsory care can be provided. These are cases where it is reasonably certain that there is a crisis measure will be taken, but where the adoption of the measure itself still takes time. Pending the arrival of such a measure could reduce the already required person’s freedom or to administer medication to calm him down and make the situation manageable.
Position and engagement family
The position and involvement of family and loved ones will be strengthened. For example, when a confused person’s family thinks the made underused information which it supplies, it may still require the council to send an application for compulsory care to the prosecutor. This can also serve as the municipal council does not need itself. Even if the prosecutor finds that not fulfill the criteria for compulsory care are met, the family may require him to apply for compulsory care yet to be submitted to the court if the information from the psychiatrist has evolved. The family can continue with its application for compulsory care optionally remain anonymous for a relative. Lastly, family members can express their views on the care plan and getting the family counselor a legal basis.
Data
To determine what care and support someone needed it, so also revealed report of the commission on the case Bart Hoekstra U., information sharing is essential. The bill clarifies the information between the parties as may be exchanged. Then it concerns, for example information from mental health to justice and vice versa. In the current situation, there is often confusion about what is and is not.
Role Prosecution
Thanks also following the report of the committee Hoekstra the prosecution will now central ‘request roller. This means that no longer the initiative lies with the medical superintendent of a psychiatric institution in order to make an application to the court for compulsory care, but that the prosecution in the person of the prosecutor herein is given a central and active role.
Reasons for this include that compulsory care – even if it is for the sake of the patient and others – a form of deprivation of liberty may involve. In addition, flows this task stems from the role of the Public Prosecution in ensuring social security. And again to settle the OM’s central role, the medical director of a mental health institution can concentrate again on his care-related core.
No comments:
Post a Comment