No sooner was the theme of this year’s
33rd Ethics Conference
there were lively discussions, opposition and criticism: outpatient treatment instructions.
People who suffer from a chronic, severe mental illness, who were already dangerous to others or to themselves, but who were then successfully treated with medication, should be obliged by an outpatient treatment order, if it were anchored in the PsychKHG, to continue treatment after their release from the hospital.
Proponents of such a directive hope it will improve patient and victim protection. The opponents, on the other hand, cannot see this, they only see the restrictions of the freedom rights of the mentally ill person concerned.
On the basis of a concrete case, the problem situation was presented and examined from different perspectives. Special attention was paid to speeches from the perspective of patients and their relatives:
Carina Kebbel from LV PE BW succeeded in describing the situation of the people at stake very empathetically and pointed out weak points: for example, she missed alternative concepts in the outpatient setting and expressed the fear that, in practice, all that might remain of the promised accompanying therapies is the obligation to tolerate depot injections.
Gabriele Glocker from the LV BW ApK also complained about the often inadequate discharge management and the lack of involvement of relatives, to whom those discharged from the hospital then usually return. If there a continuation of the medicamentous treatment can prevent that fellow men become again victims of the aggressions of the mentally seriously ill family member, then this should be also obligated to permit the treatment.
Members of the bpe (Bundesverband Psychiatrie-Erfahrener e. V. – Federal Association of People Experiencing Psychiatry), who had travelled here specially, tried to provoke again and again and finally sang their song of freedom.
Certainly, the desire for boundless freedom is all the more pronounced the tighter the bonds are. In the community, however, everyone can only live out his or her rights of freedom as long as they do not restrict the rights of freedom of other individuals.