Inger-Mari Eidsvik and Merete Nesset have sued the state for violations of human rights. They have been belted, isolated and forcibly medicated a number of times while they have been admitted to mental health care. – It is high time that those of us who have been subjected to coercion in psychiatry are seen and heard, said Eidsvik when the case went to the Oslo district court in June. However, the court has now decided that they will not process the case further. The reason is that “too much time has passed between the enforcement decisions being made and the legal action being taken”. Too far back in time, Eidsvik and Nesset have been subjected to forced treatment in the period 1988–2016. The judgment states that the women should have gone to trial by 2019 in order to stay within the limitation period. Law professor Mads Andenæs says they are prepared to take the case all the way to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Photo: Benjamin Vorland Andersrød / news Mads Andenæs conducts the women’s case pro bono with Føniks Advokater. He believes it would have been impossible for them to go to trial at an earlier time. – They have been knocked out by the mistreatment they have been exposed to in the mental health service, says Andenæs, who warns that they will appeal the decision. The government attorney defends the state’s interests in the case. Lawyer Bjarne Snipsøyr tells news that they are satisfied with the verdict. He believes it is positive that the case received thorough treatment in the district court. Forced medicating more often Andenæs claims Eidsvik and Nesset have been illegally medicated more than 100 times in total. In 2017, the Mental Health Protection Act was amended. The aim was to reduce forced use. After the change in the law, on the other hand, forced medication has increased: In an article in Aftenposten, senior doctor in psychiatry, Sigrid Medhus, recently advocated that the change in the law in 2017 is not working as intended. She believes that the requirement for competent consent prevents mentally ill patients from getting the help they need. If a patient is competent to consent, they now have the right to terminate or refuse to receive treatment. – If we could have extended the coercion for this group, then the condition would have been much better over a long period of time, stated Medhus, when the subject was debated on 6 July in Dagsnytt 18. Different attitudes – It is challenging for healthcare personnel to accept how offensive being subjected to coercion can be experienced, says psychologist specialist and professor at Oslo Met, Tonje Lossius Husum. Psychology specialist and professor at Oslo Met, Tonje Lossius Husum. Photo: Privat Patients experience coercion to a greater extent as offensive and harmful, while employees more often see the use of coercion as caring. This is shown by a study Lossius Husum has previously carried out. – Psychiatrists and nurses are more positive about the use of coercion than psychologists and social workers, says the professor.
ttn-69
Merete and Inger-Mari were isolated and forcibly medicated – they are not allowed to sue the state
