Summary

A patient was under care at a clinic for forensic psychiatric care for approximately 20 years. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman states, that against this background, and the intrusive nature of compulsory care, it is essential to make sure that the time that a patient is under care does not become unnecessarily long. A condition is that care is not given in a passive manner. It is therefore important that the care provider continuously evaluates a patient’s situation and needs, and obtains an adequate basis for medical care. The care provider can do this, for example, by acquiring information and advice regarding a patient's current issues through collegial discussions or consultation with external expertise.

The investigation proves that the clinic has, on a regular basis, removed the patient's belongings from the patient’s room without legal support or support in the clinic’s codes of conduct. Due to this, the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman directs criticism towards the clinic. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman also states that a patient’s property, that is placed in the storage of a healthcare facility, should be documented, to, among other things, protect patients from loss of property or damage during storage.

The clinic has further informed the injured party and a few of the injured party’s relatives about some of the patient’s outside stays, which did not constitute leaves of absence. According to the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman’s understanding, the clinic may have disclosed confidential information about the patient through these notifications. The clinic deserves criticism due to this fact.