A comparison of Norway and Denmark’s legislations regarding the use of restraints in psychiatric institutions in light of the Human Rights Convention article 3.

The theme of the dissertation is to examine the Norwegian and Danish legislations regarding the use of restraints in psychiatric health care and study the legislations in light of the European Convention on Human Rights article 3. The hypothesis is that Denmark uses restraints in a wider scope and with a longer duration than Norway. Based on this, could distinctions in regulation explain this difference? Furthermore, the use of restraints is a severe intervention in a person’s sphere and integrity. ECHR article 3 prohibits such intervention, unless some requirements are fulfilled. Therefore, is the operating law in Norway and Denmark in accordance with article 3? To answer these questions the legislations which regulates when it is lawful to put a patient under restraints will be examined and thereafter the legislations will be compared to see if there is a difference. To examine the situation regarding use of restraints and whether the two countries practice is in accordance with article 3, one court decision from both the countries will be examined and the two most recent reports from The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. This will give an indication of the situation of the operating law in the two countries.