Beyond the
walls: the transition from hospital to community based care.
Deinstitionalisation
and International Cooperation in Mental Health.
Erveda Sansi - 2011 April
15th
I thank the organizers of
this conference for inviting me to speak. First of all I would like to announce
the European MadPride, organized by two Belgian mental health users
associations, Till Uilenspiegel and Psitoyens with the support of
the European Network of (ex) - Users and Survivors of Psychiatry (Enusp),
that will be held during the days around October 2011 the 8th.
Accepting others in all their diversity is key to positive and nurturing
societies. Such is the basis of the Mind Freedom concept, from which MadPride
events take inspiration, whose aims are: to celebrate our diversity, including
our own madness; to celebrate the power of self-determination of the free human
spirit; to introduce to a wider public the degree of stigma and social
exclusion suffered by people who are deemed mentally ill or psychologically
different, including abuses of psychiatry; to support and promote the interests
of people who are deemed mentally ill or psychologically different; to
acknowledge our sincere desire in wanting a constructive dialogue, even if
critical at times, with mental health professionals and policy makers at all
levels.
There will be joyous and peaceful demonstrations in streets, local joyful and non-violent happenings, outdoor theatre performances, stands, speeches, writings, poetry readings and so on. Jacques Bonnafé once said: “It is possible to judge the degree of evolution of a society by the way it treats its mad people”.
There will be joyous and peaceful demonstrations in streets, local joyful and non-violent happenings, outdoor theatre performances, stands, speeches, writings, poetry readings and so on. Jacques Bonnafé once said: “It is possible to judge the degree of evolution of a society by the way it treats its mad people”.
I am here as a
representative of Enusp, and although I’m Italian (I’m coming from the
Lombardy region), it seems to me that I’m arrived from abroad, in the sense
that I found here a reality of the psychiatry completely different from that
one I knew. I’m very surprised that despite the facts that here they are
operating since many years to realise the de-institutionalization and the
overcoming of the asylum ideology, and that the positive results, both in
economically and human terms, are before anybody’s eyes, this model is only
scarcely imitated. In Italy, out of a total of 321 SPDC (Psychiatric Services
for Diagnosis and Treatment), there are only about 15 that constitute part of
the Club of open SPDC no-restraint, that means that they declare
publicly not to lock the doors and not to use any means of restraint.
The situation in Italy,
with some exceptions, and also in some other realities in Europe, has worsened
from the period of questioning psychiatric institution, in the beginning of the
sixties. Italy has been at the forefront of the closure of mental hospitals.
Not only Franco Basaglia and many professionals, but also a good part of the
common people realized that psychiatric hospitals were not places of care. Civil
society, then, was sensitive to the issue of smash-down asylum culture,
launched by Franco Basaglia. Publications appeared, there was an open debate,
workers and students organized themselves, and entered in asylums to see the
conditions in which their fellow citizens were locked up. They protested and
denounced the deplorable conditions the internees were forced to live in.
But since several years, we
observe a re-institutionalisation process and, at the same time, in some
Italian hospital’s psychiatric wards happened many deplorable facts, due to the
institutionalization and forced restraint.
Some of these facts have
become infamous after that committees and relatives have seeked justice, as in
the case of the teacher Franco Mastrogiovanni, that was debated also on
national television channels. Franco Mastrogiovanni, after a forced
psychiatric treatment in 2009, in circumstances that have been the subject of
pending penal proceedings, has been heavily sedated, tied to the bed of Vallo
della Lucania’s hospital psychiatric ward, and left to die after
four days of abandonment. A hidden camera recorded everything; the video is of
public domain.
Giuseppe Casu, guilty
of having wanted to pursue his peddler job in the village square, died after
being hospitalized against his will, bound hands and feet to the bed during
seven days, after having been heavily sedated.
A 34 years old Nigerian, Edhmun
Hiden, was voluntarily hospitalized in a psychiatric ward in Bologna
in May 2008; the next day he decided to be discharged, because he did not feel
cared. At this point he was sedated, tied to the bed and held in place with the
help of police; he died soon after, due to a heart attack.
These are just some of the
cases that came to the limelight, but many more of them are not known when they
happen. As, for example when people that live in loneliness are involved, or
people whose relatives have given their consent, or simply when people want to
get rid of a person perceived as annoying. Personally, I am constantly getting
acknowledged of forced psychiatric treatments, during which treated people
suffer heavy damages. Forced treatments are often made on request of relatives,
when patients refuse to take any longer the psychiatric medications, or when
their behaviour is perceived as annoying. A friend of mine tried to escape, but
he was chased and filled with drugs; shortly after he was found dead at the
bottom of a ravine. He was 40 years old. Another friend of mine was walking on
a path between fields and was stopped by police, because he was known as a
“mentally ill” person. Then they called the psychiatrist on duty and told him:
“He was walking near the railway and could possibly have in mind to commit
suicide”; so they locked him up. I know this person, who often walks in the
fields, where, however, it’s easy to be located near the railway, because of
the constitution of the territory. Another acquaintance of mine died, throwing
himself under a train, terrified by the fact that his mother, according to the
psychiatrist, would refer to forced psychiatric treatment for him. Another one
has suffered of heavy harassment, after having reported his superior’s
embezzlement, noticed during his duties as a municipal technician. He was
subjected to forced psychiatric treatment, kidnapped by police in riot gear.
While he was sleeping, his door was smashed down, and he was thrown on the
ground face down and handcuffed. He says that at least they could have tried to
open the door, which was not locked. Now he is terrified and he even fears the
dark; he is forced to take psychiatric drugs. We can not think of
de-institutionalization before we have dismissed the rules that allow forced
psychiatric treatment, that allow to hold a person against his will, without
him having committed any crime, without the right to an equitable process,
based on the alleged dangerousness and only because this person was diagnosed
with a mental illness. Legislation of forced psychiatric treatment provides
ample scope for arbitrariness and it is in strong contrast to the human rights
regulations, that aim at preserving even people with disabilities from inhuman
and degrading treatments. For those who commit a crime, it is expected that the
judicial authority, within certain specific procedural rules, sanctions or imposes
restrictive measures. I constantly deal with people in forced psychiatric
treatment, that can no longer find a way out of the psychiatric institution.
Dr. Calchi Novati, a
Niguarda’s Hospital psychiatrist, was strongly mobbed because she opposed the practice
of restraining patients, not only by the straps, but also through the shoulder
(“spallaccio”) of asylum memory, or with other degrading practices. She
preferred to have an open dialogue with her patients, resize or scale down the
intake of psychiatric drugs, deal with their existential problems. In a few
days Dr. Calchi Novati would undergo the third disciplinary
proceeding of the Disciplinary Board, and now she is in danger of dismissal,
because in 2010, she had complained about her working difficulties with a small
circle of friends on facebook. Meanwhile her patients have signed a petition
with 500 signatures asking that the doctor would be readmitted into her
workplace. Other professionals who disagreed with the practice of restraint in
respect of patients in the Niguarda’s psychiatric wards - which otherwise is a
hospital of excellence - have been mobbed or transferred. In December 2010, a
series of complaints was presented by relatives of people who died or have
suffered as a result of restraint. Following these complaints, since 2006, at
Milano Niguarda Hospital’s psychiatric wards Grossoni I, II and III, 13
people died, mainly due to the practices of restraint and abuse of psychiatric
drugs. It would be important to spread the awareness that the restraint is an
anti-therapeutic act, that makes cures more difficult, rather than to
facilitate them. Physical restraint is not exercised only in the field of
psychiatry. The areas of operation where should be discussed the problem of
legitimacy, usefulness and appropriateness of physical restraint, do not
consist only in hospitals, but also in nursing homes for the elderly,
therapeutic communities for drug addicts and nursing homes for people with
disabilities related to congenital or early acquired disabilities. An
improvement in psychiatric nursing practice, characterized by the renunciation
of physical restraint, would be a strong signal in order to spot out the
problem also in other operating environments, urging those who work in this
field to act with similar treatment practices, rather than restrictive ones.
Recently I have been given the opportunity to visit the Psychiatric Service of
Diagnosis and Treatment (SPDC) in Trieste, and Dr. Assunta Signorelli
has showed us the ability to take care of people never using restraint
instruments, but using a friendly, human scale approach, where an open dialogue
and understanding take the place of a mere deletion of the “symptoms”. In
addition, people are hospitalized for only one day, or for some days in presence
of particular physical problems.
In the “Istanbul
Protocol - Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment”, paragraph
g) Review of torture methods, among other torture methods is listed
also: b) positional torture, suspension by using stretching of limbs,
prolonged restriction of movement, forced positioning; u) compulsion to
attend to torture or other inflicted atrocities.
The 2010 July the 29th Italian Conference
of Regions and Autonomous Provinces, approved a document entitled “Physical
restraint in psychiatry: a possible strategy of prevention”. The document,
contains seven recommendations to the regions, originated from an intervention
by the CPT (European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which is emanation of the European
Council), on psychiatric wards in Italy. In the chapter “Measures of
restraint in Psychiatric establishments for adults”, the report says: “The
potential of abuse and mistreatment that the use of restraints implies, is of
particular concern to the CPT. Unfortunately it seems that in many of the
visited structures, an excessive use of restraints is practiced”. The document
draws up a grading rank of rules to be put in practice, in order to deal with
the patient’s violence, and include psychological means, verbal interaction and
belief, and hold the patient by the hands for a short time. All this is
proposed as an alternative to chemical sedation and restraint by straps. The
final objective of the Recommendations is that all regions take steps to
introduce changes in psychiatric care (knowledge, attitudes, resources,
management, organization) that can lead to a stable and safe zero the number of
restraints applied in mental health services.
Despite this, the tying by
shoulder, obtained by means of a sheet rolled up properly, which stops the
patient’s back on the bed top, tied behind his headboard, is part of the Niguarda
Department of Mental Health’s Protocol and it is even taught to the
students of Milan’s University Specialization School of Clinical Psychology.
Since many years, in a portion of the former Paolo Pini asylum, the Olinda
association organizes cultural activities, music review, theatre, cinema,
children's activities, sports activities, various workshops, the Jodok bar
restaurant, the hostel and numerous other activities throughout the city and
with the active participation of users. It would be a paradox if the Olinda
cultural experience was to be used to cover the disturbing reality of the three
Grossoni psychiatric wards, that would be not wrong to define similar to
an asylum.
Although in recent times
campaigns and seminars on the theme of the abolition of physical restraint in
psychiatric wards and facilities for the elderly were organized by various
organizations, and that in the programs of these campaigns and seminars very
firm statements can be read, such as: “The restraint is not a medical act, it
is an affront to the dignity of the person who suffers, and it is a symptom of
serious inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the services that adopt it”, and
“Tying a person in a condition of suffering at a hospital bed is an inhuman
act, unworthy of a civilized country” and “We propose a proactive path toward a
progressive ban of any coercive practice”, it seems that despite everything,
there is still an underestimating of the urgency of this “progressive ban on
all coercive practices”. When you declare that the practical and organizational
health care could prevent a rapid ban on physical restraint, it seems that in
reality it continues to underestimate the deep human and civil unacceptability
of this instrument of physical coercion of inmates. The underestimation of the
effects on people tied with this instruments, strictly prohibited since 200
years in the prisons, continues to result in hospitals.
The deplorable situation of
the six Forensic Psychiatric Hospitals recently became more visible,
after surprise-inspections of a parliamentary committee. The videos of the
visits, showed by the national television, and the press releases can be found
on the web. A parliamentary report had already been made in June 2010, but the
photographs show a situation that until now has not yet changed. People held
for decades for minor offenses, whose penalty would have expired long time
since, if not repeatedly and automatically renewed. Dirt and decay, asylum’s
instruments and methods of restraint, bottles placed in the toilet’s drain in
order to prevent rats to come up, neglected physical problems such as those of
a person with gangrene in his feet. On 2011 April the 12th, a
Romanian citizen has committed suicide at Aversa’s Forensic Psychiatric
Hospital, because his imprisonment was automatically renewed. Francesca
Moccia of the Tribunal for Patients' Rights of Active Citizenship,
remembers that there is a reform that waits to be implemented from 2008, what
requires the closedown of the Forensic Psychiatric Hospitals. If we
don’t shut these places once and for all, we can not talk about
de-institutionalization. Close them not in order to transfer their users to
other psychiatric institutions, but to give these people a life dignity.
A research (source: British
Medical Journal) conducted in 6 European countries (Italy, Spain, England,
Netherlands, Sweden, Germany), that have closed asylums in the 70s, saw that
between 1990 and 2003 an increase in the number of beds in forensic psychiatric
hospitals, in psychiatric wards, in so-called safe houses. Supported housing is
seen as an alternatives to asylums, as a sign of de-institutionalization, but
they are rather a form of institutionalization. Also forced treatments
increased. It is not clear the reason why the number of beds in Forensic
Psychiatric Hospital increased, since there is no correlation between
crimes like homicides and de-institutionalized persons.
Erik Olsen of Enusp
told that recently a survey made in Copenhagen, in a way, has given positive
results: about 90% of the people who receive assistance in the
socialpsychiatric field, lives independently in their apartments. Only 10% live
in the centers/halfwayhouses. But there are still 3 or 4 mammoth institutions,
where 173 people live in small rooms (27 x 30 m) and toilets are shared with
ten more people. Users with cognitive problems are facing abuses in some of
these institutions, a recent television program broadcasted clips filmed
with a hidden camera, which has shocked the viewers in Denmark. In any case,
says Erik Olsen, how can we be sure that people living in institutions
do not fall victim of abuse? According to him the institution itself is a
violation of human rights, destroys the human agency instead of rebuilding it.
In all European countries
lobotomy and electroshock treatments are not prohibited, although it is widely
demonstrated that these non-therapeutic treatments are invasive and
destructive. We can not think of a de-institutionalization if we don’t remove
these practices and if we don’t replace them with dialogue, re-socialization, empowering,
practices that, as Trieste’s Department of Mental Health and other departments
have demonstrated, it works fine. It is necessary that human rights laws
already enacted will be implemented.
Referring to the
psychiatric drugs there are rules of the Convention on Human Rights,
which require user’s fully informed consent, before administering, even if he’s
disabled. Most psychiatric drugs are prescribed for a long time, sometimes for
life, without informing the user on their effects, and without any help in the
resolution of his real and existential problems. Akathisia, dyskinesia, are
very unpleasant effects and can throw a person in despair. The psychiatric
drugs can cause neurological diseases, that sometimes become irreversible.
Often the user is encouraged to continue taking the drugs even when he asks to
withdraw them, and there are few professionals who help and give directions for
withdrawal. Peter Breggin, a psychiatrist, working with institutions as
WHO (World Health Organisation) and FDA (Food and Drug Administration), wrote
hundreds of pages on the harmful effects of psychiatric drugs. Peter Lehmann,
who tested the effects of drugs on himself during his hospitalization in a
psychiatric clinic, has published and continues to publish the results of his
research for which he uses pharmaceutical and medical literature. The effect of
psychiatric drugs is known, but the billion-dollar business behind it is too
big to lose it. Peter Lehmann is the first survivor of psychiatry to be
awarded with the honorary degree, conferred him by the clinical psychology
faculty of the Aristotele’s University of Thessaloniki, for his work as
researcher and activist in the field of mental health.
A person who starts to take
drugs, in most cases will be induced to take them for life, because they create
addiction problems. The psychiatric user develops a very strong dependence
toward the psychiatric service too. Lack of compliance is in fact intended in
it self an aggravation of the disease. Then the conditioning that takes place,
goes in the direction of dependence from psychiatric services, of becoming
childish and “chronic patient”. As long as we continue to administer the drugs
in this way, as real chemical straitjackets, we cannot talk about
de-institutionalization.
Although in almost all
European countries asylums and psychiatric hospitals have been eliminated or
substantially reduced, this does not mean that in the new post-asylum
structures, asylum-dispositifs have been eliminated. People are, with few
exceptions, completely sedated by psychiatric drugs, even though apparently
there are implemented programs such as art therapy. The intake of psychiatric
drugs is induced also in order to make the user unconscious.
Erwin Redig, a German
psychiatric survivor, says: “There are people putting us under pressure to
force us to take them (psychiatric drugs). If we do not take them, our changes
embarrass them. If this is our case, we must make clear to ourselves that we
are swallowing drugs for other people’s welfare, because they find us
unpleasant if we do not”. “The dispositif of discomfort-complex, that operates
in a small residence, acts more broadly in the society”. Neuroleptic drugs
affect thinking, block the flow of thoughts, and make people flatten. I relate
the words of a healthcare professional: “As soon as psychiatric drugs are given
to people, they literally get extinguished. To what extend is it fair to cancel
the person?” Although in the European countries, the asylum psychiatry and the
psychiatric hospitalization of users have given way to communities, the
psychiatric institution culture has not changed. Although many examples exist
that prove that you can accompany a person in troubles out of his
problems, through dialogue and support in the resolution of the objective and
material difficulties, and helping him to get awareness of his own rights,
these experiments and their positive results continue to be deliberately
ignored.
In recent years, many
non-profit organizations have flourished, that deal with the so-called social
“reintegration” of the psychiatrised person. After the closure of mental
hospitals in Italy, several small residential “intermediate” psychiatric
facilities were opened, such as group homes, protected dwellings, shared
apartments; they often have no substantial difference in rapport to the classic
psychiatric institutions. The rule is: “This flat is an ASL (health
institution) structure, so if you live in it you must follow the rules of life
that the institution gives you”. The tenants, that are the users, have no
control over the money for household management, bestowed in the form of
regional subsidies, and could never say a word in the choice of another tenant;
they are obliged to keep the apartment according to the criteria established by
the health professionals. Recently a friend who lives in such an apartment was
complaining because “they pay for a cleaning lady who comes and sits, giving us
orders on how to clean, and when we finish she goes away”. The control also
extends to external relations. So the typical devices of total institutions are
restated in mental health structures who should be the alternative to
institutions, either in “intermediate” residential structures or in the
“alternative communities”. Old asylums heritage as totalitarian relational
devices still operates in the structures, and professional’s adaptation modes
are still the same. The patterns of asylum residentiality are still active. But
most of all it is still alive an asylum mentality, therefore it is important for
everyone to be aware how much everybody’s mentality is crucial in creating or
not creating devices that belong to psychiatric institutions; operating devices
that constitute a widespread operating module.
A Mental Health Department
professional stated that “you certainly can not talk about family-home, where
everyday acts are not self-determined by residents”. “Residential Intermediate
Structures”, foreseen in Italy by the 1983 law, should have had the
transitoriness as their specificity; therefore they should not constitute
either a definite admission or a final place for forced hospitalization; they
should have been transitional housing, that could break prejudice and
exclusion logics. In March 1999, by a special decree, to the Italian Regions was
imposed the definitive closure of the asylums, under threat of strong economic
sanctions, because despite the birth, on paper, of the new “local services”,
mental hospitals were still crowded with patients. Named by the derogatory
title of “asylum residuals”, for these people that nobody wanted, residential
structures accounted for an illusion of freedom; they founded themselves to be
again in a mental institution. “Many patients”, writes one of them in an
autobiography, “have never been so well in terms of comfort, but nevertheless
they are in a state of fearful desolation”.
An induced need of
security, the defence from a potentially dangerous mind sick person that at any
time, during an outbreak, could commit heinous actions against others or
against himself; shortly, on the basis of this need and of this false
scientific fundamentals, we build the myth of the need of post-asylums
psychiatric institutions. If we don’t get reed of the psychiatric prejudice,
the “mental health” institution remains. There are many alternatives pursued by
individuals, associations or institutions, but they are deliberately ignored.
The responsibility for solving the problems of institutionalization, is not up
only to psychiatrists or to mental health professionals, but to the whole civil
society. Everybody contributes to the asylum mentality. Users as well, who have
internalized the psychiatric diagnosis and can no longer live without it.
Mary Nettle, chairman
of Enusp until 2010, expects an increasing involvement of users and
survivors of psychiatry in researches about psychiatry; while they often are
excluded or not paid on the pretext that they are not professionals.
Yesterday, I talked with a “Radio Fragola” (Trieste
ex-asylum’s “Strawberry Radio”) young operator. To my observation, that
usually common people are afraid of people labelled as mentally ill, because
after the closure of asylums there is no possibility anymore to lock them up,
he replied: “Here it's different, now this different way of relating to the
problem is rooted in our territory and we could not do without it”.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento