Psychiatry. 2.2.2.4. De facto compulsory admission by locking the door of a ward During a visit to the Department for Neurology and Psychiatry of Children and Adolescents of the Clinic Klagenfurt, Commission 3 found that the door of the ward was locked when an adolescent was admitted and this resulted in a de facto compulsory admission of all other adolescents. If they wish to leave the ward, they must ask the staff to unlock the door and they are asked repeatedly why they want to go out. In legal proceedings on comparable cases, it was already clarified that locking ward doors must always be considered a restriction of freedom. The possibility of asking staff for help doesn’t change that fact. Constant dependence on the will of third parties when wishing to change one’s whereabouts is a not insignificant intervention in the right to personal freedom. Case law The grounds set out in case law are that all forms of restrictions (of freedom) mentioned in Section 33 of the Hospitalisation Act also result in the presence of an admission within the meaning of Section 2 of the Hospitalisation Act, whereby no particular materiality threshold with regard to duration and extent of the restrictions is provided for. The Hospitalisation Act does not provide any basis for voluntary confinement or care of a patient in a closed ward of a facility without admission within the meaning of Section 2 of the Hospitalisation Act. This is necessary in light of international law and constitutional law with regard to the right to personal freedom and also in order to maintain human dignity. In this context, the facility argued vis-à-vis Commission 3 that at the time of admission to the ward all of the adolescents and their legal guardians were asked in written form to provide their consent to have the door to the ward locked. Declaration of consent is not sufficient Declarations of consent, which are intended to legitimise an unlawful situation, are deemed invalid and unenforceable by the NPM. Besides, in the declaration of consent available to the NPM reference is made only to an occasional locking of the entry door to the ward. This creates the impression that the ward is only locked in exceptional cases, although this can in actuality be continuous for lengthy periods. From a professional standpoint, the hospital justifies this practice with the reasoning that complete isolation of individual minors must be avoided in order to prevent stigmatisation and marginalisation. Furthermore, such measures are met with a complete lack of understanding on the part of the adolescents who are being treated Problematic care concept 55