National Preventive Mechanism shapeable framework conditions and even the inadequate resource situation do not permit a violation of the fundamental right to freedom. Working with persons with multiple disabilities can result in enormous strain. Prior to such crisis situations, a well-trained and efficient team can intervene and de-escalate. However, sometimes viable work alliances are missing to pursue the question of which inner mental processes trigger behaviour that is harmful to the self or others. Occasionally, the knowledge about alternatives and methods with which to react differently in stressful situations is missing. Curative pedagogical processes can only be effective if the pedagogical support is linked to the current development and action level, and the organisation of everyday life is planned individually and “suitably” and systematically implemented with activating measures. There are also structural problems in caring for persons with complex needs, intellectual impairment and complex mental illnesses. Care situations that are highly critical from a human rights perspective can continue over longer periods of time. Commission 6 visited a residential facility in Lower Austria, for example, in which three residents repeatedly had sudden violent outbursts in spite of all efforts to avert the same. Both physical assaults against residents and attacks against the personnel are daily routine there. Great credit must be given to the private operator and the personnel for their willingness to care for highly difficult and highly vulnerable clients who were refused admission to other facilities. Criminal charges are intentionally not filed against the three, who are not criminally liable in order to avert the threat of their being committed by a court to a facility for mentally disturbed offenders or to a forensic ward within the framework of detention of mentally ill offenders. On the wish of Commission 6, the Human Rights Advisory Council will deal with the problem. Structural problems foster violence Only when a relationship can be established with the residents and when the individualised care results in changed attitudes and techniques in dealing with impulsive outbursts and challenging behaviour can the right to freedom be safeguarded and the personnel better protect themselves and others. However, it does not suffice to design routine work only under a “behavioural therapeutic setting”. It is also insufficient to unilaterally prioritise one “care model”. As important as the qualified and health-promoting care of persons with disabilities is, it cannot provide access to education, employment, leisure and interpersonal encounters. Individualised care The NPM made the precarious care situation in a facility of the Land Salzburg public through the media in agreement with the representatives of the residents after it was not possible to obtain concrete commitment for change. Thirty five persons with multiple disabilities of varying age groups are cared for in the facility. In several cases, medication-based measures that restrict freedom were deemed impermissible pursuant to the Nursing and Residential Homes Residence Act, but no consequences drawn. At the time of the first Restriction of freedom with no development concepts 159