27 Selected topics from 2020 day, with provisions for physical activity and other recreational activity. Children’s right to healthcare must be safeguarded, and medical treatment should, in principle, only be given on the basis of informed consent from the child. Children must also have the opportunity to stay in contact with family, friends and relevant organisations, through visits or by telephone. The use of intrusive coercion and force must only take place in extraordinary circumstances after other measures have been tried, and only within what is permitted by law. The Mental Health Care Act provides few reg­ ulations that are adapted to children who have been deprived of their liberty. The challenges this represents will be further examined in the final part of the article. Visits indicate that children need better protection against intrusive coercion Intrusive force and coercion measures must only be used on children if there is an immediate risk that they can harm themselves or others, as a last resort and for the shortest time necessary.8 It must only be used in cases that are clearly warranted by laws and regulations, and there are strict require­ ments in respect of documentation. Several human rights agencies have recommended a prohibition of coercive measures, solitary confinement and similar measures imposed on children.9 The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture has stated that it is only acceptable to restrain children until the risk of injury has passed.10 The NPM conducting an inspection during a visit to a "mental healthcare section for children and adolescents. However, the Mental Health Care Act allows for administration of strong medication without the consent of the child in emergency situations.11 Chil­ dren over 16 years of age can also be restrained with straps or isolated in a room. It is additionally problematic that Norwegian law permits the use of particularly intrusive coercion methods, such as straps, to prevent damage to objects. Human rights considerations indicate that such intrusive measures are only permitted to prevent immediate risk of injury to persons.12 Findings from our visits indicate that children admitted to mental healthcare institutions can be subjected to very intrusive forms of coercion. During one of our visits, we found that children under 16 years old had been subjected to unlawful use of restraint belts and segregation.13 We also found that an adolescent over 16 years old had been brought to the hospital by the police wearing 8 ECHR judgement of 19 Feb 2015 MS v. Croatia (no. 2), application no. 75450/12, section 104; Havana Rules, rule 64 and UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Annual Report to the UN General Assembly 2015, A/HRC/28/68, section 86 (f). 9 UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Annual Report to the UN General Assembly for 2013, A/HRC/22/53, page 14–15, section 63 and page 23, section 89 (b), and for 2015, A/HRC/28/68, section 84 (d). See also UN Committee Against Torture, recommendations to New Zealand, 2 June 2015, CAT/C/NZL/CO/6, section 15 (b). 10 See Committee on the Prevention of Torture (CPT) report after a visit to Poland in 2017 CPT/Inf/ (2018) 39, section 134. 11 Mental Health Care Act Section 4–8. 12 In appeal cases against the use of restraint straps on adult patients, ECHR has stated that: “... such measures be employed as a matter of last resort and when their application is the only means to prevent immediate or imminent harm to the patient or to others.” (M.S. v. Croatia (no. 2), complaint no. 75450/12, judgement of 19 February 2015, section 104. See also Council of Europe Committee of Ministers recommendation Rec (2004) article 27 no. (1). 13 The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s report after the visit to Helse Stavanger HF, Section for children and adolescent mental health care. 8–10 and 29–30 October 2019. The unlawful circumstances had ended at the time of the visit.