compulsory psychiatric care 76 unit that then receives the patient for further care decides on admission. The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman stated that questions arise concerning how legal certainty is affected by the way in which psychiatric care at Sahlgrenska University Hospital is organised, where, inter alia, patients in need of compulsory psychiatric care need to be transported between different hospitals. The questions will be dealt with in an own-initiative inquiry concerning an examination of how Stockholm Region Healthcare Service has organised inpatient psychiatric care.23 6.2 Own-initiative inquiries Following the inspection of Växjö Regional Forensic Psychiatric Clinic, the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman chose to investigate the clinic’s transfer of information to the Prison and Probation Service in an own-initiative inquiry. The clinic regularly receives patients who, inter alia, are serving prison sentences in a prison. These so-called prison clients can stay at the clinic for a very long time. During the inspection, it emerged that the clinic provides information that is covered by confidentiality restrictions pursuant to Chapter 25 of the Public Access to Information and Secrecy Act (2009: 400) to the Prison and Probation Service. This occurs regarding prison clients being returned to a prison or remand prison. Such information is also provided every month regarding prison clients who continue to be cared for at the clinic. The clinic does not document what information is submitted to the Prison and Probation Service.24 6.3 Cases where responses from healthcare providers were requested In 2018, the Psychiatric Emergency Unit and Unit 1 at Sankt Göran Hospital were inspected. During the inspections, it emerged that the staff had a perception that the Prison and Probation Service’s working methods for assisted transportations contributed to stigmatising, inter alia, mental illness. Furthermore, there was a perception that the Prison and Probation Service’s staff failed to act respectfully towards patients. Following the inspection, the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman requested that Stockholm Region Healthcare Service respond detailing the measures taken or those which it intended to take in connection with this information.25 Stockholm Region Healthcare Service’s response was received by the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman on 14 June 2019. The response shows that Stockholm Region Healthcare Service has initiated extensive collaborative 23 See the Parliamentary Ombudsmen’s report p. 14, ref. no. O 6-2019 and the Parliamentary Ombudsmen’s ref. no. 1732-2019. 24 See the Parliamentary Ombudsmen’s report p. 20, ref. no. O 18-2019 and the Parliamentary Ombudsmen’s ref. no. 842-2020. 25 See the Parliamentary Ombudsmen’s report p. 15, ref. no. 5990-2018.