RECOMMENDATIONS • Flexible forms of compulsory treatment – inpatient and day-care outpatient treatment (including the opportunity the person to be free during the day for community activities and to visit the hospital/service only to have dinner, sleep, take medication) should be largely available to allow for a smooth transition to community living. Currently there is a lot of resistance from psychiatric institutions because they do not have the purely organisational capacity (and funding scheme does not allow for it) for this. In terms to achieve this, the state and the municipalities must develop new forms of services, specifically aimed to support the community living of the persons with disability. • Day-care outpatient care and treatment should be developed and available evenly in the country. Otherwise when released from compulsory treatment the persons concerned deteriorate very quickly and their quality of life outside the hospital is quite miserable. • The main theme in relation to involuntary and compulsory treatments should be how to stimulate life in outpatient medical care through proper social services and health care. • The local monitoring commissions that have the duty and the powers to take care of reintegration of released prisoners under the Execution of Punishments and Restraint Measures Act should be given life, because they could be relevant and useful, including for the convicts with IPD but are not functioning in practice. • Multidisciplinary approach in psychiatric assessments - the Swedish National Board of Forensic Medicine, where forensic psychiatric examinations are carried out for the whole country by a multidisciplinary team composed of a forensic psychiatrist, a treating psychiatrist, a social worker and a psychologist. The social worker has a huge role in making a thorough social study about the person and his life situation. 270 All of them must be educated and trained to apply properly the CRPD standards. • Multidisciplinary approach in case management by social workers/service providers, psychiatrists/psychologists, relatives/close persons and judges shows good results but is an exception in practice. Support services for persons concerned should be referred by the court. The view that the judge can and should refer to social services and/or services for the purpose of providing support, tracking treatment outside of a hospital facility, and ensuring that no one is arbitrarily deprived of liberty (because of lack of housing) should be vigorously applied in practice. Currently in judicial circles in Bulgaria, this unpopular understanding is interpreted as overempowerment and is considered to usurp the role of the social worker. However, the judges must be aware of the CRPD principles and rights of the persons with disability and must collect evidence about the readiness and ability of the so- 270 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EG2i3uRR4Ok 66 SLAVKA KUKOVA