fundamental and human rights �.� national preventive mechanism against torture indicate that a physician would have decided on the restriction. The Deputy-Ombudsman did not deem it acceptable to employ restrictive measures on the basis of a permission given by an individual suffering from a memory disorder, who may not have understood the matter. The use of restrictive care measures must always be based on a physician’s assessment and decision. In addition, the necessity of such measures must be evaluated on a regular basis (383/2018). The majority of the residents of a unit offering round-the-clock assisted living with intensified support suffered from memory loss disease. The outer doors of the unit were locked. They could be opened with a numeric code. The gate of the fenced yard was also locked. As a further restrictive measure, the beds were equipped with bedrails to prevent their occupants from falling out of them. The patients’ families had agreed on the matter with a physician. The NPM stressed that the use of restrictive measures was only permitted by decision of a physician. Furthermore, the use of restrictive measures must be monitored to ensure that they are only used when and for as long as necessary. For this reason as well, the physician should visit the unit sufficiently often and meet all of the residents. It is also the nurses’ duty to discuss the restrictive measures and their grounds with the residents’ next of kin or family members (659/2018). A unit for persons suffering from serious memory loss symptoms sought to organise its operations at the terms of the residents. This meant that the residents were allowed to decide when they woke up or ate. If they did not feel sleepy at night, they were allowed to stay up and walk in the hallways, provided that they did not disturb the other residents. The use of restrictive measures was decided by a physician. These measures included raised bedrails, various belts and back-zip overalls. Back-zip overall, also known as patient overall, is a garment preventing for example persons with dementia from undressing themselves in public. The necessity of continuing the restrictive measures was monitored on a daily basis. The unit was even equipped with restraints. However, the NPM 104 The furnishings in the service centre for the olderly was modest and worn-out. were told that the restraints had not been needed for years, since the nurses had learned to work on the terms of the residents and calm them down in other ways. Sedatives had to be given to the residents at times. It was also necessary to lock the rooms of residents every now and then to prevent restless residents from wandering into the rooms of others. In the Deputy-Ombudsman’s opinion, locking the doors of residents at night for reasons of client and patient safety was problematic with regard to fire safety and the right to self-determination of the elderly people suffering from memory disorders. The fact that the solution was temporary had no bearing on the matter (2217/2018). The report given by the city stated that locking the rooms was an extreme measure intended to ensure the safety of the group home’s residents. Nurses at a group home for individuals with severe memory loss symptoms felt that meal times took excessively long. All residents had to be assisted and monitored while they were eating. Some of the residents were so restless that they