Report on the Performance of Activities of the National Preventive Mechanism for 2017 1.3. PERSONS WITH MENTAL DISORDERS WITH RESTRICTED FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT “Given the enforcement orders, my marriage was ruined. I lost everything, it was all their fault... Debts just kept accumulating. At one point, I wanted to put an end to everything, but I was too weak to go to the very end. They took me to this ward. Initially, I refused to be treated. I thought that I was doomed. Then, that place helped calm me down. Talking to my doctor was helpful. He understands me... But, other patients told me that I may have to pay for the two weeks when I didn’t sign the admittance form. Where will I get the money for that? Will this ever stop? In 2017, we received 19 complaints filed by persons with mental disorders regarding involuntary hospitalization, i.e. subjection to involuntary medical procedures during in-patient treatment in psychiatric institutions. We visited the Psychiatric Clinic of the Rebro University Hospital Centre and the Dubrovnik General Hospital (psychiatric institution)2. Some complained that doctors threatened to launch the involuntary detention procedure if they refused to take medicines. Although the Act on Protection of Persons with Mental Disorders does not treat involuntary detention and involuntary treatment as synonyms, insufficiently clear standards may lead to different interpretation of terms and non-uniform treatment on the part of psychiatrists. Most of them think that involuntary detention also includes involuntary treatment. If this was not the case, then detention would boil down to “keeping a person inside”. Others think that the legal basis for involuntary treatment may be applicable only for forensic patients. For this reason, this area has to be regulated in a more stringent manner in order to prevent different interpretations and possible violations of rights of persons with mental disorders. Persons with mental disorders are still dissatisfied with the work of their lawyers appointed ex officio. Sometimes, they did not even know who had been assigned to them because he/she did not take an Persons suffering from acute psychiatric disorder who do not have supplemental health insurance plan still have to take part in cost sharing to cover the costs of treatment, despite the fact that they were not allowed to terminate the treatment of their own free will. active part in the procedure. Active participation of lawyers/defence counsels appointed ex officio represents an exception rather than a rule. Generally, complainants were more satisfied with the work of lawyers of their own choice. Lawyers appointed ex officio need to play a more important role in the process, otherwise their work boils down to pure compliance with the rules, rather than protection of rights of persons with mental disorders. The Croatian Health Insurance Institute (CHII) did not report on the number of insured persons who were obliged to take part in the cost sharing scheme to cover the treatment costs for their condition In this chapter, the term psychiatric institution refers to a healthcare institution or a unit for specialist and inpatient psychiatric treatment. 2 28