Published
30.1.2023 7:16:00

Deputy-Ombudsman Maija Sakslin has issued two decisions on social services for people with chronic schizophrenia

Violation of private life

In her decision (1942/2021), the Deputy-Ombudsman stated that by choosing the client’s place of residence far from the family members had effectively restricted meetings between the mother and the daughter. In the Deputy-Ombudsman's view, the matter must be assessed from the point of view of both the Constitution of Finland and the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Deputy-Ombudsman stated that she could not avoid getting the impression that contact with the daughter and grandchildren was not considered important when the assessment for the best place of residence was carried out.

According to the European Convention on Human Rights, there shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of the right to respect for private and family life other than when it is permitted by law and necessary in a democratic society, among other things, in the interests of national security and public safety or for the protection of rights and freedoms of others.

Social welfare professionals do not identify the right of persons with chronic schizophrenia to free disability services

The Deputy-Ombudsman stated that the city had acted wrongly when charging a fee for the home care. According to the entries recorded, the fee charged for the service had contributed strongly to the client's unwillingness to use the service. Home care has made living at home possible and helped to avoid periods of hospitalisation.

In her decision (6600/2021), Deputy-Ombudsman Sakslin considered that the joint municipal authority for health and wellbeing had acted incorrectly when guiding the client to buy a cleaning service subject to a fee. The fee charged for the service may have risked the client's sufficient nutrition. Cleaning the flat had been necessary to safeguard both the physical and the psychological wellbeing of the client. It has also not been appropriate to reduce the number of cleaning sessions for financial reasons.

Under the Act on Disability Services and Assistance, wellbeing services counties, previously municipalities, have a special obligation to organise the service housing required by mental health rehabilitees who are considered to be severely disabled. Service housing referred to in the Act on Disability Services and Assistance is an entity that is free of charge to the client even if it consists of paid services organised under various acts, such as home care and assistance with cleaning the flat.

The Deputy-Ombudsman considers it a serious deficiency from the point of view of legal protection of psychiatric patients if the right to free services under the Act on Disability Services and Assistance is not identified when the person's need for services is caused by a long-term mental illness restricting their functional capacity.

The Deputy-Ombudsman considers the mistakes made extremely serious. The starting point in legislation is that social welfare professionals ensure through their own actions the necessary care for persons in a vulnerable position. Sufficient nutrition and a living environment that does not put the person's health at risk are essential conditions for ensuring the necessary care. 

Because of the seriousness of the mistakes observed in the procedure, the Deputy-Ombudsman has still decided to examine how wellbeing services counties will in future ensure that these shortcomings will not be repeated in connection with other clients in need of special support. A separate individualised request for clarification on the matter will be sent to the wellbeing services counties.

Deputy-Ombudsman Maija Sakslin’s decisions 1942/2021 and  6600/2021 have been published (in Finnish) on the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s website at www.oikeusasiamies.fi.

Further information is available from Principal Legal Adviser Lotta Hämeen-Anttila, tel. +358 (0)9 432 3353.