Mandatory mental health care in connection with serious anorexia

The Supreme Court judgment 4 June 2020, HR-2020-1167-A, (case no. 19-178082SIV-HRET), civil case, appeal againt judgment. 

A (Counsel Fredrik Undheim) v. The State represented by the Ministry of Health and Care Services (The Office of the Attorney General represented by Counsel Henriette Lund Busch)

Justices: Øie, Falch, Bergh, Høgetveit Berg, Steinsvik

A patient suffering from serious eating disorders had demanded lifting of compulsory mental health care. It was not disputed that the requirements of serious mental illness, of deterioration and of risk in section 3-3 of the Compulsory Mental Health Care Act were met. The Supreme Court also found that the exception in section 3-3 (4) second sentence from the requirement of inability to give consent was met. It was assumed that the exception is not limited to apply to risk of suicide, but that it also comprises cases where the patient's life is in acute danger without this being connected to the risk of suicide. The condition in (4) was thus considered met. In the overall assessment under section 3-3 (7), compulsory mental health care appeared to be the best solution. The request for lifting was dismissed.    


Til toppen