Coercion and other forms of restrictive practice: Compliance with human rights

Position Statement PS05/26, October 2026

The statement sets out the College’s position on coercion and other forms of restrictive practice in mental healthcare. It emphasises dignity, autonomy and the need to minimise these interventions, while arguing that their use may sometimes be necessary as a last resort to prevent serious harm. Responding to WHO–UN guidance, it explains the College’s view that carefully justified interventions can be compatible with human rights, drawing particularly on the European Convention on Human Rights.

The College states that care should be based on informed consent wherever possible. Any involuntary treatment or restrictive measure must be lawful, necessary, proportionate and subject to rigorous safeguards, including individual assessment, clear documentation, regular review, access to advocacy and independent oversight. The statement also supports advance care planning to preserve patients’ wishes and preferences, and highlights additional safeguards for children and young people.

Its recommendations extend beyond individual clinical decisions to the organisation of care. The College calls for stronger community services alongside appropriate inpatient provision, research into alternatives to coercion, and coordinated action on housing, education, employment and social inclusion. It also advocates continued work on capacity-based mental health law across the UK, robust accountability, and meaningful involvement of patients and families in care, research and policy.