Current Events > Patients in Norway given electro-shock therapy 144 times without their consent.

(+) Yeah! (+)

At least 40 patients at Norwegian psychiatric treatment units have been treated with electric therapy over the last three years without giving consent, a report has revealed.

The report, the result of an investigation by the Verdens Gang (VG) newspaper, claims that electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) was given 166 times over a three-year period without the prior consent of patients.

The treatment, formerly known as electroshock therapy, has been shown to be effective against certain types of life-threatening psychotic or psychiatric illnesses, including major depressive disorder, mania and catatonia.

Although heavily regulated in Norway, doctors can decide to carry out the treatment which is only permitted with the informed consent of patients under normal circumstances if they believe it represents the absolute final chance to save the life and health of the patient, writes VG.

In January this year, Norways Civil Ombudsman reacted strongly against the use of ECT to treat a patient that had not given consent, according to the report.

The figures used in the report were gathered from all of Norways health authorities for 2014, 2015 and 2016, writes VG.

There are two aspects here that are particularly concerning. One is that the numbers are uncertain. The other is that patients are given several treatments over time, based on emergency necessity. It is notable in itself that a treatment justified by an emergency situation can last for days and weeks, Helga Ervik, who heads the Civil Ombudsmans preventative unit against torture, told VG.

Emergency necessity [ndrett in Norwegian, ed.] is associated with an acute situation, whereby someone is in mortal danger. A treatment given in such a situation could be presumed to have an immediate effect, Ervik added.

Several hospitals informed the newspaper that, should a patient be incapable of giving consent themselves, the decision to give ECT treatment is made in consultation with relatives.

A relative can never give consent to an invasive procedure of this kind. The requirement for consent is only fulfilled by the individual in question giving it, Ervik told VG, adding that the Ombudsman had experienced a lack of clarity, a lot of uncertainty and possibly also misunderstandings regarding what next of kin may do.

Hospital representatives told the newspaper that the final decision is not taken by relatives.

The final decision to give ECT under emergency circumstances is taken by the specialist in the appropriate area, head of department Torgeir Vethe of the Clinic for Psychiatric Health and Addiction at the Vestre Viken health authority told VG.

Full ARticle: https://www.thelocal.no/20171002/norway-psychiatric-patients-given-electro-therapy-without-consent-report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuNRopIJRgo

Makes you sick to think about.
---

Thats shocking
---

What the fuck
---

---

The patient's ability to provide proper informed consent at that stage is questionable though, ethically.

So, hard to say what's wrong here. I mean, I think most people just have an uninformed opinion regarding ECT, despite it being an extremely effective treatment.
---

i got it 3 times and it didn't help me, so i stopped. They are just essentially frying their brain with 144 treatments.
---

well now this sure sounds like a case of gross misconduct
---

Was the treatment at least free?
---

prettyprincess posted...

well now this sure sounds like a case of gross misconduct

real sad this one didn't take off
---

GOOMFalse posted...

Was the treatment at least free?

:/
---

If it made them better, I don't see the issue

Like someone said, doctors can be trusted more than the patients at that point
---

awesome999 posted...

If it made them better, I don't see the issue

Like someone said, doctors can be trusted more than the patients at that point

And people call me a shitty person
---

Irony posted...

awesome999 posted...

If it made them better, I don't see the issue

Like someone said, doctors can be trusted more than the patients at that point

And people call me a shitty person

If I had a health problem and there was a treatment that had a high chance of saving my life, I wouldn't want them to ask for consent, I'd want them do do it. Especially if it was bad enough that I couldn't give consent

It's be a different thing if I said no and they did it anyway. But as long as I'm undecided, they can do whatever they want. I can say no at the last moment and it'd be shitty if they didn't stop
---

---

Irony posted...

awesome999 posted...

If it made them better, I don't see the issue

Like someone said, doctors can be trusted more than the patients at that point

And people call me a shitty person

So, mentally ill people shouldn't be drugged/committed against their will?
---

armandro posted...

Irony posted...

awesome999 posted...

If it made them better, I don't see the issue

Like someone said, doctors can be trusted more than the patients at that point

And people call me a shitty person

So, mentally ill people shouldn't be drugged/committed against their will?

No, of course not. What's wrong with you?
---

Duncanwii posted...

No, of course not. What's wrong with you?

So someone has gone off their medication and is suffering from a psychotic episode. Extremely disorganized thoughts, acting in ways that will almost certainly be bad for themselves.

They aren't going to sit down and decide to medicate themselves. It seems that this person's state of mind has prevented any form of informed consent to begin with. What seems more appropriate, ethically, in these circumstances is informed assent.
---

COVxy posted...

The patient's ability to provide proper informed consent at that stage is questionable though, ethically.

---

COVxy posted...

Duncanwii posted...

No, of course not. What's wrong with you?

So someone has gone off their medication and is suffering from a psychotic episode. Extremely disorganized thoughts, acting in ways that will almost certainly be bad for themselves.

They aren't going to sit down and decide to medicate themselves. It seems that this person's state of mind has prevented any form of informed consent to begin with. What seems more appropriate, ethically, in these circumstances is informed assent.

When you start locking people who have committed no crimes up without their consent you step into dangerous territory.
---

I wasn't aware such barbaric "treatments" were still being practiced.
---

Electric shock treatment is actually pretty effective. :v It isn't as extreme as the name makes it sound. They basically give your brain tiny shocks to help stimulate it, which can help in extreme cases. Like if someone is extremely depressed and no medicine is helping them.
---

mentally ill people can't be trusted to make the decision in their best interest
---

prettyprincess posted...

prettyprincess posted...

well now this sure sounds like a case of gross misconduct

real sad this one didn't take off

I got it.
---

voldothegr8 posted...

I wasn't aware such barbaric "treatments" were still being practiced.

Probably one of the most efficacious treatments for severe depression, along with ketamine.
---

Duncanwii posted...

When you start locking people who have committed no crimes up without their consent you step into dangerous territory.

Institutionalization of course has it's own set of issues, but that's really not what this topic was about, and even then that's not even a clear cut ethical issue.
---