Search

Dutch psychiatric hospitals have been engaged in a range of projects to reduce the use of seclusion and others forms of coercive treatment since 1998. A key factor in allowing for such longitudinal evaluations was mandatory registration of all individual uses of restraint and coercive treatment in all psychiatric institutions. This chapter briefly sets out relevant background information about the Dutch health care system and introducing key terms. It examines the legal framework in the Netherlands which regulates the use of restraint and coercive measures in psychiatric institutions, as well as institutions housing people with intellectual disabilities and people with psychogeriatric conditions. The chapter also examines the registration system, which was designed to record each use of restraint, coercion and involuntary treatment in Dutch psychiatric institutions, and the controversies surrounding the system related to patient privacy. It analyses the factors which seem to have influenced the (reduced) use of coercive measures, and particularly seclusion, in psychiatric institutions in the Netherlands.

This article explores the understanding and use of the concept of vulnerability in European Union (EU) law, with a particular focus on the fields of criminal law and consumer protection law. It draws on Fineman’s understanding of vulnerability as a universal phenomenon, and considers the scope for, and policy implications of, incorporating (further) such an approach within these fields of law. The article reveals that there is no common understanding of the concept of vulnerability in the fields of EU criminal law and consumer protection law, and there is a lack of overall coherence across these two fields of law. In fact, a common understanding is not even necessarily found within single fields. The purposes served by highlighting“vulnerable”groups and individuals in legislation differs, and references to“vulnerability” result in a stronger focus on the need for individualised assessments, and tailored measures, in EU criminal law than is the case for EU consumer protection law. Indeed, the provisions addressing "vulnerable” consumers are particularly brief and provide very little extra protection. However, both fields of EU law also reveal evidence of a universal approach to vulnerability being taken with regard to communication and information provision, which should be tailored to individual needs and abilities.

This study, commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Cititizen's Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the PETI Committee, analyses the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 and makes recommendations regarding the new European Disability Strategy. The study reflects on the design and implementation of the current Strategy, as well as its achievements and shortcomings. The study makes recommendations in respect of the post-2020 European Disability Strategy. Those recommendations are addressed to the European Parliament, the European Commission and other EU institutions, Member States and key stakeholders, and relate to the groundwork needed to prepare the new Strategy, and the design, content and mechanisms for implementation and enforcement.

The 2019 Work-life Balance Directive prohibits discrimination when workers exercise the rights contained in the Directive, which include rights to take leave for reasons related to caring responsibilities and the right to request flexible working arrangements for caring purposes. This article explores the relationship between the Work-life Balance Directive and EU non-discrimination law. It analyses the provisions of the Directive related to non-discrimination and compares these to equivalent provisions found elsewhere in EU non-discrimination law. It argues that the Work-life Balance Directive should be regarded as forming a new branch of EU non-discrimination law. Such a characterization will be important for its interpretation by the Court of Justice. This is also significant for our understanding of how EU non-discrimination law is evolving.

This report analyses and compares European Union (EU) law, with a focus on the Employment Equality Directive and related case law, and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), in the wider context of international human rights law, to establish how they address disability equality and non-discrimination. The report identifies particular areas where the approaches of the UN and the EU to disability equality and non-discrimination law are compatible, and it also identifies the areas where compatibility appears to be lacking.

The focus of this synthesis report is disability assessment, and specifically how disability is assessed in the context of a variety of benefits and support schemes across European states. Assessment of disability is widely used to determine eligibility for entitlements, services and benefits. This synthesis report explores different aspects of disability assessment from a European perspective. The report is structured as follows. Part I of the report follows on from this introduction to explore various aspects and dimensions to disability assessment mechanisms from a generic perspective. On the basis of a literature search, this section first seeks to identify and discuss various different approaches to assessing disability. Part I concludes by considering the guidance that the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, linked to the CRPD, has issued on disability assessment in its Concluding Observations to States Parties. Part II of the report explains the methodology used to collect information from ANED country experts relating to national disability assessments and provides a short overview of the overall findings. Part III contains the synthesis based on the information provided by a number of ANED country experts, making use of the template on national disability assessment mechanisms. In Part IV, elements of assessment mechanisms which can be regarded as good practice are identified, and the impact of the CRPD, as well as the compatibility of various assessment methods with the CRPD, are discussed. It is worth noting that elements of the overall evaluation that determine eligibility for a particular benefit which are not directly or indirectly related to disability, such as an individual’s history of social security contributions, are not considered in this synthesis report, although they may be covered in the related country reports.

The report provides a disability perspective on the European Pillar of Social Rights. Taking the Social Pillar principles as a starting point, it advocates for a strong disability mainstreaming approach throughout the developing policy framework. The full participation and equality of people with disabilities should not be limited to disability-specific policy proposals but, like gender equality, should be considered in all relevant policies and initiatives of the European Union. This report provides a starting point from which to achieve this within discussions on the Social Pillar. The Social Pillar is an important development for the EU that renews its focus on effective rights for EU citizens. Its three core themes – equal opportunities and access to the labour market, fair working conditions and social protection and inclusion – are all relevant to people with disabilities and each area raises important questions about disability rights. Those rights are established not only by EU law but also in international law under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to which the EU is a party. This report represents a substantial work of synthesis, arising from a European Commission request to the Academic network of European disability experts (ANED) in 2016. It has been produced by the collective effort of more than 40 authors, including country experts, topic experts and thematic rapporteurs. The result is a compendium work of reference that covers all of the 20 principles of the Social Pillar before driving deeper into an analysis of selected themes. Further evidence and examples are provided in individual country reports on these themes, from EU Member States and Associated Countries, which are all published on the ANED website.