Spain's mental health system faces a critical contradiction between international human rights standards, notably the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and the continued practice of involuntary treatment under Article 763 of the Civil Procedure Law (LEC). This law permits deprivation of liberty based on a 'mental disorder,' clashing with Spain's recent legal reforms (Law 8/2021) that champion supported decision-making. This article critically examines the coercive realities masked by Article 763's procedural rhetoric and proposes pathways for rights-based reform. Employing a sociolegal methodology, the study combines doctrinal analysis with qualitative insights from users and survivors of psychiatry and key stakeholders, including clinicians and prosecutors. Findings reveal that judicial oversight often functions as a superficial formality, while the lived experience of patients is dominated by coercive practices, regardless of the legal grounds for admission. The analysis identifies a systemic erosion of informed consent, where admission is treated as de facto consent for treatment; the illusory nature of voluntary discharge; and the persistent clinical reliance on implicit dangerousness criteria. The article advocates for a multi-layered transformation, beginning with the repeal of Article 763 and the amendment of Law 41/2002 (Patient Autonomy) to mandate written, intervention-specific consent for all psychiatric procedures. It calls for a systemic reorientation towards community-based care, strengthened judicial oversight, mandatory professional training, and a cultural shift that prioritises the dignity, will, and preferences of all persons, aligning Spanish law and practice with its international human rights obligations.
María Laura Serra (Wed,) studied this question.