A resident of a Jerusalem corridor community claims she took part in a protest outside the office of Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked and as a result, was committed to a psychiatric facility against her will.

‘A’ took part in a protest outside the Justice Minister’s office in Jerusalem, part of a protest vigil maintained outside the office. She remained on the site for four days, demanding to speak with the minister. The minister did indeed agree to speak with her briefly.

During their brief meeting she concentrated on matters pertaining to the judicial system. A short time before the meeting, according to ‘A’, a social worker was sent to meet her and she then referred the case to a psychiatrist. The attorney representing ‘A’ claims the social worker led to her client being admitted to a psychiatric facility against her will, Yediot Yerushalayim reports.

The report adds that Yediot Yerushalayim obtained a copy of the letter sent by the social worker to a psychiatrist, which states “According to the report given to me by an employee of the Justice Ministry, in recent days, ‘A’ decided she is going to remain at the entrance to the ministry”. The social worker concluded “I am asking for your immediate intervention”.

A short time later ‘A’ was taken for a psychiatric evaluation during which it was determined that ‘A’ is in a “paranoid psychotic state’ and therefore, she behaves without judgement”. This resulted in her hospitalization against her will.

‘A’ managed to hide out at the home of a friend for a number of days until police tracked her down via a call to the public for assistance in locating a missing person. A son of the friend saw this on Facebook and notified police of the woman’s whereabouts. After a number of days of being committed against her will she was released following a decision from the district psychiatric board, which ruled she is not in an active psychotic state.

The committee also ruled the decision to commit her against her will was illegal, and attorney Inbal Brown, an expert in such matters adds, “in an effort to justify their actions they also stated ‘A’ is a threat to her own well-being, which was also not true”. Brown also has harsh words for the actions of the social worker and others involved.

The Ministry of Health released the following statement: “Medical confidentiality may not be applicable in this specific case. In principle, instructions for an urgent examination is a medical condition that requires immediate testing and investigation. Since this is a forced process, all actions possible are taken to make sure the person taken by force is indeed the relevant person. In cases in which the identity of an individual is not known with certainty, contact information that may assist in identifying the subject is given to the appropriate staff. This is done towards avoiding mistakes resulting in examining the wrong person”.

(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)