The importance of including everyone

It seems blindingly obvious to me that mentally ill people should be allowed to vote and participate in politics, which makes it quite hard to write about as the risk of stating the obvious is quite big. To keep it simple, let's first look at what international law and recommendations say. The FRA report on voting rights for people with disabilities or mental illness tries to answer that same question. They find that although international law legally protects the right to vote, they make an exception for mental incapacity which is seen as a reasonable ground to deny people the right to vote. However, between 2004 and 2006 a bit of a turnaround has happened in the attitude to mentally ill people's rights. I found some statistics here that show that Scottish awareness and stigma tackling campaigns helped to improve people's attitude to people with mental health problems. 2006 is also when the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) took place, and FRA quotes a number of Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers to Member States concerning this topic. One of the recommendations, Rec(2006)5 of 5 April 2006 I like especially because it's straightforward in stating the democratic principle this is about (even if it talks about people with disabilities rather than specifically with mental health problems):

"The participation of all citizens in political and public life and the democratic process is essential for the development of democratic societies. Society needs to reflect the diversity of its citizens and benefit from their varied experience and knowledge. It is therefore important that people with disabilities can exercise their rights to vote and to participate in such activities."

In one of the next posts I will try to explain the concepts of legal and mental capacity, which are important to understanding how rights, control over one's life, and making decisions work legally for mentally ill or mentally handicapped people. Based on a judging that a person is legally incapable people could automatically lose the right to vote. Although in some cases a person may genuinely be unable to vote - a person who is severely mentally handicapped, for instance - to have the right to vote taken away automatically for all people who are considered unable to make wise decisions about their own life, even if only in some areas, is a dramatic measure. This is demonstrated by a case that came before the European Court of Human Rights, Alajos Kiss v. Hungary, also mentioned in the FRA report. He was placed under partial guardianship because of his manic depression and subsequently lost his right to vote, as stipulated in article 70(5) of the Hungarian constitution. The European Court found this to be improportional and argued that such restrictions should be applied very carefully, especially if applied to a "particularly vulnerable group in society, who have suffered considerable discrimination in the past".

The story of the "considerable discrimination" that the Court refers to is a sad and frustrating one of involuntary electroshocks, bullying, and locking people into institutions which only serve to worsen their conditions. You may well have seen One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest - here's a review about whether that film is realistic in its depiction of mental hospitals. The film depicts some rather extreme examples of patient abuse, as may be expected from a film - how else are they going to get viewers? Nevertheless, as the author of the review notes, the film was helpful in bringing attention to unethical patient treatment.

The previous maltreatment of mentally ill people is a testament to what can happen if people are excluded from decisions that concern themselves. A more modern example is the Work Capability Assessment, which I helped to organise a debate about during my internship for MindWise. See report; the authors explain that the decisions made regarding the WCA are intransparent and not evidence-based. Luckily in this case people are clearly voicing their opinions; whether they are listened to is a next question.


Besides these political and moral arguments for why mentally ill people's rights to vote and participate should be honoured, participation also has psychological benefits. It makes sense; having control over your own life and noticing that other people take you serious is crucial to building self-confidence which in turn makes you feel happier. This is discussed in detail in an article by Lynn M. Sanders, "The Psychological Benefits of Political Participation."


It is not just for the benefit of mentally ill people, but also for democracy itself that inclusion is crucial. If mentally ill people are automatically excluded from politics, a corrupt politician could simply get their political opponents sectioned (he doesn't agree with me so he must be crazy!!) For an amusing, not entirely fictional example read The Unlikely Genius of Dr Cuthbert Kambazuma (Set in Zimbabwe). The same goes with not allowing prisoners the right to vote (Northern Irish political terrorist prisoners being a controversial example).