The Kerala High Court has asked the state government to examine whether mental health centres in the state should be renamed to help reduce the stigma associated with mental illness.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Devan Ramachandran and Basant Balaji issued the direction on August 21 after amicus curiae Sathyasree Priya raised the issue before the court.
The amicus curiae suggested renaming the centres “Institutes of Behavioural Management” or adopting another name that would avoid the stigma associated with the term “Mental Health Centres”.
The court, however, clarified that it was not proposing any particular name. “We are not suggesting a particular name, though we have recorded the input of the learned Amicus Curiae,” the Bench said.
The court asked the government to examine why such institutions should continue to carry the “Mental Health” tag when hospitals treating physical ailments are not similarly named.
“Other hospitals are not called Centres of Physical Health; and therefore, one justifiably cannot comprehend why these Centres should have the tag of being ‘Mental Health’ Centres,” the court observed.
The Bench acknowledged that these institutions function under the Mental Health Care Act, but questioned whether this necessarily meant they should continue to carry a label that could contribute to stigma.
“Since this is a matter of policy, it is for the Government to initiate the first move and inform us,” the court said.
The direction came after the amicus curiae told the court that the issue had assumed greater significance in modern times. The Bench noted that the stigma associated with mental health centres was evident even during visits to such facilities by the judges over the preceding two weeks.
The court directed the competent government authority to consider the suggestion and inform it of its decision. The matter has been adjourned to September 15.
Making clear that the issue was not adversarial, the Bench said its primary concern was the welfare of patients.
“We make it clear that this issue cannot be treated as an adversarial one,” the court said, adding that vulnerable patients should be protected from stigma and that the centres should be viewed as institutions serving “community welfare and development, rather than for a particular kind of illness.”