Not just Hesse: Police check mentally ill people on the way to the “Register for Mentally Ill Violent Offenders”?

dossier

[Petition] Gesundheitsdaten in Gefahr “The Hessian police systematically go through all the people in their databases for whom they have stored evidence of a “mental and behavioral disorder”. In this way, she wants to identify risks of violent acts and, for example, plan approaches to those at risk or surveillance. Other measures would be needed to support those affected.“Mentally abnormal people, those who write a lot, violent criminals” is the name of a task force that has existed at the Hessian State Criminal Police Office since February 2025. (…) There is currently a PSYV notice for around 1,600 people in Hesse, writes the Ministry of the Interior there upon request. (…) According to the Robert Koch Institute, 40.4 percent of adults in Germany received a diagnosis of a mental disorder in 2023…" From theContribution by Anna Biselli from July 8th, 2025 in network politics externer Link (“Hesse: Police check 1,600 mentally ill people” with further information on planned stigmatization – see more about this as well as protests beginning in more and more federal states:

The renewed mental health law in North Rhine-Westphalia is intended to provide not only the police, but also the immigration authorities with information about hospital admissions of refugees
“A new law in North Rhine-Westphalia is intended to not only provide the police with more information about people who have been admitted to a clinic. The immigration authorities should also learn more about refugees in psychiatric hospitals - so that they can better plan deportations.
North Rhine-Westphalia wants to renew its Mental Health Act (PsychKG). On the one hand, this concerns when people can be involuntarily admitted to a psychiatric clinic. On the other hand, there are also offers of help and support for people with mental illness. In Germany, this is regulated at the federal state level.
In North Rhine-Westphalia, as in other federal states, there is another topic at the center of discussions: the exchange of data about people who are admitted to a clinic. Particularly if the admission was due to an established danger to others, i.e. because there is concern that a person could be dangerous to others due to their condition. And in North Rhine-Westphalia it is also about deportations.
On Thursday, experts spoke about the draft law in the state parliament's health committee. Numerous statements from clinics, social psychiatric services, associations and those affected expressed concerns.
Hospitalization is not a punitive measure
“Here, in medical and psychiatric contexts, the police authority has an extended right to have a say in the flow of data up to and including dismissal,” writes the Free Welfare Association of North Rhine-Westphalia. It is a working group that includes, among others, the Red Cross, Caritas and Workers' Welfare. Hospital placement under the PsychKG is “not a criminal measure”. The criticism from independent welfare care relates to a new regulation as to who must be informed by the clinics when a person who has previously been forcibly admitted is discharged. In addition to confidants or the social psychiatric service, the local police should also be informed in certain cases in the future. (…)
Many experts see it as a problem that the law creates the impression that mental illnesses have to be dealt with with security measures. According to the Free Welfare Association of North Rhine-Westphalia, this serves “the narrative of the ‘dangerous, mentally ill, violent criminals’. However, mental illness and acts of violence are only directly related to a small extent.” (…)
The immigration authorities should always know where a refugee is so that they can deport them at any time. Experts are outraged.
Psychiatric clinics should “not become places from which deportations take place on a regular basis,” writes the Action for the Mentally Ill. “Hospitals should remain protected spaces,” says the statement from the association, which brings together members of the Bundestag and experts from psychiatric care. (…)
Doctors are not deportation aides
Deportations from hospitals are already happening today. During a deportation flight to Afghanistan in July 2025, at least three of the 81 people affected were in a psychiatric clinic immediately beforehand. At the beginning of 2025, the police picked up a suicidal refugee from a clinic in Osnabrück in order to deport him to Gambia…”Contribution by Anna Biselli from October 2, 2026 in Netzpolitik (“Mental health law in North Rhine-Westphalia: data for deportation”
- See also the dossier:Deportation from the clinic in Rickling (SH) after a suicide attempt renews the call for a ban on deportations from hospitals
Data exchange about mentally ill people: Which federal states want to change their laws
"... When can a person be placed in a psychiatric clinic against their will? What help are people with mental illnesses entitled to? What rights does a person who has been forcibly housed have when it comes to visits, communication and other things? Lower Saxony and North Rhine-Westphalia are currently discussing a reform of their mental illness laws (PsychKG), which regulate these questions. The state laws, which differ slightly in name and content in each federal state, deal with something different in their most recent revision Topic: It's about the exchange of data about people who could pose a danger. The Hessian state parliament had already passed such new rules in December 2025. Psychiatric clinics there must now inform the responsible police authority if a person who was previously forcibly detained is released - at least if they were admitted as a danger to others and could theoretically pose a danger from them again in the future “The regulations are quite different and have received a lot of criticism - both from medical experts and from those affected and data protection officers. Critics fear, among other things, further stigmatization of sick people, that the relationship of trust with doctors will be damaged and that the focus will shift from help to general suspicion (…) But what does it look like in other federal states? An overview by Anna Biselli from July 9, 2026 at Netzpolitik.org
20 organizations and individuals are calling for the new version of the PsychKHG: No sensitive health data to be handed over to the police in Lower Saxony!
“Stop discrimination by law against people with psychiatric diagnoses in Lower Saxony
Lower Saxony, under the red-green coalition, is currently planning a stricter new version of the PsychKHG (Lower Saxony Act on Help and Protective Measures for the Mentally Ill). TheThe draft bill is expected to be passed in the state parliament shortly become. It means the end of medical confidentiality and puts people with psychiatric diagnoses under general suspicion.
According to the draft law (Drs. 19/9722), health facilities should pass on sensitive health data of people with psychiatric diagnoses to police authorities upon suspicion. These include the state of health and clinical picture, the course of treatment and treatment content (§38, 1-3). The prerequisite is sufficient evidence that a person poses a significant danger to otherscould become.Specifically, §38, 1-3 deals with three stages according to which clinics and social psychiatric services can, should or ultimately have to transmit data to the local police.
The process is part of a nationwide push by politicians and security authorities against people with psychiatric diagnoses. It goes back to the demand for a register for “mentally ill people”.CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann this is ostensibly to prevent possible acts of violence. This means that people who are particularly vulnerable are generally declared a security risk. SuchForecasts of a potential “imminent” danger have already found their way into police laws in recent years and have led to a worrying advance in police powers.
Although politicians have now avoided the term “register” after massive criticism, the now planned mandatory reporting and handing over of personal health data to police authorities continues to in fact represent the central recording of vulnerable people. (…)
The Lower Saxony approach is part of a general trend towards increasingly derogatory, anti-disability policies.
Similar legislative proposals are currently being pushed forward in several federal states, and at the same time police authorities are searching their databases for people they consider suspicious. All people who are already listed there with the note “mental and behavioral disorder” (PSYV) are currently being checked by the police (link to overview document). Lower Saxony has also initiated a nationwide initiative through the Federal Council to facilitate the exchange of health data and adapt laws…”Press release from April 14, 2026 from the Fundamental Rights Committee
New mental health law in North Rhine-Westphalia: “Harmful to dangerous”
“People with experience in psychiatry as well as social psychiatric services criticize the fact that in some cases information about people who have been forcibly committed should flow to the police
Hesse already has one, in Lower Saxony it is currently in the state parliament, and now the government in North Rhine-Westphalia has also presented a draft: It is about new laws for the mentally ill in the federal states. For example, they regulate what help there should be for people with mental illnesses. But also when people can be admitted to a clinic against their will. The current wave of mental health laws (PsychKG) addresses another question: When can and must clinics, social psychiatric services and the police exchange data about people? (…)
The reason for these new regulations were acts of violence in recent years, in which the media quickly reported that the perpetrators were suspected of being ill after the crime. Since then, a federal-state working group on “early detection and threat management” has been working on suggestions for how different agencies can exchange information. If the black-green state government in North Rhine-Westphalia has its way, various actors should work together more closely and in a more binding manner in the future. This particularly affects the regional social psychiatric services that are at the heart of the assistance system. (…)
The new draft law contains additional institutions with which cooperation is required in the future. Most of them do not belong to the health sector: these are, for example, regulatory and police authorities, reception facilities for asylum seekers and immigration authorities. (…)
The State Working Group for Social Psychiatric Services of North Rhine-Westphalia is critical of this in its statement on the draft law. It must be borne in mind that “the objectives and tasks of the clinics and social psychiatric services are to be assessed differently than the tasks of the security authorities,” writes the state working group. “Mixing must be avoided” and collaboration must under no circumstances “be at the expense of mentally ill people”. The association is equally critical of the planned data exchange with the police, immigration authorities and others. A new paragraph on placements, i.e. involuntary admissions, stipulates that other authorities should be informed in certain cases. According to the draft, this should occur if a local police was involved in a referral due to an assumed danger to others. (…)
“Even if risk registers are fortunately excluded, the focus here is shifted away from help and treatment towards control and recording, which will increase stigmatization effects and reduce the willingness to treat required,” says the statement. (…)
Luan Engelns from the State Association of Experienced Psychiatrists in North Rhine-Westphalia is also “very critical” of the planned data exchange and considers it “harmful to dangerous”. (…) In the past, however, the police ignored information in advance, criticizes Engelns. Now “scapegoats are being sought in the name of security and marginalized groups are being monitored, while the police and psychiatry are demanding more rights without using the existing ones in a way that actually prevents acts of violence.” Since the new paragraphs do not specify exactly what information should flow between the police, clinics and others, Engelns writes: "It is completely unclear what data is reported, in which databases it is stored and what the police use it for. Does this also include diagnoses and treatment courses? This is highly sensitive health data." The personal rights of those affected would be violated and “in practice there will be a register without calling it a register”. (…)
“People with mental illnesses are generally declared to be potential security risks,” writes SPD state parliament member and health politician Rodion Bakum, who himself worked as a specialist in psychiatry and psychotherapy. "This is technically wrong, socially dangerous and constitutionally questionable. Mental crises can affect anyone and everyone. Anyone who places those affected under general suspicion does not create security, but rather exacerbates the spiral of violence," said Bakum. He sees the bill as a shift “away from help and towards suspicion”. (…)
The professional society [the German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Neurology (DGPPN) itself writes in its recommendations that medical confidentiality is a “great asset that builds trust and promotes therapy.” (…) There will be an expert hearing on the planned law in mid-April.” Contribution by Anna Biselli from April 3, 2026 at Netzpolitik.org
Data sharing about mentally ill people: The return to registration
"More than 50 years ago there was a dispute about whether authorities should collect data on people who were considered mentally ill. But while a consensus was formed back then for more participation and against stigmatization, something has changed today. (...) The discussion goes back to the 1970s. But a look into the past shows us what was different back then and raises the question of why we seem to have forgotten the lessons from this history today. The current discussion gained momentum the demand of CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann about a year ago, in December 2024. “I mean, we have created large grids for right-wing extremists, for Islamists, but obviously not for mentally ill violent criminals,” said Linnemann in an interview with Deutschlandfunk. “It is not enough to create registers for right-wing extremists and Islamists, but in the future this should also apply to the mentally ill.” (…) Linnemann's demand for government data collection was preceded by an attack on the Magdeburg Christmas market, in which six people died and more than 300 others were injured. (…) Afterwards, many people looked for explanations and ways to prevent such terrible events. But Linnemann and others caused considerable damage by placing mental illness and violence in a context that was unrecognizable. Because one thing is clear: the perpetrator Taleb A. would not have been recorded in a register for violent criminals with mental illnesses. (…) The registry idea originally spread by Linnemann initially seemed off the table after an outcry from people with experience in psychiatry and medical experts.Almost like the previous register discussion from 2018 in Bavaria, when the CSU state government reformed the mental health assistance law there. Originally, a so-called accommodation file was to be introduced on this train. “We were completely blown away,” says Brigitte Richter, looking back today. “They wanted to introduce a register in which compulsory admissions were recorded, which authorities such as the police could then have access to for five years.” The state government wrote into the law the aim of these compulsory admissions: “The aim of the placement is to avert danger.” Only then, as a “further goal,” was the improvement in the condition of those admitted. (…) Richter, who is now 76 years old, has had psychiatric experience for more than half a century. For many years she has been involved, among other things, in the Pandora association for self-help for people with mental problems and emotional stress. She stubbornly confronts grievances. “Pressure creates counter-pressure,” is what Richter calls it. When the Bavarian Mental Health Assistance Act was reformed eight years ago, this apparently worked after numerous protests. The paragraphs on the “accommodation file” were deleted from the draft. (…)But something is different than back then in Bavaria. “It’s a good thing that no one talks about registers anymore,” says Dr. Kirsten Kappert Gonther. The specialist in psychiatry and psychotherapy has been a member of the Bundestag for the Greens and chairwoman of the Health Committee since 2017. A sensitivity has developed that registers are something harmful.“But the basic idea behind the registers,” says Kappert-Gonther, limiting the optimism, “unfortunately it has not yet been overcome.” While politicians are now avoiding the term register, they are looking for other ways to make data about mentally ill people accessible to authorities. The Conference of Health Ministers decided last summer that the legal framework as well as necessary adjustments and responsibilities should be examined, for example in order to exchange health data and findings from the security authorities. The Conference of Interior Ministers is also discussing the topic; the keyword for this is “integrated risk management”. According to a resolution from June 2025, the aim is to “make the information relevant to them from the health authorities available to the security authorities”. A “joint risk assessment” must be carried out in the event of relevant information. (…) While a federal-state working group on “early detection and threat management” continues to work on the topic, some states are already creating facts when exchanging data. Two basic directions can be observed. Hesse, for example, passed a new law on assistance for the mentally ill last December. This obliges doctors to report discharged patients to the police if they had previously been forcibly admitted because of fears of danger to others and if they could become a danger again “in the foreseeable future without further medical treatment”. Lower Saxony is taking a similar path; the corresponding law will soon be debated in the state parliament. Hamburg, on the other hand, relies primarily on event-related action instead of mandatory reporting and data exchange.The basic idea in the Hanseatic city model is that the interior, social and judicial authorities can each initiate a case conference to discuss possible help and consequences for a person. And always when they see a need for action that exceeds their own skills and capacities. (…) “You won’t be able to get rid of people’s fear,” says Brigitte Richter. (…) But crises are usually not a permanent condition, emphasizes Richter. And you can tell that she's actually had enough of the recurring discussions about violence and supposed danger over the long time she's been involved. “If we only ever talk about mental illness and violence, it gets stuck,” she says. "Even if we say that mental illness and violence have nothing to do with each other. What remains in our minds is the connection: violence, mentally ill, violence, mentally ill." Something always gets stuck, no matter how hard you try to differentiate. (…) “I would like us to be seen as people who also have our quirks. And you can even do something about some of these quirks,” says Richter. (…) Richter even received the Federal Cross of Merit in 2023 for her commitment. Such a commitment to people who experience psychological stress in our society will continue to be needed - whether as a medical professional, someone with psychiatric experience or a neighbor. Precisely because the fight for human rights-oriented care has made progress in the past decades, it is up to everyone to prevent this development from going backwards again..." Contribution by Anna Biselli from February 7, 2026 at Netzpolitik.org
Police dealing with mentally ill people: diagnosis risk. The Berlin police want to capture potentially dangerous people with mental illness.
“Civil rights activists see a fatal development.
Berlin Police Chief Barbara Slowik Meisel has announced that the police want to identify people with mental illnesses who they classify as potentially dangerous in a more targeted manner in the future and deter them from committing potential crimes. Slowik Meisel told the German Press Agency that the police had developed a system “how we can identify these people in good time in order to prevent the most serious crimes possible.” Specifically, she announced a pilot project that will be implemented starting this April. A “three-stage model” is therefore planned: In a first step, police officers should identify “people with risk potential” and evaluate their dangerousness using “short and concise criteria,” said Slowik Meisel. In case of doubt, the personal details would be forwarded to a central point at the responsible police department, where a risk analysis would be carried out. In the third step, the State Criminal Police Office and psychotherapeutic expertise would then be called in to advise on possible further measures - from a case conference to the involvement of the social psychiatric service to compulsory hospitalization ordered by a judge…”Article by Timm Kühn from February 3, 2026 in the taz online
New dragnet search with Palantir? The federal government is examining cross-state analysis of police data on mental health
"In response to a small question from left-wing MP Evelyn Schötz, the Federal Ministry of the Interior provides current figures for the storage of so-called personal information (PHW) relating to mental health in German police databases. In the nationwide information system Inpol, 16,043 people are currently labeled as "mental and behavioral disorder", 3,810 as "risk of suicide" and 417,229 as "narcotics user". The According to the federal government, the PHW is awarded after an individual case assessment with the result that the note is necessary for the protection of the person or for the self-protection of police forces (...) For the PHW "mental and behavioral disorder" to be recorded, there must be a medically diagnosed mental illness. For "danger of suicide", "indications" of a possible suicide risk can be included in this prognosis As an example, the Ministry of the Interior cites searches in which police officers “can sustain injuries from a device or are at risk of unpredictable behavior caused by narcotics.” The aim of the request was also to find out whether this sensitive data could be included in automated analysis systems in the future - for example in the US software from Palantir, which is already used in Bavaria, North Rhine-Westphalia, Hesse and soon also in Baden-Württemberg (…) The program can currently only be used to prevent crimes. The police laws in the respective countries have been changed for this purpose.Between the lines, the answer to the small question suggests that the inclusion of PHW in a nationwide VeRA is not ruled out. The example of Hesse shows what such problematic data links could look like in practice. There, the police checked around 1,600 people with mental illnesses to assess possible future threats. In addition to the PHW, information from other sources was brought together, analyzed and evaluated according to certain criteria. This form of dragnet search with specially protected health data could also be carried out using risk analysis software - after the police law has been changed accordingly. (…) “We must not become dependent on a company whose founder and boss is promoting a fascist social restructuring in the USA,” criticizes the questioner Evelyn Schötz to “nd”. The MP is also her group's mental health spokesperson. According to Schötz, security for people with mental illness does not come from surveillance and general suspicion, but rather from support and social participation.” Article by Matthias Monroy from August 12, 2025 in New Germany online
- See also our dossier:Big data in the police: (Not only) Hesse is (not only) looking for dangerous people with Palantir software
Mentally ill and under general suspicion – how the surveillance state is growing
“Mentally ill? Then you will soon be in the sights of the authorities. What began in Hesse with the examination of over 1,600 mentally ill people is now continuing nationwide: more and more state governments are reforming their mental health laws with the aim of expanding monitoring, data collection and access options. (…)
The new line: prevention through control
This is preceded by HesseDraft law - “Second Act to Amend the Mental Health Aid Act” - which provides for reporting requirements for discharges from psychiatric hospitals, new data transfers, expanded definitions of risk and an ever larger circle of potentially “conspicuous” people.At the same time, medical confidentiality is being further weakened and data protection officers and professional associations are being ignored. An illness certified by a doctor should be enough to be declared a risk - combined with massive encroachments on fundamental rights. The line is: stigma instead of help – “prevention” through control.
Not just Hesse – federal states are revising “mentally ill laws”
However, the whole thing is not just a Hessian problem - although one could ask oneself what is actually going on with Hesse. NSU 2.0, the new HessianAssembly law that provides for the collection of personal data by meeting leaders, police images and sound recordings and facilitated bans and dissolutions of meetings or the data analysis software "Hessendata“, which was overturned by the Federal Constitutional Court - all of this gives cause for concern for the federal state. (…)
Instead of examining the reasons for the increasing number of mental illnesses - stress, poverty, loneliness, work pressure, social insecurity - the sufferers are now being made scapegoats. Instead of dealing with the obviously right-wing background of the attack in Magdeburg, CDU politicians diverted the debate to mental illness. Carsten Linnemann even demanded itPsych register historically ill people , as if illness were to be equated with danger. (…) Particularly worrying: According to the police union magazine, around half of the people who are involved in police operationskilled become mentally ill. A lack of training and de-escalation repeatedly leads to deadly escalations…”Comment by Alexandra Baer from July 11th, 2025 on perspective online
Small request: storage of mental health references
"The Left Party wants to know what options there are today for police officers and security authorities to store information about mental health. In a small question (21/854), they also asked, among other things, how many people, according to the Federal Government's knowledge, have "characteristics related to mental health (including risk of suicide, addiction, etc.) stored by the police." Short message from the German Bundestag from July 15, 2025
- In theSmall request 21/854 “Reports about concerns about the collection and storage of data on people with mental illnesses by security authorities” states, among other things:"In December 2024, Carsten Linnemann, General Secretary of the CDU, spoke out in favor of an exchange between the security authorities and also with psychiatry, with psychotherapists and much more (...) He called for a register for the mentally ill as a lesson from the attack on the Magdeburg Christmas market (...). According to the questioners, this demand is in direct contradiction to human rights standards, in particular the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN-BRK), which Germany ratified in 2009, emphasizes that people with disabilities - including mental illnesses - must enjoy the right to freedom and security of person on an equal basis with others. The General Declaration of Human Rights and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) also prohibit the blanket collection of sensitive health data without an individual, legally verifiable basis According to the questioners, recording illnesses in a central register and classifying them as a security-relevant risk violates not only medical knowledge, but also constitutional principles such as the presumption of innocence, the principle of proportionality and the right to informational self-determination.(…) The German Society for Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Psychosomatics and Neurology (DGPPN) makes it clear in response to the demand for a register for mentally ill people: "People with mental illnesses are not generally more violent than people without mental illnesses. [...] Even in the group of terrorist violent criminals, the proportion of mentally ill people is not higher than in the general population" (…) In connection with the introduction of a register for mentally ill people, there is concern that the previous Destigmatization of those affected could be impaired (ibid.). People who consciously decide to seek medical and therapeutic support could refrain from making use of such offers of help in the future. A general recording could lead to those affected foregoing assistance out of concern for their data confidentiality in order not to be recorded in a register accessible to third parties...[The following are 26 detailed questions for the federal government about this]

Basic information:

CDU Hesse: Mentally ill people should therefore be recorded centrally - because they are supposedly so dangerous for the general public. See thatcorresponding draft law
Carsten Linnemann, the party's general secretary, also had one shortly before the turn of the year“Register for mentally ill violent offenders” required . In an interview he literally said that there were “grids for right-wing extremists and Islamists, but not for mentally ill violent criminals.”

See on the topic:

The postNot just Hesse: Police check mentally ill people - on the way to the “Register for mentally ill violent offenders”?appeared firstLabourNet Germany.