When Rules Collide: Vaping, Rights and Mental Health Institutions

Restrictive practices in mental health hospitals, such as smoking bans, aim to create safe and therapeutic environments but can inadvertently restrict patient autonomy and reduce engagement. Smoking has long been a coping mechanism for many individuals with mental health conditions, and its prohibition often exacerbates stress and agitation among patients. In recent years, vaping has emerged as a potential harm-reduction tool that offers a compromise between public health objectives and individual patient needs. This paper critically examines vaping as an alternative to smoking in mental health hospitals, exploring its ethical, clinical, and policy dimensions. Through an analysis of existing evidence and practices, the discussion highlights the benefits of vaping in reducing behavioural incidents, addressing stigma, and fostering patient autonomy, while also considering potential risks, such as misuse and regulatory gaps. By framing vaping as a pragmatic approach to restrictive practices, the paper underscores its potential to improve therapeutic environments and contribute to more inclusive and patient-centred care. Recommendations for policy development, staff training, and future research directions are proposed to guide the responsible implementation of vaping in mental health settings.