“Skalbes” sounds the alarm: the crisis hotline may become unsafe for callers 0 10

The organization points out that the decision is being promoted without proper assessment of the consequences and without broad consultations with industry professionals, creating risks to the safety of people in crisis situations — including in cases of suicidal threats and violence.

“Skalbes” emphasizes that the unified psycho-emotional support number 116 123 is a harmonized social services number of the European Union, operational in all EU countries, similar to the emergency number 112. Its aim is to provide every person, regardless of location, with anonymous, free, and immediate assistance in crisis situations.

So far, the operation of the crisis hotline 116 123 in Latvia has been provided by a non-governmental organization with years of experience in helping people at risk of suicide, victims of violence, and other vulnerable groups.

The crisis intervention model used is based on the work of specially trained professionals, regular training, supervision, and strict ethical frameworks that comply with international recommendations for effective and person-centered support.

International practices and human rights standards highlight the important role of non-governmental organizations in preventing violence and providing crisis assistance, “Skalbes” notes.

International studies show that the institutional environment significantly reduces people's willingness to seek help in a crisis. The World Health Organization indicates that fear of involuntary treatment, data tracking, and connections with psychiatric institutions hinder people from being open, and between 30% and 60% of individuals with suicidal thoughts do not disclose them in an institutional setting.

The American Psychological Association emphasizes that especially men in such conditions are more likely to avoid seeking help. Furthermore, Grevio recommendations stipulate that services for victims of violence should be anonymous and independent of the police and medical system.

Practice shows that anonymity is not a formality but a necessary condition for a person in crisis to even consider seeking help, “Skalbes” emphasizes.

Experts note that the change in management will most affect those who seek help exclusively in an anonymous and safe environment. These are victims of violence, individuals with suicidal thoughts, men with emotional difficulties, as well as members of LGBTQIA+ communities, migrants, and people with disabilities.

In practice, it is the ability to maintain anonymity that determines whether a person dares to call. There is a high risk that the number of calls will decrease not because there will be fewer crises, but because people will no longer feel safe when seeking help, “Skalbes” believes.

The organization also points out serious shortcomings in the decision-making process. There is still no publicly available independent analysis of risks to human rights and safety, there is no clearly defined transition plan, and there have been no open consultations with industry professionals regarding the potential impact on public trust in the support service.

Although alternative models for providing the service have been proposed that would allow for the preservation of quality and anonymity even with a limited budget, these solutions have not yet been taken into account in decision-making, the organization notes.

Experts emphasize that the foundation of the crisis assistance system is trust, safety, and anonymity. As “Skalbes” indicates, decisions affecting the availability of such services should be based on professional assessment and international human rights commitments, especially regarding violence prevention and mental health.

In a crisis moment, people need a safe space where they can seek help without fear. Anonymity in crisis support is not a privilege but a necessary condition for saving a person's life, “Skalbes” emphasizes.