Regulatory Framework · 2.5 Mental Health and Vulnerable Groups

Partial compliance.

Mexico has a relevant constitutional and legal basis for requiring inclusive and non-discriminatory services. The Constitution recognizes equality, non-discrimination, and the right to health protection. The Federal Law to Prevent and Eliminate Discrimination directly strengthens this indicator because it does not merely establish a general anti-discrimination framework; it expressly prohibits stigmatizing or denying rights to people with addictions.

The General Health Law provides the health-system connection in the evidence block. Its provisions on health services, mental health, addictions, informed consent, and user rights support the finding that care for substance users should be provided under rights-based and non-exclusionary standards. NOM-028-SSA2-2009 translates part of that framework into criteria for prevention, treatment, referral, admission, discharge, and addiction control.

The contextual evidence also helps frame the problem. ENADIS 2022 identifies discrimination as a structural barrier in Mexico, although it does not specifically measure treatment of substance users within health or addiction services. The 2020-2024 Health Sector Programme provides historical context on equity and universal access, but it is not a current protocol or specific operational evidence.

The indicator does not reach full compliance because the available evidence does not confirm a homogeneous and evaluated system of stigma-free care for substance users. The block does not verify mandatory substance-user-specific protocols, anti-discrimination staff training, effective accessibility, reasonable accommodations, complaint and remedy mechanisms, sanctions, dignified-treatment monitoring, or state-level outcomes.

At the territorial level, Mexico City, Puebla, Oaxaca, Chiapas, and the complementary states remain probatory gaps. These gaps do not prove discrimination or absence of services, but they prevent validation of local implementation of inclusive standards in health, mental health, addiction, or harm-reduction services. Consequently, Mexico demonstrates an important legal and normative basis, but not sufficient evidence of homogeneous and verifiable national implementation.