Social Prescribing and Faith-Based Community Organizations in Viet Nam: Where Could Community Partnerships Add Value, and What Would Inclusive, Voluntary Participation Require?
IMPLEMENTATION & PRACTICEVIET NAM CONTEXT
Social Prescribing and Faith-Based Community Organizations in Viet Nam: Where Could Community Partnerships Add Value, and What Would Inclusive, Voluntary Participation Require?
Imagine a community organization connected to a religious institution that runs a free weekly activity for local residents. People come to learn a skill, meet others and spend time together. The activity is open to the wider community and does not involve religious practice.
A healthcare worker hears about the program and thinks it might interest someone looking for a suitable community activity.
The person likes the idea but is not religious. Before deciding whether to attend, they ask a reasonable question: “Will I be expected to take part in any religious activities?”
The organizer explains that the sessions do not involve worship or religious instruction. Participation is voluntary, and visitors can learn more about the activity before making a decision.
Another person might prefer an activity held somewhere else, regardless of what the program offers. Both choices deserve respect.
This hypothetical situation raises an important question for social prescribing in Viet Nam. Religious organizations and faith-connected communities may already contribute to social life through charitable activities, education, practical assistance and opportunities for people to gather. Some of these activities could be relevant to community-connected care.
However, having a religious identity does not automatically make an organization a suitable social prescribing partner. Nor does someone's interest in an activity organized by a religious institution mean that they want religious guidance.
The opportunity is to understand whether particular community activities can support people's interests and needs while respecting freedom of belief, voluntary participation and the legal responsibilities of the organizations involved.
Faith-Based Community Support Is Not a Single Model
Social prescribing connects people with non-clinical activities, groups and services that may support their health and well-being. The World Health Organization's 2022 implementation toolkit emphasizes adapting these connections to individual circumstances and available community resources.[1]
The term faith-based community organization can describe several different arrangements.
Some organizations provide activities shaped by religious values. Others offer charitable, educational or social programs that welcome people from different religious backgrounds or no religious background. An ordinary community activity may also take place on religious premises without including religious content.
These distinctions matter because the purpose of an activity, the identity of its organizer and the experience of participants are not necessarily the same.
The National Academy for Social Prescribing (NASP) in England recognizes this diversity. Its work on faith and social prescribing considers support informed by religious principles, activities welcoming people of all faiths and none, and secular programs operating in religious settings.[2]
This international perspective is useful, but it does not establish a legal category or authorization under Vietnamese law.
In Viet Nam, a religious organization, an affiliated religious organization, a religious establishment, a belief establishment and a separately established charitable or social-service organization may have different legal statuses and responsibilities.
A community program associated with a religious institution may also be operated by another legally established entity.
Before considering cooperation, it is necessary to understand who organizes the activity, who manages the premises, what the program is authorized to provide and which organization is responsible for its delivery.
The term faith-based is useful for discussing potential cooperation. It should not replace an assessment of an organization's actual legal and operational status.
Why Might Faith-Connected Organizations Be Relevant?
Religious communities can be important parts of people's social lives.
For some individuals, religious participation provides opportunities to maintain relationships, volunteer, learn and contribute to community activities. Organizations connected with religious communities may also provide lawful charitable, educational or practical assistance to people beyond their own membership.
These activities may create opportunities for cooperation with healthcare and community services.
An established organization may already have meeting spaces, volunteers, regular programs and relationships with local residents. It may understand the interests of its participants and have experience bringing people together.
However, these potential strengths should not be assumed to apply to every organization.
A group may be familiar and welcoming to regular members but less accessible to people from other backgrounds. An established program may have limited space, inconvenient opening hours or expectations that some prospective participants find uncomfortable.
Religious affiliation alone does not establish trust, suitability or inclusiveness.
For social prescribing, the relevant question is what a particular activity offers, whether it is appropriate for the individual and whether participation is genuinely wanted.
An organization should neither be automatically selected for partnership because of its religious identity nor excluded solely because it has one.
What Can International Experience Tell Us?
Faith communities have become an area of growing interest within social prescribing in England.
In May 2025, the Good Faith Partnership announced a two-year initiative involving NASP, supported by the Sir Halley Stewart Trust. The initiative included establishing a Strategic Lead for Faith and Social Prescribing to strengthen relationships between faith communities and social prescribing systems.[3]
The work recognizes that faith-connected organizations may already offer activities relevant to community participation, practical support and well-being.
It also highlights the importance of cooperation between faith organizations, healthcare providers and other community services.
These relationships require more than identifying organizations willing to receive referrals. Participating groups need to understand what is expected of them, whether they have sufficient resources and how their activities fit within wider community support arrangements.
The English experience is relevant to Viet Nam because it shows how established community organizations may contribute to social prescribing without necessarily becoming healthcare providers.
However, the two countries have different legal systems, healthcare structures and approaches to regulating religious organizations.
A program involving NHS social prescribing link workers does not establish equivalent legal authority for Vietnamese religious organizations or healthcare professionals.
International experience should therefore inform local planning rather than provide a model to reproduce without adaptation.
What Does the Research Actually Support?
Research involving faith communities offers useful insights into partnership development, although evidence specifically addressing faith-based social prescribing remains limited.
A scoping review published in BMJ Public Health on January 27, 2026, examined how faith communities participated in the design and delivery of public health interventions addressing ethnic health inequalities in the United Kingdom.[4]
The review identified 16 eligible empirical studies published between 2014 and 2024.
Faith community involvement included partnerships, volunteer and peer roles, and the use of places of worship as settings for public health activities. Most interventions focused on health education and were delivered locally.
The authors identified trust, cultural alignment, supportive leadership and clearly defined responsibilities as factors that could facilitate engagement. Limited resources, mistrust, cultural differences and unequal power relationships were among the reported barriers.
Reported outcomes were more commonly psychosocial or related to engagement than to measurable behavioral or structural changes.
These findings offer practical lessons about working with community organizations. However, the review was not an evaluation of faith-based social prescribing in Viet Nam.
Nor did it establish that involving a religious organization automatically improves health outcomes.
A separate scoping review published in The Lancet Regional Health – Western Pacific in 2026 identified 55 sources on social prescribing and related community-connected approaches across the region, including 42 peer-reviewed studies and 13 gray-literature sources.[5]
The review found considerable variation in delivery models, funding, target populations and implementation arrangements. It also emphasized adapting approaches to local healthcare systems and community resources.
Only one of the included peer-reviewed studies came from Viet Nam.
Taken together, these findings support careful exploration of locally appropriate partnerships. They do not demonstrate that faith-based social prescribing is clinically effective, cost-effective or already established as a recognized service model in Viet Nam.
A community activity may be meaningful and worthwhile without having been proven to improve clinical outcomes. This distinction should remain central to any discussion of implementation.
Viet Nam's Current Legal Framework
Any proposal involving religious organizations in Viet Nam must begin with the applicable domestic legislation.
As of November 1, 2026, the principal legal framework remains the Law on Belief and Religion No. 02/2016/QH14, as amended, including by Law No. 84/2025/QH15, together with its applicable implementing regulations.[6]
Government Decree No. 95/2023/ND-CP, effective from March 30, 2024, provides further provisions and procedures for implementing the law.[7]
Decree No. 124/2025/ND-CP, effective from July 1, 2025, also addresses delegation, decentralization and the allocation of responsibilities under Viet Nam's two-level local government structure in matters involving ethnic affairs, belief and religion.[8]
These regulations matter because the competent authority for a particular activity or administrative procedure should be identified under the arrangements actually in force, rather than assumed from earlier institutional structures.
An important provision of the 2016 Law on Belief and Religion is Article 55, which addresses participation in educational, training, healthcare, social assistance, charitable and humanitarian activities in accordance with relevant legislation.
This provision is important because religious organizations' involvement in social and charitable activities is not a new concept introduced by social prescribing.
However, Article 55 should not be interpreted as unrestricted authorization to provide any type of service.
An organization participating in healthcare, education or social assistance must comply with the laws governing those specific activities.
A charitable program does not automatically become an authorized medical service. Providing community information does not automatically authorize professional social-work assessment or case management.
Similarly, operating an activity on religious premises does not remove the need to comply with legal requirements concerning the venue, its permitted use and the proposed program.
The legal status of the organization, the nature of the activity and the responsibilities involved must therefore be considered separately.
This distinction allows potential partners to cooperate without assuming that a general charitable or religious purpose authorizes every proposed function.
The New Law on Belief and Religion Takes Effect in 2027
Viet Nam's legal framework concerning belief and religion is changing.
On April 23, 2026, the National Assembly adopted the new Law on Belief and Religion No. 07/2026/QH16.[9]
The law is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027, replacing the 2016 law as amended, subject to the relevant transitional provisions.
As of November 1, 2026, the new law has been enacted but is not yet in force.
Article 51 of the 2026 law addresses participation by religious organizations and affiliated religious organizations in education, healthcare, social assistance, charitable and humanitarian activities in accordance with applicable law.
This continues an area already addressed under the 2016 framework. It should not be presented as the first legal recognition of religious organizations' ability to participate in these fields.
The Prime Minister issued Decision No. 1382/QD-TTg on July 23, 2026, establishing a plan for implementing the new law.[10]
On October 28, 2026, the Government reported that the implementing decree was still being reviewed and finalized. The responsible agencies were asked to complete the draft for further consideration in November 2026.[11]
For organizations exploring partnerships in late 2026, the distinction between current and forthcoming requirements is important.
Activities undertaken before January 1, 2027, must comply with the legislation applicable at that time. Arrangements intended to continue into 2027 will need to be reviewed against the new law, its transitional provisions and relevant implementing regulations as they become applicable.
A social prescribing initiative should not rely on future statutory provisions as though they already provide authorization.
Freedom of Belief Includes the Freedom Not to Participate
One of the most important safeguards in any faith-connected partnership is the individual's freedom of belief and religion.
Article 24 of Viet Nam's Constitution recognizes freedom of belief and religion, including the right to follow or not follow a religion.[12]
The applicable legislation also prohibits discrimination on religious grounds and conduct involving coercion, inducement or obstruction concerning religious belief or affiliation.
These principles have direct implications for social prescribing.
A healthcare professional should not assume that someone would benefit from religious participation simply because they are experiencing loneliness, illness or another difficulty.
Equally, a person should not automatically be discouraged from choosing a suitable activity solely because it is organized by a religious institution.
Someone who values participation in their religious community may welcome information about an appropriate activity connected with that community.
A person with no religious affiliation may still be interested in a non-religious educational program organized by a faith-connected institution.
Another person may prefer an entirely different setting.
The navigator's role is to help individuals understand suitable options, not to choose religious experiences on their behalf.
Freedom of belief should be reflected in ordinary decisions about participation, including the ability to decline without inappropriate pressure or disadvantage.
Voluntary Participation Must Be Meaningful in Practice
Many community programs describe participation as voluntary.
However, the important question is whether people genuinely feel able to make their own decisions.
Someone introduced to an activity by a respected healthcare professional may interpret the suggestion as an expectation. A person receiving charitable assistance may worry that declining an associated religious activity could affect access to support.
Another participant may be uncertain whether an ordinary educational session includes prayer, religious instruction or other religious practices.
These concerns can often be reduced through clear information before participation begins.
Organizers should explain what the activity involves, whether religious elements are included, who may attend and whether fees, donations or other participation conditions apply.
A program that includes religious content should describe it accurately. A program presented as non-religious should operate consistently with that description.
The presence of religious symbols or the religious identity of a venue does not necessarily mean that every activity held there is religious. Nevertheless, prospective participants should have enough information to decide whether they are comfortable with the setting.
Where an activity is offered as an inclusive community service, participation should not be conditional on adopting a belief, attending worship or making an unrelated donation.
A meaningful choice also includes the ability to leave an activity or request information about alternatives without inappropriate pressure.
This matters particularly when the initial suggestion comes from a healthcare or social-service professional.
The professional relationship should not be used to influence religious decisions.
Religious Activities and Community Activities Serve Different Purposes
For some people, participation in worship, religious education or other faith practices is personally meaningful. That is a legitimate expression of religious freedom.
Others may be interested primarily in recreation, learning, volunteering or meeting people, without any desire for religious participation.
These motivations are different, and social prescribing should respect that distinction.
A person who already values their religious community may wish to reconnect with an appropriate faith-related activity.
Someone else may be comfortable attending a non-religious program in a religious setting but prefer not to participate in worship. A third person may wish to avoid the setting entirely.
None of these preferences needs to be justified.
It is also important to distinguish spiritual guidance from regulated professional services.
Religious leaders may provide spiritual guidance within their established roles and lawful activities. That does not automatically qualify them to diagnose mental health conditions, provide psychotherapy or deliver medical treatment.
Likewise, healthcare professionals should not use social prescribing to provide religious instruction or make judgments about the correctness of someone's beliefs.
Respecting these different purposes allows cooperation without confusing spiritual participation, social support and professional healthcare.
A Suitable Activity Does Not Automatically Mean a Suitable Partnership
A faith-connected organization may already operate a useful community program. It may also have premises that appear suitable for additional activities.
Neither fact is sufficient on its own to establish an appropriate partnership.
The organization responsible for the activity must have the necessary legal status, authority and operational capacity.
The proposed activity must be compatible with its lawful purposes, and the premises must be suitable and appropriately authorized for the intended use.
The partners also need to understand who organizes the program, who supervises facilitators, who manages the premises and who responds when concerns arise.
A religious establishment may be managed by people who cannot individually authorize every proposed use of its facilities.
A separately established charitable organization may have its own governing body, even when it maintains close relationships with a religious institution.
An informal conversation with an interested representative may be a useful starting point, but it is not necessarily sufficient authorization for a formal arrangement.
Similarly, a religious organization should not automatically be described as a social prescribing provider because a healthcare professional occasionally recommends one of its activities.
Sharing information about an existing program and establishing a structured healthcare-linked partnership involve different responsibilities.
The appropriate arrangement depends on what the participating organizations actually intend to do.
Community Organizations Should Not Be Treated as Unlimited Resources
Religious and faith-connected organizations may already operate charitable, educational and community activities that are important to their participants.
Introducing a healthcare-linked pathway can create additional demands.
Organizers may be asked to respond to inquiries, accommodate new participants, provide accessibility information, coordinate with navigators or report on attendance.
These tasks require time, even when the activity itself is free. Volunteers may have other responsibilities, and charitable funding may not be sufficient to support ongoing expansion.
A potential partner should therefore have a genuine opportunity to decide whether cooperation is appropriate and what level of responsibility it can accept.
It may be willing to provide general information about an existing activity without entering into a formal referral arrangement. Another organization may have the capacity to cooperate more closely.
Both arrangements can be legitimate, depending on their purpose and the applicable requirements.
Financial contributions, operating costs, sponsorship and expectations concerning donations should also be transparent.
A partnership should not create obligations that the organization cannot realistically sustain.
The intention should be to make appropriate use of existing community opportunities without undermining the organization's lawful activities and commitments.
Trust, Influence and Complaints Deserve Attention
Religious organizations may have established leadership structures and relationships of trust within their communities.
These relationships can be strengths, but they may also influence how people experience participation.
Someone may feel uncomfortable disagreeing with a respected leader. A person receiving practical assistance may feel indebted to the organization providing it. A participant may hesitate to raise a concern if they believe doing so would affect relationships with other members.
These circumstances should not be assumed to occur in every faith-connected organization. They are nevertheless worth considering when healthcare or social-service professionals introduce people to unfamiliar environments.
The 2026 BMJ Public Health review identified unequal power relationships and mistrust among the barriers that can affect partnerships involving faith communities.[4]
A responsible arrangement should therefore make it possible for participants to ask questions, decline activities, raise concerns and seek alternative information.
Where a complaint concerns someone in a position of authority, the process should not depend solely on that person's judgment.
Partners should also be transparent about their responsibilities.
No organization should use a community connection to exert inappropriate influence over someone's religious beliefs, health decisions or personal circumstances.
Protecting Privacy When Religion and Health Information Are Involved
A person may attend a community activity held at a religious institution without identifying with that religion.
Another may value their religious beliefs but prefer not to disclose them to a healthcare provider or community navigator.
Participation in an activity should not automatically be interpreted as evidence of religious affiliation.
This becomes especially important when personal information is collected or shared between organizations.
Viet Nam's Law on Personal Data Protection No. 91/2025/QH15 and Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP both took effect on January 1, 2026.[13,14]
Article 4 of Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP identifies information concerning political, religious and belief-related views among categories of sensitive personal data. Health information is also included.
These provisions are relevant when healthcare and faith-connected organizations consider recording an individual's beliefs, religious identity, health circumstances or reasons for seeking assistance.
A navigator should not routinely collect religious affiliation merely because someone is considering an activity at a religious venue.
Likewise, an activity organizer would not ordinarily need a participant's medical history simply because the introduction came from a healthcare service.
In many cases, providing accurate public information about an activity may be sufficient.
Where a direct introduction is requested, any personal information shared should be limited to what is necessary and lawful for that particular arrangement.
Consent, where legally required, must be appropriately obtained and managed. Agreement to attend an activity should not be treated as unrestricted permission to share information between healthcare providers, religious organizations and other partners.
Photographs, registration forms, attendance lists and messaging groups also deserve attention.
Someone may be happy to attend a community activity without wanting their name or image published in communications associated with a religious institution.
For organizations considering digital social prescribing platforms, this raises an important design question: whether information about religious preferences or participation needs to be collected at all.
Where the same purpose can be achieved without collecting such information, avoiding unnecessary collection may reduce privacy risks.
Respecting these principles helps protect personal information and prevents unsupported assumptions about people's beliefs.
Professional Healthcare and Social-Work Responsibilities Must Remain Separate
Faith-connected organizations may provide valuable community assistance within their lawful functions.
However, not every supportive activity constitutes professional healthcare or social work.
A volunteer may help someone find information about a community program or explain how to attend. That does not automatically authorize the volunteer to diagnose illness, interpret medical results, provide clinical treatment or undertake professional case management.
Viet Nam's Law on Medical Examination and Treatment No. 15/2023/QH15 governs regulated medical examination and treatment activities.[15]
Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP establishes a framework for social work. Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT, effective from August 25, 2026, further regulates social-work practice and professional knowledge updating within its defined scope.[16,17]
Circular No. 51/2024/TT-BYT separately regulates social-work activities in medical examination and treatment establishments.[18]
These provisions become relevant when proposed activities involve regulated professional functions.
An organization operating an appropriately authorized healthcare or social-service facility may employ qualified professionals working within the relevant legal framework.
Their responsibilities remain distinct from those of religious leaders, volunteers and ordinary community activity organizers.
Where participants require medical treatment, professional psychological support, rehabilitation, regulated social work or emergency assistance, appropriate professional services must retain responsibility.
Community participation may complement those services when suitable and wanted. It should not replace them.
Additional Safeguards May Be Needed for Some Participants
Community activities may involve children, older adults, people with disabilities or individuals who need additional assistance.
The safeguards required depend on the activity, the participants and the responsibilities of the organizations involved.
A general adult learning session may require relatively straightforward arrangements. An activity involving children may need appropriate supervision, parental or guardian arrangements and procedures for responding to protection concerns.
Viet Nam's Law on Children No. 102/2016/QH13 provides a relevant legal foundation for child protection.[19]
An organization that regularly welcomes children is not automatically authorized to provide specialist child-protection services.
Similarly, volunteers assisting older adults should not be expected to undertake clinical or personal-care tasks beyond their competence and the applicable requirements.
Accessibility, appropriate conduct by staff and volunteers, safe premises and the ability to respond to foreseeable concerns should be considered before participants are encouraged to attend.
Safeguards should remain proportionate to the actual activity.
A small educational program does not need to operate like a hospital. However, charitable or religious purposes do not remove the need to address relevant safety and legal responsibilities.
What Would a Responsible Navigation Conversation Look Like?
A responsible social prescribing conversation begins with what the person wants to do.
Someone may be interested in learning a skill, joining a reading group, volunteering or meeting people with shared interests.
The navigator can explore suitable community opportunities based on those preferences.
There is no need to begin by asking about religious affiliation unless it is genuinely relevant and the person wishes to discuss it.
If a potentially suitable activity is organized by a faith-connected institution, the navigator should explain the arrangement accurately.
The person should understand who organizes the program, where it takes place, what happens during the activity and whether religious content is involved.
If someone prefers another setting, that preference should be respected.
Where a suitable alternative exists, it can be discussed. Where no comparable option is available, the navigator should explain the limitation rather than pressure the person to accept the available activity.
Someone who already values religious participation may also prefer to contact an appropriate organization independently.
The navigator should not assume responsibility for selecting religious practices or determining a person's spiritual needs.
The purpose is to support informed community participation, not to influence religious identity or belief.
What Might a Modest Local Pilot Look Like?
A small pilot could help determine whether an established community activity organized by a faith-connected institution is suitable for inclusion among local social prescribing resources.
It should not begin with a target for referring people to religious organizations.
A better starting point would be to understand whether prospective participants are interested in the activity and whether the organization can support their participation appropriately.
For example, an established organization may already operate a lawful, non-religious educational activity that welcomes people from the wider community.
A healthcare or community service could begin by verifying the activity's purpose, schedule, eligibility, location and participation conditions.
The organizer could explain whether religious content, registration requirements, costs or expectations concerning donations apply.
Prospective participants, including people who do not share the organization's religious tradition, could be invited to comment on whether the information is clear and the activity appears suitable.
For a limited pilot, it may be sufficient to make accurate information available without establishing a new referral system.
If a more structured arrangement is proposed, the participating organizations would need to agree on authorization, responsibilities, information-sharing, communication and procedures for addressing concerns.
The pilot should avoid collecting unnecessary information about religious identity.
It should also avoid creating a professional navigation function unless the relevant legal, workforce and organizational requirements have been considered.
The experience may show that the activity is feasible and welcomed. It may also reveal that some participants would prefer a different setting or that the organization lacks capacity for additional participation.
Both findings would be useful.
The purpose is to understand whether a particular arrangement is appropriate, not to demonstrate that all religious institutions should become social prescribing partners.
Evaluation Should Examine Inclusion, Not Just Attendance
A partnership may report that many people attended activities organized by a faith-connected institution.
That figure alone does not establish that participation was inclusive, voluntary or beneficial.
Some attendees may already belong to the organization and have participated in its activities for years. Others may attend once but find the environment unsuitable.
A person may decide not to participate because of the religious setting, even when the activity itself is non-religious.
These experiences should inform evaluation rather than automatically be classified as success or failure.
Participants should be able to explain whether they understood the activity before joining, felt comfortable making their own decisions and experienced any inappropriate pressure.
It would also be useful to know whether the program operated as described and whether people felt respected regardless of their religious beliefs or lack of religious affiliation.
Where an activity is intended to welcome people beyond the organization's existing membership, feedback from those participants may be particularly informative.
The organization should also have an opportunity to reflect on its own experience.
Did the partnership fit its purpose? Was the additional workload manageable? Were responsibilities clear? Were there unexpected costs or concerns?
Complaints involving discrimination, pressure, inappropriate information-sharing or other problems should be considered through suitable procedures.
Evaluation should not automatically require collecting detailed information about participants' religious identity.
Where such information is genuinely necessary for a lawful research purpose, relevant data protection and ethical requirements must be addressed.
A pilot may demonstrate feasibility, acceptability and improved access to a particular community opportunity.
It cannot, without appropriate research, establish improved clinical outcomes, reduced healthcare utilization or cost-effectiveness.
Nor would a successful arrangement with one organization demonstrate that the same model is appropriate across different religious communities or localities in Viet Nam.
Partnerships Must Preserve Organizational Independence
Healthcare providers, community organizations and religious institutions operate under different legal and professional frameworks.
A partnership should not obscure those differences.
A healthcare organization may share information about a suitable community activity without endorsing the religious beliefs of the institution organizing it.
A religious organization may cooperate with a community initiative without assuming responsibility for clinical decisions made by healthcare professionals.
Similarly, a social prescribing platform may examine potential partnerships without acting as a religious organization or promoting a particular belief system.
Public communication should reflect actual relationships and permissions.
An informal exchange of information should not be described as a formal partnership.
Participation in a meeting or research discussion should not be presented as endorsement by a religious organization, public authority or international institution.
The use of names, logos and other representations should be agreed where appropriate.
Funding and financial arrangements should also be transparent.
Community navigation should not be used to create undisclosed commercial benefits, pressure people to make donations or introduce conditions unrelated to the stated activity.
Clear organizational boundaries help protect independence, public trust and the rights of participants.
Community Connection Should Expand Choice, Not Direct Religious Belief
Religious organizations and faith-connected community groups may already contribute to social life through activities that bring people together, provide practical assistance and create opportunities for participation.
Some of these activities may be relevant to social prescribing.
However, the existence of a religious institution or a well-intentioned charitable program is not sufficient reason to establish a formal community referral pathway.
The suitability of a partnership depends on the actual activity, its legal and organizational arrangements, the preferences of participants and the responsibilities accepted by each partner.
For Viet Nam, the existing legal framework already provides for religious organizations to participate in certain social and charitable activities according to applicable law.
The new Law on Belief and Religion, scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027, makes it important for organizations planning longer-term arrangements to review forthcoming requirements carefully.
International experience offers useful examples of cooperation between faith communities and social prescribing systems, but it does not establish that a comparable model has been proven effective in Viet Nam.
The responsible direction is therefore to explore specific activities rather than assume that religious institutions should become standard destinations for social prescribing referrals.
One person may find a meaningful connection through an organization associated with their faith. Another may enjoy a non-religious activity held at a religious venue. Someone else may prefer a different community setting entirely.
All three choices are valid.
An inclusive social prescribing approach does not require every religious organization to make all its activities non-religious. Religious institutions have their own lawful purposes and practices.
What matters is whether the activity is suitable for the individual, accurately described, appropriately authorized and offered without inappropriate pressure.
Community-connected care should not direct people toward or away from religion.
Its purpose is to help individuals understand and access suitable opportunities while respecting their beliefs, choices, rights and circumstances.
Where a faith-connected organization can contribute lawfully, safely and voluntarily, it may be a valuable community partner.
Where those conditions cannot be met, the appropriate decision may be not to establish the connection.
For Social Prescribing Vietnam, this provides a responsible foundation for exploring faith-connected community partnerships: respect for the diversity of Vietnamese communities, respect for freedom of belief and a clear distinction between ordinary community participation, religious activities and regulated professional services.
References
World Health Organization Regional Office for the Western Pacific. (2022). A Toolkit on How to Implement Social Prescribing. Manila: World Health Organization.
National Academy for Social Prescribing. Faith and Social Prescribing. United Kingdom.
Good Faith Partnership. (2025). New Strategic Lead to Champion the Role of Faith in Social Prescribing. Published May 22, 2025.
Mujong, D., Pierce, P. A. S., Hofer, S. A. G., Weil, L. G., Crosby-Nwaobi, R., Husbands, J., & Powell, R. A. (2026). Engaging with faith communities to tackle ethnic health inequalities in the UK: A scoping review. BMJ Public Health, 4(1), e003816. Published January 27, 2026. DOI: 10.1136/bmjph-2025-003816.
Lwin, K. S., Wong, M. S. J., Tan, M. H., et al. (2026). Organization and implementation of social prescribing in the Western Pacific Region: A scoping review. The Lancet Regional Health – Western Pacific, 67, 101714. DOI: 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2025.101714.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2016). Law No. 02/2016/QH14 on Belief and Religion, as amended, including by Law No. 84/2025/QH15. Consolidated Document No. 74/VBHN-VPQH dated August 15, 2025. Article 55 addresses participation in educational, healthcare, social assistance, charitable and humanitarian activities.
Government of Viet Nam. (2023). Decree No. 95/2023/ND-CP Detailing Certain Articles and Implementation Measures of the Law on Belief and Religion. Effective March 30, 2024.
Government of Viet Nam. (2025). Decree No. 124/2025/ND-CP on Delegation, Decentralization and Allocation of Responsibilities Under the Two-Level Local Government Structure in Ethnic Affairs, Belief and Religion. Effective July 1, 2025.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2026). Law No. 07/2026/QH16 on Belief and Religion. Enacted April 23, 2026; effective January 1, 2027. Article 51 addresses participation in education, healthcare, social assistance, charitable and humanitarian activities.
Prime Minister of Viet Nam. (2026). Decision No. 1382/QD-TTg Issuing the Implementation Plan for the Law on Belief and Religion. Issued July 23, 2026.
Government News of Viet Nam. (2026). Further Refinement of the Decree Guiding Implementation of the Law on Belief and Religion. Published October 28, 2026.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. Constitution of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, as amended. Article 24 addresses freedom of belief and religion, including the right to follow or not follow a religion. Consolidated Document No. 52/VBHN-VPQH dated July 21, 2025.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2025). Law No. 91/2025/QH15 on Personal Data Protection. Effective January 1, 2026.
Government of Viet Nam. (2025). Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP Detailing Certain Articles and Measures for Implementing the Law on Personal Data Protection. Effective January 1, 2026. Article 4 includes political, religious and belief-related views among categories of sensitive personal data.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2023). Law No. 15/2023/QH15 on Medical Examination and Treatment, as amended where applicable. Effective January 1, 2024.
Government of Viet Nam. (2024). Decree No. 110/2024/ND-CP on Social Work. Effective October 15, 2024.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. (2026). Circular No. 29/2026/TT-BYT on Social-Work Practice and Professional Knowledge Updating. Effective August 25, 2026.
Ministry of Health of Viet Nam. (2024). Circular No. 51/2024/TT-BYT on Social-Work Activities in Medical Examination and Treatment Establishments. Effective March 1, 2025.
National Assembly of Viet Nam. (2016). Law No. 102/2016/QH13 on Children, as amended where applicable.
Article Information
Primary Category: Implementation & Practice
Secondary Category: Viet Nam Context
Evidence and Regulatory Context Reviewed: November 1, 2026
Publisher: Social Prescribing Vietnam (SPVN)
Disclaimer
This article is provided for educational, research and general informational purposes only. It does not constitute individualized medical, mental health, religious, spiritual, professional social-work, regulatory or legal advice.
The examples of faith-connected community activities and potential partnerships are illustrative. They do not indicate that any particular religious organization, religious establishment, charitable organization or community group in Viet Nam currently operates a formal social prescribing service or has agreed to participate in such a pathway.
References to faith-based community organizations do not imply that all religious institutions have the same legal status, functions, service capacity or authorization. Any proposed activities must be assessed according to applicable Vietnamese legislation and the specific legal status and permitted activities of the organizations involved.
As of November 1, 2026, the Law on Belief and Religion No. 02/2016/QH14, as amended, and its applicable implementing regulations remain in force. Law No. 07/2026/QH16 was enacted on April 23, 2026, but is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2027, subject to relevant transitional provisions. Future provisions should not be treated as already applicable before their effective date.
Participation in social prescribing and community activities should respect freedom of belief and religion, including the freedom to follow or not follow a religion. Community navigation should not be used to pressure individuals to adopt, change, disclose or abandon religious beliefs, participate in religious practices or make donations as a condition of receiving appropriate healthcare or other support to which they are entitled.
Social prescribing and community navigation may complement lawful community activities and existing services where appropriate. They do not replace regulated medical examination and treatment, professional mental health services, regulated social work, child protection, emergency care or other activities requiring specific legal authorization and professional competence.
International research and guidance discussed in this article are provided for comparative learning. They do not establish that faith-based social prescribing has been formally implemented or proven effective in improving clinical outcomes, reducing healthcare utilization or generating cost savings in Viet Nam.
Organizations considering faith-connected community partnerships should independently assess applicable Vietnamese legal, professional and organizational requirements, including institutional authorization, religious and belief-related activities, use of premises, voluntary participation, accessibility, safeguarding, conflicts of interest, financing, personal data protection, professional boundaries and accountability before implementation.
Social Prescribing Vietnam (SPVN) is an education, research, development, implementation-support and collaboration platform. SPVN is not presented in this article as a religious organization, belief organization, healthcare provider or licensed professional social-work service. Publication of this article does not indicate that SPVN conducts religious activities, promotes or endorses any particular faith, directly provides individualized care navigation or referrals, or has established formal partnerships with any religious or community organizations discussed.
References to government institutions, religious organizations, international bodies, research publications and community initiatives are provided for educational and comparative purposes only. They do not imply endorsement, accreditation, formal authorization, affiliation or an established service partnership.