jkghlkjb

jkghlkjb - I nvolunta ry commitment is the practice of...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Involuntary commitment is the practice of using legal means or forms as part of a mental health law to commit a person to a mental hospital , insane asylum or psychiatric ward against their will and/or over their protests. In some juridictions (e.g. India), it was once known as the "restraint of the insane". Now it is called "restraint of the mentally ill". Many countries have mental health laws governing involuntary commitment. Some, such as the United States , require a court hearing if the individual is hospitalized more than briefly. In most states, police officers and designated mental health professionals can require a brief commitment of an individual for psychiatric evaluation. If the individual is evaluated as needing further hospitalization, a court order must be obtained. Doctors, psychologists and/or psychiatrists present written reports to the court and in some cases testify before the judge. The person who is involuntarily hospitalized, in most U.S. jurisdictions, has access to counsel. A commitment is always time-limited and requires reevaluation at fixed intervals. It is also possible for a patient to challenge the commitment through habeas corpus . This was the case in a famous United States Supreme Court decision in 1975, O'Connor v. Donaldson , when Kenneth Donaldson, a patient committed to Florida State Hospital , sued the hospital and staff for confining him for 15 years against his will . The decision means that it is unconstitutional to commit for treatment a person who is not imminently a danger to himself or others and is capable to a minimal degree of surviving on his own. [1] Some individuals and groups have challenged involuntary commitment, particularly in countries that are part of the Anglo-American judicial tradition. There have also been allegations that at certain places and times the practice of involuntary commitment has been used for the suppression of dissent , or in a punitive way. There have been alternating trends towards the aboliton or substantial reduction of involuntary commitment [2] via stricter standards for its imposition, and the greater use of involuntary commitment with more lax standards for its imposition. In 1975, the United States Supreme Court ruled that involuntary hospitalization and/or treatment violates an individual's civil rights . This ruling forced individual states to change their statutes. For example, the individual must be exhibiting behavior that is a danger to himself or others in order to be held, the hold must be for evaluation only and a court order must be received for more than very short term treatment or hospitalization (typically no longer than 72 hours). This ruling has severely limited involuntary treatment and
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
hospitalization in the United States. [3]
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 19

jkghlkjb - I nvolunta ry commitment is the practice of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online