DOCSLIB.ORG

Debate Psychiatry and the Control of Dangerousness: on the Apotropaic Function of the Term “Mental Illness” T Szasz

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Debate Psychiatry and the Control of Dangerousness: on the Apotropaic Function of the Term “Mental Illness” T Szasz J Med Ethics 2003;29:227–230 227 ....................... PSYCHIATRIC ETHICS J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.29.4.237 on 20 August 2003. Downloaded from Debate Psychiatry and the control of dangerousness: on the apotropaic function of the term “mental illness” T Szasz he term “mental illness” implies that persons atric detention, also known as involuntary mental with such illnesses are more likely to be dan- hospitalisation or civil commitment. And the pro- Tgerous to themselves and/or others than are cedure is a patent violation of due process and the persons without such illnesses. This is the source presumption of innocence. of the psychiatrist’s traditional social obligation to We call all manner of human problems “(men- control “harm to self and/or others,” that is, tal) diseases”, and convince ourselves that drugs suicide and crime. The ethical dilemmas of and conversation (therapy) solve such problems. psychiatry cannot be resolved as long as the con- Solutions exist, however, only for mathematical tradictory functions of healing persons and problems and some medical problems. For human protecting society are united in a single discipline. problems, there are no solutions. Conflict, dis- Life is full of dangers. Our highly developed agreement, unhappiness, the proverbial slings consciousness makes us, of all living forms in the and arrows of outrageous fortune are challenges universe, the most keenly aware of, and the most that we must cope with, not solve. Only after we adept at protecting ourselves from, dangers. admit that our solutions are illusions can we Magic and religion are mankind’s earliest warn- begin to develop more rational and more humane ing systems. Science arrived on the scene only methods for dealing with “mental illness” and about 400 years ago, and scientific medicine only the “dangerous mental patient”. 200 years ago. Some time ago I suggested that We are proud that we do not punish acts or “formerly, when religion was strong and science beliefs that upset others, but do not injure them weak, men mistook magic for medicine; now, and hence do not constitute crimes. Yet, we pun- when science is strong and religion weak, men ish people—albeit we call it “treatment”—for mistake medicine for magic”.1 annoying family members (and others) with We flatter and deceive ourselves if we believe behaviours they deem “dangerous” and also for that we have outgrown the apotropaic use of “being suicidal”. To be sure, persons who exhibit language (from the Greek apostropaios, meaning “to such behaviours—labelled “schizophrenics”, turn away”). “persons with dangerous severe personality disor- http://jme.bmj.com/ Many people derive comfort from magical ders,” and “suicidal patients”—frighten others, objects (amulets), and virtually everyone finds especially those who must associate with them. Unable to control non-criminal “offences” by reassurance in magical words (incantations). The means of criminal law sanctions, how can the classic example of an apotropaic is the word offended persons and society protect themselves “abracadabra,” which The American Heritage Dic- from their unwanted fellow men and women? tionary of the English Language defines as “a magi- One way is by “divorcing” them. However, this cal charm or incantation having the power to method of separating oneself from an unwanted on September 29, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. ward off disease or disaster”. In the ancient world, companion—especially when it involves relations abracadabra was a magic word, the letters of between disturbing and disturbed spouses or which were arranged in an inverted pyramid and between disturbing adult children and their dis- worn as an amulet around the neck to protect the turbed parents—strikes most people as an unac- wearer against disease or trouble. One fewer letter ceptable rejection of family obligation. Psychia- appeared in each line of the pyramid, until only trists offer to relieve the disturbed person of the the letter “a” remained to form the vertex of the burden of coping with his disturbed relative by triangle. As the letters disappeared, so supposedly incarcerating the latter and calling it “care” and did the disease or trouble. “treatment”. I submit that we use phrases like “dangerous- How do psychiatrists do this? By allying them- ness to self and others” and “psychiatric treat- selves with the coercive apparatus of the state and ment” as apotropaics to ward off dangers we fear, declaring the offending individual mentally ill and much as ancient magicians warded off the dangerous to him or herself or others. This magic man- dangers people feared by means of incantations, tra allows us to incarcerate him in a prison we call a exemplified by “abracadabra”. Growing reliance “mental hospital”. Ostensibly, the term “mental on compulsory mental health interventions for illness” (or “psychopathology”) names a pathologi- protection against crime and suicide illustrate the cal condition or disease, similar say to diabetes; actu- phenomenon. Physicians, criminologists, politi- ally, it names a social tactic or justification, permit- T Szasz, 4739 Limberlost cians, and the public use advances in medicine ting family members, courts, and society as a body, Lane, Manlius, NY, and neuroscience to convince themselves that to separate themselves from individuals who 13104–1405, USA; such interventions are “scientific” and do not vio- exhibit, or are claimed to exhibit, certain behav- [email protected] late the moral and legal foundations of English iours identified as “dangerous mental illnesses”. Accepted for publication and American law. This is a serious error. There is This tactic is dramatically illustrated by the follow- ............... 13 September 2002 no scientific basis whatever for preventive psychi- ing “advice” appearing on the web site of the www.jmedethics.com 228 Debate ....................... National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI), a In his classic treatise on schizophrenia, Eugen J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.29.4.237 on 20 August 2003. Downloaded from mental health advocacy organisation that identi- Bleuler complained: “People are being forced to fies itself as representing “more than 200 000 continue to live a life that has become unbearable Debate families, consumers, and providers across the for them for valid reasons. ... Even if a few more country”. As will be evident, NAMI represents the [patients] killed themselves, does this reason jus- interests of mental patients the same way that the tify the fact that we torture hundreds of patients Ku Klux Klan represented the interests of black and aggravate their disease?” (emphasis added).7 Americans. Why are psychiatrists expected to prevent suicide by depriving the “suspect” of liberty? The Sometime, during the course of your loved idea of suicide makes us nervous. We cannot one’s illness, you may need the police. By decide whether killing oneself is a “right” or a preparing now, before you need help, you wrong, an element of our inalienable personal can make the day you need help go much more smoothly. ... It is often difficult to get liberty or an offence of some sort that ought to be 911 to respond to your calls if you need prohibited and perhaps punished. We are too someone to come & take your MI [mentally uptight about suicide to recognise that killing ill] relation to a hospital emergency room oneself is sometimes a reasonable and right thing (ER). They may not believe that you really to do, sometimes an unreasonable and wrong need help. And if they do send the police, thing to do, but that, in either case, it ought to be treated as an act that falls outside the scope of the police are often reluctant to take 8 someone for involuntary commitment. That is interference by the state. because cops are concerned about liability. The right to kill oneself is the supreme symbol ... When calling 911, the best way to get of personal autonomy. Formerly, the church allied quick action is to say, “Violent EDP”, or with the state prohibited and punished the act. “Suicidal EDP”. EDP stands for Emotionally Now, psychiatry, as an arm of the state, prohibits Disturbed Person. This shows the operator the act and “treats” it as if it were a symptom of that you know what you’re talking about. an underlying disease (typically, depression or Describe the danger very specifically. “He’s schizophrenia). The deprivation of liberty intrin- a danger to himself” is not as good as “This sic to such an intervention is viewed not as a morning my son said he was going to jump human rights violation but as a human rights off the roof.” ... Also, give past history of protection. The modern reader may be surprised, violence. This is especially important if the perhaps even shocked, at seeing the words person is not acting up. ... When the police “prohibition” and “suicide” bracketed. Lack of come, they need compelling evidence that familiarity with the long history of the religious the person is a danger to self or others prohibition against self murder, together with before they can involuntarily take him or her unquestioning acceptance of coercive psychiatric to the ER for evaluation. ... While AMI/ suicide prevention as “therapy,” make such a FAMI [Alliance for the Mentally Ill/Florida reaction a virtual certainty. This is unfortunate. Alliance for the Mentally Ill] is not Formerly, religious doctrine defined the permis- suggesting you do this, the fact is that some sible uses of the body. Its impermissible uses—self families have learned to “turn over the abuse (masturbation), sex abuse (homosexuality http://jme.bmj.com/ furniture” before calling the police.2 and other “perversions”), substance abuse (drunk- Giving false information to the police is a enness and gluttony), and self murder (suicide)— crime, unless it is in the cause of “mental health”. were sins, crimes, or both, punished by informal or In the United Kingdom, unlike in the United formal sanctions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Involuntary Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill: a System in Need of Change
    Volume 29 Issue 2 Article 2 1983 Involuntary Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill: A System in Need of Change John E. B. Myers Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr Part of the Law and Psychology Commons Recommended Citation John E. Myers, Involuntary Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill: A System in Need of Change, 29 Vill. L. Rev. 367 (1983). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol29/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Villanova Law Review by an authorized editor of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. Myers: Involuntary Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill: A System in Nee 1983-84] INVOLUNTARY CIVIL COMMITMENT OF THE MENTALLY ILL: A SYSTEM IN NEED OF CHANGE JOHN E. B. MYERSt Table of Contents Introduction .................................................. 368 I. THE RISE OF INSTITUTIONS ............................. 368 II. DEVELOPMENT OF INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT LAW... 375 A. HistoricalDevelopment ..................... .......... 375 B. The Authority of the State to Impose Involuntay Commit- ment-The Parens Patriae Power ..................... 380 III. THE DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION MOVEMENT ............. 388 A. HistoricalDevelopment ................................ 388 B. The Contribution of the Courts to Deinstitutionah'zation.... 394 C. Treatment in the Least Restrictive Environment ........... 400 IV. FAILINGS OF THE DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION MOVEMENT ......................................................... 40 3 A. The "Community's" Failure to Provide Adequate Commu- nity-Based Treatment Resources ......................... 403 B. The Shortcomings of Denstitutionah'zationare Exacerbated by Restrictive Commitment Laws ........................ 409 V. ALTERNATIVES FOR CHANGE IN THE SYSTEM OF INVOL- UNTARY TREATMENT OF THE MENTALLY ILL ..........
    [Show full text]
  • Guardian's Authority to Involuntarily Hospitalize the Incompetent Ward JOHN L
    Guardian's Authority to Involuntarily Hospitalize the Incompetent Ward JOHN L. SULLIVAN, J.D.,LL.M.* A Guardian may give any consents or approvals that may be necessary to enable the ward to receive medical or other professional care, counsel, treatment or service. Section 5-312(a) (3) Uniform Probate Code If Section 5-312(a) (3) is accepted as a composite or representative definition of a guardian of the person's state law statutory authority to deal with the care and custody of his incompetent ward in matters relating to medical management, any private hospital could admit, on the signature of the guardian, any so-called "lucid" incompetent. The limitation to a consideration of private hospital admission is made because it is almost universal practice for state or governmental hospitals to demand a civil commitment order before admitting an involuntary patient, whether declared incompetent or not. The so-called "lucid" incompetent is the adjudicated incompetent who still can be heard to protest the decisions made for him by his guardian. The labeling and attendant distinction of the "lucid" incompetent is useful in categorizing those cases where courts have been called upon to render judgments relating to radical medical procedures such as experimental psychosurgery 1 or kidney transplants2 or negative medical procedures such as a discontinuance of medical suppon systems. 3 In such cases it has readily been seen that the bare authority of a guardian under state statutes is not sufficient to authorize medical procedures or cessation of them. It has been agreed that specific coun authority is required, and probably that of a court exercising equity jurisdiction.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cuckoo's Nest: an Examination of the National Commission Report on Psychosurgery Steven C
    Hofstra Law Review Volume 6 | Issue 4 Article 3 1978 Return to the Cuckoo's Nest: An Examination of the National Commission Report on Psychosurgery Steven C. Spronz Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr Recommended Citation Spronz, Steven C. (1978) "Return to the Cuckoo's Nest: An Examination of the National Commission Report on Psychosurgery," Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 6: Iss. 4, Article 3. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol6/iss4/3 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Spronz: Return to the Cuckoo's Nest: An Examination of the National Commi NOTES RETURN TO THE CUCKOO'S NEST: AN EXAMINATION OF THE NATIONAL COMMISSION REPORT ON PSYCHOSURGERY One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest' describes the use of psychosurgery to rid MacMurphy, an inmate-patient who chal- lenged the authority of his "keepers" in a psychiatric institution, of his allegedly violent tendencies. The operation transformed him into a human vegetable. His friend, the "Chief," another patient at the hospital, recognized that MacMurphy's life was now without meaning and mercifully suffocated him. The author's indictment of abuses in mental institutions was published in 1962, when the practice of psychosurgery was waning in the United States. 2 Cuckoo's Nest should belong to a bygone era, one replaced by an age in which more humane treatments are administered.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 8 – Civil Commitments
    GENERAL DISTRICT COURT MANUAL CIVIL COMMITMENTS Page 8-1 Chapter 8 – Civil Commitments Civil Commitments include involuntary admissions of mentally ill/intellectual disability and medical emergency temporary detention. Civil mental illness/intellectual disability proceedings and medical emergency consent proceedings may be heard by a judge of the general district or juvenile and domestic relations district court or a special justice appointed by the chief judge of the applicable judicial circuit. Va. Code § 37.2-803. The involuntary mental commitment process begins when a petition is filed, and alleges a person is mentally ill and in need of hospitalization. For proceedings in this chapter, whenever the term “mental illness” appears, it shall include substance abuse. Va. Code § 37.2-800. The process may begin with a referral to the localities’ Community Service Board, or may be initiated at the magistrate’s office. Some clerk’s offices will only receive paperwork after the proceedings and hearings are over, while in some offices the judges themselves may hold the hearing. These are the procedures for filing and indexing under each circumstance. Transportation of a person who is the subject of an emergency custody order, temporary detention order, and a person under an involuntary commitment order may be provided by a family member or friend, representative of the Community Services Board (CSB), or other alternative transportation provided with staff trained to provide transportation is a safe manner. No person who provides alternative transportation pursuant to these sections shall be liable to the person being transported for any civil damages for ordinary negligence in acts or omissions that result from providing such alternative transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • Involuntary Commitment: Implication for Psychiatric Nursing Practice* a RTICLE
    O RIGINAL Involuntary commitment: implication for psychiatric nursing practice* A RTICLE INTERNAÇÃO INVOLUNTÁRIA: AS IMPLICAÇÕES PARA A CLÍNICA DA ENFERMAGEM PSIQUIÁTRICA INTERNACIÓN INVOLUNTARIA: IMPLICACIONES PARA LA CLÍNICA DE ENFERMERÍA PSIQUIÁTRICA Lilian Hortale de Oliveira Moreira1, Cristina Maria Douat Loyola2 ABSTRACT RESUMO RESUMEN The characteristics of involuntary psychiat- Quando nos deparamos com Internação Psi- Cuando nos encontramos con Internación ric commitment (IPI) may cause implica- quiátrica Involuntária (IPI), percebemos que Psiquiátrica Involuntaria (IPI), percibimos tions on the nursing/patient relationship. as características dessa internação podem que las características de internación pue- The objectives of this study were to list the causar implicações para a relação enferma- den causar implicaciones en la relación en- forms of nursing care delivered to psychi- gem/paciente. Relacionar os cuidados de fermería/paciente. Relacionar los cuidados atric patients, according to the type of com- enfermagem prestados ao paciente psiqui- de enfermería brindados al paciente psi- mitment; analyze the reaction of the nurs- átrico, considerando o tipo de internação; quiátrico, considerando el tipo de interna- ing team towards the IPI patient, and dis- analisar a reação da equipe de enfermagem ción; analizar la reacción del equipo de en- cuss on the implications that IPI have on the em relação ao paciente de Internação Psi- fermería en relación al paciente de IPI, y practice o psychiatric nursing. A field re- quiátrica Involuntária (IPI), e discutir as im- discutir las implicaciones de la IPI para la search was performed with the nursing plicações da IPI para a clínica da enferma- clínica de enfermería psiquiátrica. Investi- team of a psychiatric institution in Rio de gem psiquiátrica.
    [Show full text]
  • Mental Health Commitment Laws: a Survey of the States
    Mental Health Commitment Laws A Survey of the States February 2014 Research from the Treatment Advocacy Center 1 Mental Health Commitment Laws A Survey of the States Brian Stettin, Esq. Policy Director, Treatment Advocacy Center Jeffrey Geller, M.D. Professor of Psychiatry Member of the Board, Treatment Advocacy Center Kristina Ragosta, Esq. Director of Advocacy, Treatment Advocacy Center Kathryn Cohen, Esq. Legislative and Policy Counsel, Treatment Advocacy Center Jennay Ghowrwal, MHS Research and Communications Associate, Treatment Advocacy Center © 2014 by the Treatment Advocacy Center The Treatment Advocacy Center is a national nonprofit organization dedicated exclusively to eliminating barriers to the timely and effective treatment of severe mental illness. The organization promotes laws, policies and practices for the delivery of psychiatric care and supports the development of innovative treatments for and research into the causes of severe and persistent psychiatric illnesses, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. 2 TACReports.org/state-survey EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The tragic consequences of ignoring the needs of individuals with the most severe mental illness who are unable or unwilling to seek treatment are on vivid display nationwide: on our city streets, where an estimated quarter million people with untreated psychiatric illness roam homeless; in our jails and prisons, which now house 10 times as many people with severe mental illness than do our psychiatric hospitals; in our suicide and victimization statistics, where individuals with psychotic disorders are grossly overrepresented; and in our local news, which reports daily on violent acts committed by individuals whose families struggled vainly to get them into treatment. In the U.S., primary responsibility for treatment of this vulnerable and at-risk population falls to state and local governments.
    [Show full text]
  • Involuntary Outpatient Commitment and Related Programs of Assisted Outpatient Treatment 1
    APA Resource Document RESOURCE DOCUMENT ON INVOLUNTARY OUTPATIENT COMMITMENT AND RELATED PROGRAMS OF ASSISTED OUTPATIENT TREATMENT 1 Prepared by the Council on Psychiatry and Law: Marvin S. Swartz, M.D. Steven K Hoge, M.D. Debra A. Pinals, M.D. Eugene Lee, M.D. Li-Wen Lee, M.D. Mardoche Sidor, M.D. Tiffani Bell, M.D. Elizabeth Ford, M.D. R. Scott Johnson, M.D. Approved by the Joint Reference Committee, October 2015 "The findings, opinions, and conclusions of this report do not necessarily represent the views of the officers, trustees, or all members of the American Psychiatric Association. Views expressed are those of the authors." -- APA Operations Manual. Involuntary outpatient commitment is a form of court-ordered outpatient treatment for patients who suffer from severe mental illness and who are unlikely to adhere to treatment without such a program. It can be used as a transition from involuntary hospitalization, an alternative to involuntary hospitalization or as a preventive treatment for those who do not currently meet criteria for involuntary hospitalization. It should be used in each of these instances for patients who need treatment to prevent relapse or behaviors that are dangerous to self or others. Executive Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations In 1987, the American Psychiatric Association’s Task Force Report on Involuntary Outpatient Commitment endorsed its use under certain circumstances (1) and reiterated its endorsement in the 1999 Resource Document on Mandated Outpatient Treatment (2). During the decades since publication of the 1987 Task Force Report, outpatient commitment has received a great deal of 1 Outpatient court-ordered treatment may be referred to as ‘assisted outpatient treatment’, ‘involuntary outpatient commitment’, ‘mandated community treatment’, or ‘community treatment orders’.
    [Show full text]
  • Involuntary Commitment to Outpatient Treatment © American Psychiatric Association, All Rights Reserved Page 1 of 10
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Involuntary Outpatient Treatment . 1 Surveys of Outpatient Commitment Statutes . 2 Studies of Outpatient Commitment . 2 The Impact of Recent Statutory Changes . 4 Implications for the Future Use of Outpatient Commitment . 5 Proposed Supplement to American Psychiatric Association . 6 Guidelines for Legislation on the Psychiatric Hospitalization of Adults References . 9 26 INVOLUNTARY OUTPATIENT TREATMENT Prior to the late 1960’s, involuntary treatment of the mentally ill was INVOLUNTARY COMMITMENT TO provided almost exclusively in long-term inpatient facilities. The majority of patients suffered from chronic illnesses for which there were no effective OUTPATIENT TREATMENT treatments which could permit many of them to be discharged into the community. Although the legal authority for commitment emanated from state statutes, the process, essentially dominated by clinicians, held few REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON procedural protections for patients facing commitment (1). INVOLUNTARY OUTPATIENT With the growing availability of effective treatment for chronic mental illnesses in the 1960’s, the community mental health movement and COMMITMENT advocates concerned with patients’ civil rights worked for the deinstitutionalization of as many hospitalized patients as possible (2,3). David Starrett, M.D., Chairperson Legislators were attracted to the movement by the prospect of saving Robert D. Miller, M.D. money through hospital closure and less expensive community treatment Joseph Bloom, M.D. (4). The combination of stricter commitment laws (most of which William D. Weitzel, M.D. incorporated the criterion of treatment in the least restrictive environment Robert D. Luskin, Esq., Consultant (5)) and the establishment of federally-supported community mental health centers led to a massive depopulation of the public mental hospital Publication authorized by the Board of Trustees, June 1987 system.
    [Show full text]
  • How the Involuntary Commitment of Persons with Mental Illness Violates the United States Constitution
    Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly Volume 47 Number 4 Summer 2020 Article 3 Summer 2020 Worse than Punishment: How the Involuntary Commitment of Persons with Mental Illness Violates the United States Constitution Samantha M. Caspar Artem M. Joukov Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/ hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Samantha M. Caspar and Artem M. Joukov, Worse than Punishment: How the Involuntary Commitment of Persons with Mental Illness Violates the United States Constitution, 47 HASTINGS CONST. L.Q. 499 (2020). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_constitutional_law_quaterly/vol47/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A - CASPAR_ JOUVOK_CLQ_V47-4 (DO NOT DELETE) 4/6/2020 10:11 AM Worse than Punishment: How the Involuntary Commitment of Persons with Mental Illness Violates the United States Constitution by SAMANTHA M. CASPAR* & ARTEM M. JOUKOV** The most important deprivation of human and constitutional rights inflicted upon persons said to be mentally ill is involuntary mental hospitalization . – Dr. Thomas Szasz Individuals struggling with mental health ailments face many challenges, sometimes including the loss of liberty. While incarceration in jail or prison may follow criminal misconduct, this is not the most imposing threat to liberty faced by persons with mental illness. Instead, they must cope with the possibility of involuntary commitment to a treatment facility, a fate that may be worse than criminal incarceration.
    [Show full text]
  • There Are Cracks in the Civil Commitment Process: a Practitioner's Recommendations to Patch the System Donald Stone
    Fordham Urban Law Journal Volume 43 Number 3 Mental Health, the Law, & the Urban Article 8 Environment 2016 There Are Cracks in the Civil Commitment Process: A Practitioner's Recommendations to Patch the System Donald Stone Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj Recommended Citation Donald Stone, There Are Cracks in the Civil Commitment Process: A Practitioner's Recommendations to Patch the System, 43 Fordham Urb. L.J. 789 (2016). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol43/iss3/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Urban Law Journal by an authorized editor of FLASH: The orF dham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THERE ARE CRACKS IN THE CIVIL COMMITMENT PROCESS: A PRACTITIONER’S RECOMMENDATIONS TO PATCH THE SYSTEM Donald Stone* Introduction ............................................................................................. 790 I. The Government’s Power to Confine, Minimal Due Process Protections, and the Remaining Void of Due Process Protections ......................................................................................... 791 A. The Government’s Power to Apprehend and Confine a Person with a Mental Illness ............................................. 791 B. Minimal Due Process Protections Afforded by the Supreme Court ...................................................................... 793 C. The Void of Due Process Safeguards in the Civil Commitment Process: Lessard v. Schmidt ......................... 794 II. The Constitutional Right To Remain Silent: Does It Apply To Civil Commitment Proceedings? ............................................... 798 A. Miranda and the Civil Commitment Process ....................... 799 B. State Laws on the Right to Remain Silent in the Civil Commitment Setting ............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Disability Studies Reader
    CHAPTER 7 A Mad Fight: Psychiatry and Disability Activism Bradley Lewis 100 SUMMARY The Mad Pride movement is made up of activists resisting and critiquing physician-centered psychiatric systems, finding alternative approaches to mental health and helping people choose minimal involvement with psychiatric institutions. They believe mainstream psychiatry over exaggerates pathology and forces conformity though diagnosis and treatment. In this chapter, Bradley Lewis highlights the political and epistemological similarities between the Mad Pride movement and other areas of disability studies. For instance, the social categories of normal and abnormal legitimize the medicalization of different bodies and minds and exert pressure on institutions to stay on the side of normality, or in this case, sanity. Lewis briefly traces the historical roots of Mad Pride to show how diagnoses of insanity were often political abuses aimed at normalizing differing opinions and experiences. The movement entered into the debate to fight involuntary hospitalization and recast mental illness as a myth rather than an objective reality. Today’s Mad Pride often works within mental health services systems by bringing together “consumers” (rather than “survivors” or “ex-patients”) who contribute real input for psychiatric policy. Nevertheless, Mad Pride still wages an epistemological and political struggle with psychiatry, which has undergone a “scientific revolution” that values “objective” data and undervalues humanistic inquiries. For example, biopsychiatric methods led to Prozac-type drugs being prescribed to 67.5 million Americans between 1987 and 2002. Mad Pride staged a hunger strike to protest the reduction of mental illness to a brain disease, arguing this model couldn’t be proved by evidence and limited consumers’ options for treatments like therapy or peer-support.
    [Show full text]
  • Involuntary Outpatient Commitment for the Chronically Mentally Ill Jillane T
    Nebraska Law Review Volume 69 | Issue 2 Article 5 1990 Involuntary Outpatient Commitment for the Chronically Mentally Ill Jillane T. Hinds University of Nebraska College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr Recommended Citation Jillane T. Hinds, Involuntary Outpatient Commitment for the Chronically Mentally Ill, 69 Neb. L. Rev. (1990) Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol69/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law, College of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Jillane T. Hinds* Involuntary Outpatient Commitment for the Chronically Mentally Ill TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction: The (Perceived) Need for Outpatient Commitment .............................................. 346 II. Commitment to Outpatient Treatment .................... 355 A. Outpatient Commitment or Conditional Release? .... 355 1. Conditional Release ............................... 356 2. Outpatient Commitment .......................... 358 B. Outpatient Treatment ................................. 361 1. Treatment Planning ............................... 361 2. Review ............................................. 365 3. Right to Refuse Outpatient Treatment ............ 367 III. Enforcement: Revocation of Outpatient Commitment .... 376 A. Statutory Procedures ................................. 376 B. Constitutional Requirements
    [Show full text]