Behavior Modification, Token Economies, and the Law
Token and Taboo: Behavior Modification, Token Economies, and the Law David B. Wexler* Not surprisingly, legal concepts from the prisoners' rights move- ment have begun to spill over into the area of the rights of the institu- tionalized mentally ill. Since the mental patient movement is free of the law and order backlash that restrains the legal battles of prison- ers, it may evoke considerable sympathy from the public, the legisla- tures, and the courts. Commentators and authorities have recently directed attention to important procedural problems in the administration of psychiatric jus- tice' and to the legal issues presented by various methods of therapy. Legal restrictions on a hospital's right to subject unwilling patients to electroconvulsive therapy ' and psychosurgery3 are developing rapidly, and close scrutiny is now being given to "aversive" techniques of be- havior modification and control 4-such as procedures for suppressing transvestitism by administering painful electric shocks to the patient while dressed in women's clothing, and procedures for controlling al- * Professor of Law, University of Arizona. B.A., 1961, Harpur College; J.D., 1964, New York University. 1. See, e.g., Wexler, Scoville et al, The Administration of Psychiatric Justice: Theory and Practice in Arizona, 13 ARIz. L. REV. 1 (1971) [hereinafter cited as PSYCHIATRIC JUSTICE PROJECT]. 2. N.Y. Times, July 15, 1972, at 7, col. 3. In California, section 5325(f) of the Welfare and Institutions Code gives a patient the right to refuse shock treatment, but the following section allows the professional person in charge of the institution, or his designee, to deny the right "for good cause." CAL.
[Show full text]