DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 8 – Civil Commitments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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. If an alternative transportation provider providing transportation of a person who is the subject of a temporary detention order becomes unable to continue providing transportation of the person at any time after taking custody of the person, the primary law-enforcement agency for the jurisdiction in which the alternative transportation provider is located at the time he becomes unable to continue providing transportation shall take custody of the person and shall transport the person to the facility of temporary detention. The magistrate may change the transportation provider specified in a temporary detention order at any time prior to the initiation of transportation of a person who is the subject of a temporary detention order pursuant to this section. If the designated transportation provider is changed by the magistrate at any time after the temporary detention order has been executed but prior to the initiation of transportation, the transportation provider having custody of the person shall transfer custody of the person to the transportation provider subsequently specified to provide transportation. Va. Code §§ 37.2-808, 37.2-810, 37.2-817.2, and 37.2-829. Office of the Executive Secretary Department of Judicial Services Rev. 7/21 GENERAL DISTRICT COURT MANUAL CIVIL COMMITMENTS Page 8-2 For information regarding inpatient psychiatric hospital admission of inmates from local correctional facility in accordance with Va. Code §19.2-169.6, please refer to Mental Condition of Defendant in THE CRIMINAL CASE PROCEDURES chapter in this manual. Involuntary Civil Commitment The district court judge or special justice shall render a decision on the petition for involuntary admission after the appointed examiner has presented the report required by Va. Code § 37.2- 815, and after the community services board that serves the county or city where the person resides or, if impracticable, where the person is located has presented a preadmission screening report, with the recommendations for that person’s placement, care and treatment pursuant to Va. Code § 37.2-816. These reports, if not contested, may constitute sufficient evidence upon which the district court judge or the special justice may base his decision. Va. Code § 37.2-817 (A). After observing the person and considering (i) the recommendations of any treating physician or psychologist licensed in Virginia, if available, (ii) any past actions of the person, (iii) any past mental health treatment of the person, (iv) any examiner’s certification, (v) any health records available, (vi) the preadmission screening report, and (vii) any other relevant evidence that may have been admitted including whether the person recently has been found unrestorably incompetent to stand trial after a hearing held pursuant to subsection E of Va. Code § 19.2- 169.1, if the judge or special justice finds by clear and convincing evidence that (a) the person has mental illness and that there exists a substantial likelihood that, as a result of the mental illness, the person will, in the near future, (1) cause serious physical harm to himself or others as evidenced by recent behavior causing , attempting, or threatening harm and other relevant information, if any or (2) suffer serious harm due to his lack of capacity to protect himself from harm or to provide for his basic human needs, (b) all available less restrictive treatment alternatives to involuntary impatient treatment, pursuant to section D, and that would offer an opportunity for the improvement of the person’s conditions have been investigated and determined to be inappropriate, the judge or special justice shall by written order and specific findings so certify and order that the person be admitted to a facility for period of treatment not to exceed 30 days from the date of the court order. Such involuntary admission shall be to a facility designated by the community services board that serves the city or county in which the person was examined as provided in Va. Code § 37.2-816. If the community services board does not designate a facility at the commitment hearing, the person shall be involuntarily admitted to a facility designated by the Commissioner. Upon the expiration of an order for involuntary commitment, the person shall be released unless he is involuntary admitted by further petition and order of the court, or such person makes application for treatment on a voluntary basis as provided for in Va. Code § 73.2-805 or is ordered to mandatory outpatient treatment pursuant to subsection D. Upon motion of the treating physician, a family member or personal representative of the person, or the community services board serving the area where the facility is located the county or city where the person resides, or the county or city where the person receives Office of the Executive Secretary Department of Judicial Services Rev. 7/21 GENERAL DISTRICT COURT MANUAL CIVIL COMMITMENTS Page 8-3 treatment, a hearing shall be held prior to the release date of any involuntarily admitted person to determine whether such person should be ordered to mandatory outpatient treatment pursuant to subsection D upon his release if such person, on at least two previous occasions within 36 months preceding the date of the hearing has been, (A) involuntarily admitted pursuant to this section or (B) the subject of a temporary detention order and voluntarily admitted himself in accordance with the subsection B of Va. Code § 37.1-814. A district judge or special justice shall hold the hearing within 72 hours after receiving the motion for a mandatory outpatient treatment order; however, if the 72-hour period expires on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, the hearing shall be held by the close of the business on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. Va. Code §37.2-817(C) In the order for involuntary admission, the judge or special justice may authorize the treating physician to discharge the person to mandatory outpatient under a discharge plan developed pursuant to subsection C2, if the judge or special justice further finds by clear and convincing evidence that (i) the person has a history of lack of compliance with treatment for mental illness that at least twice with the past 36 months has resulted in the person being subject to an order for involuntary admission pursuant to subsection C; (ii) in view of the person’s treatment history or current behavior, the person is in need of mandatory outpatient treatment following inpatient treatment in order to prevent a relapse or deterioration that would be likely to result in the person meeting the criteria for involuntary inpatient treatment; (iii) as a result of mental illness, the person is unlikely to voluntarily participate in outpatient treatment following inpatient treatment unless the court enters an order authorizing the discharge to mandatory outpatient treatment following inpatient treatment; and (iv) the person is likely to benefit from mandatory outpatient treatment. The duration of the mandatory outpatient treatment shall be determined by the court based on recommendations of the community services board, but shall not exceed 90 days. Upon expiration of the order of mandatory outpatient treatment, the person shall be released unless the order is continued in accordance with Va. Code § 37.2- 817.4. Va. Code §37.2-817 (C1). Clerk and Court Procedures Once executed, law enforcement files the return of the district court form DC-492, Emergency Custody Order, and/or the district court form DC-894A, TEMPORARY DETENTION ORDER with the court. The clerk’s office receives one or more of the following documents: Va. Code § 37.2-804.1. District court form DC-492, EMERGENCY CUSTODY ORDER; district court form DC-894A, TEMPORARY DETENTION ORDER; or district court form DC-4001, PETITION FOR INVOLUNTARY ADMISSION FOR TREATMENT. The patient may be hospitalized and the special justice (or Judge) has already conducted the hearing. District court forms DC-492, EMERGENCY CUSTODY ORDEr and DC-894A, TEMPORARY DETENTION ORDER may be filed, issued, served, or executed by electronic means, and signatures on those documents are to be treated as originals. Office of the Executive Secretary Department of Judicial Services Rev.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Psychosurgery for Political Purposes
    Psychosurgery for Political Purposes Peter R. Breggin, M.D. * INTRODUCTION Neurosurgeons and psychiatrists who favor psychosurgery some­ times show dismay that anyone would accuse them of harboring political aims, and it is true that the average psychosurgeon has little or no interest in the application of his technology to overtly political problems. But it is equally true that several of the nation's leading psychosurgeons have persistently linked their work to the control of urban violence, ghetto disorders and political dissent. These men rode the wave of hysteria generated by the urban upris­ ings of the late 1960's and parlayed the nation's fear into federal and state grants for themselves. As I review their statements and ac­ tions, keep in mind their shared political characteristics. Each of the psychosurgeons targeted potential patients according to well-recognized political categories. They began with a political issue of grave national concern, the inner-city uprisings of 1967 and 1968, and then attempted to redefine it as a medical disease or syndrome to justify their own interventions. This is analogous to the Russian practice of redefining political dissent into psychiatric cate­ gories in order to subject the dissenters to psychiatric authority and treatment. Even if "violence" were a recognized medical disease or syn­ drome, focus on a politically volatile segment of the population would raise the probability of a primarily political interest. In the absence of any such medical disease or syndrome, I the attempt to .. Psychiatrist and Executive Director of the Center for the Study of Psychiatry. 1. Kaimowitz v. Department of Mental Health, Civil No.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Where Involuntary Commitment, Civil Liberties, and the Right to Mental Health Care Collide: an Overview of California's Mental Illness System Meredith Karasch
    Hastings Law Journal Volume 54 | Issue 2 Article 5 1-2003 Where Involuntary Commitment, Civil Liberties, and the Right to Mental Health Care Collide: An Overview of California's Mental Illness System Meredith Karasch Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Meredith Karasch, Where Involuntary Commitment, Civil Liberties, and the Right to Mental Health Care Collide: An Overview of California's Mental Illness System, 54 Hastings L.J. 493 (2003). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol54/iss2/5 This Note 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 Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Where Involuntary Commitment, Civil Liberties, and the Right to Mental Health Care Collide: An Overview of California's Mental Illness System by MEREDITH KARASCH* Introduction Buford George is a fifty-three-year-old diagnosed schizophrenic with violent and criminal tendencies who can often be found on the sidewalk along Mission Street in San Francisco. Over the past twenty years, George has been in and out of jail, mental institutions, and homelessness.2 In 1980, he was arrested for assaulting a woman and released when the case resulted in a deadlocked jury.' He was placed under conservatorship between 1984 and 1986, arrested again in 1998, and released after fifteen months of treatment because he was found competent to stand trial.4 In between episodes such as these, he can usually be found near Fourth and Mission Streets with a "constantly evolving collection of old luggage and clothing" and speaking mostly in unintelligible mumbles.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 330. MENTAL HEALTH CODE DEPARTMENT of MENTAL HEALTH Act 271 of 1945 330.1-330.4 Repealed. 1963, Act 236, Imd. Eff. May 2
    CHAPTER 330. MENTAL HEALTH CODE DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH Act 271 of 1945 330.1-330.4 Repealed. 1963, Act 236, Imd. Eff. May 23, 1963;—1970, Act 138, Imd. Eff. Aug. 1, 1970;—1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. THE HOSPITAL ACT FOR MENTALLY DISEASED PERSONS Act 151 of 1923 330.11-330.71 Repealed. 1966, Act 175, Imd. Eff. July 1, 1966;—1974, Act 107, Eff. Aug. 1, 1974;—1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. Compiler's note: Subsequent to its repeal by Act 258 of 1974, MCL 330.11 was amended by Act 323 of 1974. Prior to the effective date of its repeal, MCL 330.15 was amended by Act 117 of 1975, which expired on Aug. 6, 1975. INTERSTATE COMPACT ON MENTAL HEALTH Act 270 of 1965 330.81-330.86 Repealed. 1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. REIMBURSEMENT FOR HOSPITAL CARE OF MENTALLY ILL PERSONS Act 229 of 1956 330.91-330.94 Repealed. 1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. STATE ASYLUM AT IONIA Act 7 of 1901 330.101 Repealed. 1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. JAMES DECKER MUNSON HOSPITAL Act 129 of 1945 330.161-330.166 Repealed. 1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. JAMES DECKER MUNSON HOSPITAL; LEASE Act 223 of 1947 330.171-330.175 Repealed. 1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. CHILDREN'S CLINIC AT TRAVERSE CITY STATE HOSPITAL Act 39 of 1935 330.181-330.183 Repealed. 1974, Act 258, Eff. Aug. 6, 1975. COMMUNITY HOSPITAL; TRAVERSE CITY Act 48 of 1949 330.191-330.194 Repealed.
    [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]
  • A Guide for Implementing Assisted Outpatient Treatment
    A Guide for Implementing Assisted Outpatient Treatment JUNE 2012 Created for mental health professionals to implement assisted outpatient treatment for individuals with severe mental illness 1 “A Guide for Implementing Assisted Outpatient Treatment” © 2012 by the Treatment Advocacy Center Written by Rosanna Esposito, Jeffrey Geller and Kristina Ragosta The Treatment Advocacy Center is a national nonprofit organization dedicated 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. Comments on Assisted Outpatient Treatment FROM A PARTICIPANT I never knew I could feel so well. FROM A PARENT Without AOT, my son would either be in jail or dead … It alone has made a difference for him by helping him to stay on his meds. FROM A JUDGE [Assisted outpatient treatment] has provided life-saving services to individuals suffering from mental illness … and has reduced the need for action by law enforcement, medical emergency personnel, and the Courts, and lessens the trauma and anguish of family and friends. FROM A MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONAL The clients involved in [AOT] were given the opportunity to recover at home with the support of their families and, by doing so, avoided being sent to the state hospital … The successes achieved by these individuals are inspiring; watching these people move forward in their lives was one of the most rewarding experiences of my career. For additional testimonials please see pages 53-56.
    [Show full text]
  • Grading the States an Analysis of U.S
    Grading the States An Analysis of U.S. Psychiatric Treatment Laws AUTHORS Grading the States: An Analysis of Involuntary Psychiatric Treatment Laws was written and produced by Treatment Advocacy Center staff: Lisa Dailey Director of Advocacy Michael Gray Legislative and Policy Counsel Betsy Johnson Policy Adviser Sabah Muhammad Legislative and Policy Counsel Elizabeth Sinclair Director of Research Brian Stettin Policy Director GRADING THE STATES 2 Contents Executive Summary . 4 Introduction . 8 SECTION I: Involuntary Treatment . 9 SECTION II: Policy Recommendations . 14 Emergency Psychiatric Evaluation . .. 14 Initiation of Evaluation or Treatment . 16 Criteria for Inpatient Commitment . 18 Assisted Outpatient Treatment . 22 SECTION III: Methodology . 27 SECTION IV: Findings . 30 Endnotes . 41 APPENDIX A: State Report Cards . .43 APPENDIX B: Recommended State Statutory Changes . 146 GRADING THE STATES 3 Executive Summary The U .S . mental health system is not one single broken system, but many . Responsibility for making needed reform is in the hands of the states and thousands of local governments . Each has a unique set of laws, regulations, policies and budget priorities that, collectively, make up our national mental health system . We are effectively running 50 different experiments, We are effectively running with no two states taking the same approach . As a result, whether a person receives timely, appropriate 50 different experiments, treatment for an acute psychiatric crisis or chronic with no two states taking psychiatric disease is almost entirely dependent on what state that person is in when the crisis arises . the same approach. Grading the States: An Analysis of U.S. Psychiatric Treatment Laws examines the laws that provide for involuntary treatment for psychiatric illness .
    [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]
  • Abolishing the Concept of Mental Illness
    ABOLISHING THE CONCEPT OF MENTAL ILLNESS In Abolishing the Concept of Mental Illness: Rethinking the Nature of Our Woes, Richard Hallam takes aim at the very concept of mental illness, and explores new ways of thinking about and responding to psychological distress. Though the concept of mental illness has infiltrated everyday language, academic research, and public policy-making, there is very little evidence that woes are caused by somatic dysfunction. This timely book rebuts arguments put forward to defend the illness myth and traces historical sources of the mind/body debate. The author presents a balanced overview of the past utility and current disadvantages of employing a medical illness metaphor against the backdrop of current UK clinical practice. Insightful and easy to read, Abolishing the Concept of Mental Illness will appeal to all professionals and academics working in clinical psychology, as well as psychotherapists and other mental health practitioners. Richard Hallam worked as a clinical psychologist, researcher, and lecturer until 2006, mainly in the National Health Service and at University College London and the University of East London. Since then he has worked independently as a writer, researcher, and therapist. ABOLISHING THE CONCEPT OF MENTAL ILLNESS Rethinking the Nature of Our Woes Richard Hallam First published 2018 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2018 Richard Hallam The right of Richard Hallam to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Szasz Treat Involuntarily Patients with Even Severe Chronic Psychiatric Disorders, Largely Owing to His Influence
    COLUMNS Obituaries Thomas Szasz treat involuntarily patients with even severe chronic psychiatric disorders, largely owing to his influence. Formerly Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, Department Thomas Szasz was born in Hungary and emigrated to the of Psychiatry, Upstate Medical University, State University USA, where he completed his medical education in Cincinnati, of NewYork, Syracuse, NewYork Ohio and his psychoanalytic training in Chicago. He joined the faculty at what is now the Upstate Medical University at Thomas Szasz, arguably the most Syracuse, New York, and remained there, eventually as an controversial psychiatrist, died on emeritus professor, until his death. His writings spawned an 8 September 2012 at the age of eponymous ideology: Szaszians view the concept of mental 92. He was a prolific author, illness and the deprivation of individual civil liberties in the writing over 300 articles and over name of treating mental disorders as anathema. His aphoristic 30 books. In his magnum opus, writing is full of acerbic wit and has been included in many The Myth of Mental Illness, anthologies of aphorisms. He left no doubt that he was published over 50 years ago, he passionate about his views. He was labelled as being an challenged the very concept of anti-psychiatrist, yet distanced himself from other anti- mental illness, which catapulted psychiatrists, such as R. D. Laing. him to fame. This book has been The ideal he espoused was a dyadic relationship between translated into many languages doctor and patient, without any interference from the state or and continues to be widely read and cited. Since no causal third-party insurers.
    [Show full text]
  • Aapp 2017 Abstracts
    AAPP 2017 ABSTRACTS Association for the Advancement of Philosophy and Psychiatry. Annual Conference May 2017 Philosophical Perspectives on Critical Psychiatry: Challenges and Opportunities Rethinking Insight: What Does It Mean to Be Aware of Illness When Awareness Doesn’t Map to Concept of Illness? Kathleen Lowenstein Once considered paradigmatic of a schizophrenia diagnosis, poor insight is a common clinical problem in individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia or other psychotic spectrum disorders. Denying that they are ill and consequently refusing treatment, individuals suffering from poor insight often end up mired in protracted and contentious engagement with frustrated family members and treatment providers. As such, individuals presenting with poor insight constitute one of the most challenging patient populations among those with a schizophrenia diagnosis. The dilemma posed by individuals presenting with poor insight is generally considered to result from lack of treatment, rather than failure of an epistemological framework. However, the work of psychiatric service users highlights the way in which the concept of poor insight is itself indicative of competing epistemological frameworks. Critical psychiatry has challenged the role of master narratives and the way in which traditional framing of mental illness frequently excludes or diminishes the perspectives of psychiatric service users. Central to this conversation has been a focus on the role of meaning in both interpretation of and recovery from extreme states of consciousness. A central tenet of the Hearing Voices Network is that voices demand interpretation. As much work by and with psychiatric service users suggests, the ability of an individual to find meaning in and make meaning of their experiences is often central to their identity and, more broadly, to recovery from states that, in standard medical narratives of psychosis, are frequently presented as arising from neurological dysfunction and thus constituted as essentially meaningless.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembering Thomas Szasz M
    f Ps al o ych rn ia u tr o y J Journal of Psychiatry Ruffalo, J Psychiatry 2014, 17:6 ISSN: 2378-5756 DOI: 10.4172/2378-5756.1000152 Short communication Open Access Remembering Thomas Szasz M. Louis Ruffalo* Psychotherapist, Carolina East Medical Center *Corresponding author: M. Louis Ruffalo ,Adjunct Faculty, Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, 1304- B Commerce Drive, New Bern, NC 28562, USA; Tel: 412-916-4014; E-mail: [email protected] Received Date: September 4, 2014, Accepted Date: September 23, 2014, Published Date: September 30, 2014 Copyright: © 2014, M. Louis Ruffalo, This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Short Communication literature. But it is only half-correct. Szasz maintained throughout his career that mental illness is illness only in the metaphorical sense and Two years ago, Thomas Stephen Szasz passed away at his home in that psychiatric disorders do not meet any of the established upstate New York at the age of 92. Best known as the author of the pathophysiological criteria for classification of disease. “Strictly controversial 1961 book The Myth of Mental Illness, Szasz served for speaking, disease or illness can affect only the body; hence there can be many years as professor of psychiatry at the State University of New no mental illness,” Szasz (1961) wrote. Indeed, he viewed “mental York and authored hundreds of books and articles over the course of illness” as a contradiction of terms.
    [Show full text]