DOCSLIB.ORG

Title 35 Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Title 35 Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities TITLE 35 MENTAL HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES; SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT Chapter 426. Persons With Mental Illness; Dangerous Persons; Commitment; Housing 427. Persons With Intellectual or Developmental Disabilities 428. Nonresident Persons With Mental Illness or Intellectual Disabilities 430. Mental Health; Developmental Disabilities; Substance Abuse Treatment Programs Chapter 426 2017 EDITION Persons With Mental Illness; Dangerous Persons; Commitment; Housing PERSONS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS 426.125 Qualifications and requirements for con- (Definitions) ditional release 426.127 Outpatient commitment 426.005 Definitions for ORS 426.005 to 426.390 426.129 Community liaison (Hospitals) 426.130 Court determination of mental illness; 426.010 State hospitals for persons with mental discharge; release for voluntary treat- illness ment; conditional release; commitment; assisted outpatient treatment; prohibition 426.020 Superintendent; chief medical officer relating to firearms; period of commit- 426.060 Commitment to Oregon Health Authority; ment powers of authority; placement; transfer 426.133 Assisted outpatient treatment 426.135 Counsel on appeal; costs of appeal (Commitment Procedure) 426.140 Place of confinement; attendant 426.070 Initiation; notification required; recom- mendation to court; citation 426.150 Transportation to treatment facility 426.072 Care while in custody; responsibilities of 426.155 Release of information about person held licensed independent practitioner; rules in custody pending commitment proceed- ing or while committed or recommitted 426.074 Investigation; procedure; content; report 426.160 Disclosure of record of commitment pro- 426.075 Notice and records of treatment prior to ceeding hearing; procedures 426.170 Delivery of certified copy of record 426.080 Execution and return of citation or war- rant of detention (Emergency and Voluntary Admissions) 426.090 Citation; service 426.180 Emergency commitment of individuals in 426.095 Commitment hearing; postponement; Indian country right to cross-examine; admissibility of 426.200 Duties following emergency admission investigation report 426.210 Limit of detention after commitment in 426.100 Advice of court; appointment of legal emergency proceedings counsel; costs; representation of state’s 426.217 Change of status of committed patient to interest voluntary patient; effect of change 426.110 Appointment of examiners; qualifications; 426.220 Voluntary admission; leave of absence; costs notice to parent or guardian 426.120 Examination report; rules 426.223 Retaking persons in custody of or com- 426.123 Observation of person in custody; warn- mitted to Oregon Health Authority; as- ing; evidence sistance of peace officers and others Title 35 Page 1 (2017 Edition) MENTAL HEALTH; SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT 426.225 Voluntary admission to state hospital of (Miscellaneous) committed person; examination by li- 426.310 Reimbursement of county expenses for censed independent practitioner commitment proceedings involving non- residents (Emergency Care and Treatment) 426.320 Payment of certain expenses by the state 426.228 Custody; authority of peace officers and other individuals; transporting to facility; 426.330 Presentation and payment of claims reports; examination of person 426.335 Limitations on liability 426.231 Hold by licensed independent practitioner; 426.370 Withholding information obtained in cer- when authorized; statement required tain commitment or admission investi- 426.232 Emergency admission; notice; limit of gations hold 426.380 Availability of writ of habeas corpus 426.233 Authority of community mental health 426.385 Rights of committed persons program director and of other individuals; 426.390 Construction costs of transportation 426.395 Posting of statement of rights of commit- 426.234 Duties of professionals at facility where ted persons person admitted; notification; duties of court (Licensing of Persons Who May Order 426.235 Transfer between hospital and nonhospital Restraint or Seclusion) facilities 426.415 Licensing of persons who may order and 426.236 Rules oversee use of restraint and seclusion in 426.237 Prehearing detention; duties of commu- facilities providing mental health treat- nity mental health program director; cer- ment to individuals under 21 years of age; tification for treatment; court proceedings rules 426.238 Classifying facilities COMMUNITY INTEGRATION OF PERSONS WITH CHRONIC MENTAL (Costs) ILLNESS 426.241 Payment of care, custody and treatment 426.490 Policy costs; denial of payment; rules 426.495 Definitions for ORS 426.490 to 426.500; rules 426.250 Payment of costs related to commitment proceedings 426.500 Powers and duties of Oregon Health Au- thority; rules 426.255 County to pay costs 426.502 Definitions for ORS 426.502 to 426.508 (Trial Visits; Conditional Release; 426.504 Power of Oregon Health Authority to de- Outpatient Commitment; Early Release) velop community housing for persons with 426.273 Trial visits chronic mental illness; sale of community housing; conditions 426.275 Effect of failure to adhere to condition of placement 426.506 Community Mental Health Housing Fund; Community Housing Trust Account; re- 426.278 Distribution of copies of conditions for port outpatient commitment or trial visit 426.508 Sale of F. H. Dammasch State Hospital; 426.292 Release prior to expiration of term of fair market value; redevelopment of prop- commitment erty; property reserved for community housing (Competency and Discharge) 426.295 Judicial determination of competency; SEXUALLY DANGEROUS PERSONS restoration of competency 426.510 “Sexually dangerous person” defined 426.297 Payment of expenses for proceeding under 426.650 Voluntary admission to state institution; ORS 426.295 rules 426.300 Discharge of committed persons; applica- 426.670 Treatment programs for sexually danger- tion for assistance on behalf of committed ous persons person 426.675 Determination of sexually dangerous per- 426.301 Release of committed person; certification sons; custody pending sentencing; hear- of continued mental illness; service of ing; sentencing; rules certificate; content; period of further 426.680 Trial visits for probationer commitment; effect of failure to protest further commitment EXTREMELY DANGEROUS PERSONS 426.303 Effect of protest of further commitment; WITH MENTAL ILLNESS advice of court 426.701 Commitment of “extremely dangerous” 426.307 Court hearing; continuance; attorney; ex- person with mental illness; requirements amination; determination of mental ill- for conditional release; rules ness; order of further commitment; period 426.702 Discharge from commitment of extremely of commitment dangerous person with mental illness; re- 426.309 Effect of ORS 426.217 and 426.301 to 426.307 quirements for further commitment; pro- on other discharge procedure test and hearing Title 35 Page 2 (2017 Edition) PERSONS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS 426.020 PERSONS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS preceded and led to one or more of the hos- (Definitions) pitalizations or inpatient placements referred to in sub-subparagraph (ii) of this subpara- 426.005 Definitions for ORS 426.005 to graph; and 426.390. (1) As used in ORS 426.005 to 426.390, unless the context requires other- (iv) Who, unless treated, will continue, to wise: a reasonable medical probability, to phys- ically or mentally deteriorate so that the (a) “Community mental health program person will become a person described under director” means the director of an entity that either subparagraph (A) or (B) of this para- provides the services described in ORS graph or both. 430.630 (3) to (5). (g) “Prehearing period of detention” (b) “Director of the facility” means a su- means a period of time calculated from the perintendent of a state mental hospital, the initiation of custody during which a person chief of psychiatric services in a community may be detained under ORS 426.228, 426.231, hospital or the person in charge of treatment 426.232 or 426.233. and rehabilitation programs at other treat- ment facilities. (2) Whenever a community mental health program director, director of the facility, su- (c) “Facility” means a state mental hos- perintendent of a state hospital or adminis- pital, community hospital, residential facility, trator of a facility is referred to, the detoxification center, day treatment facility reference includes any designee such person or such other facility as the authority deter- has designated to act on the person’s behalf mines suitable that provides diagnosis and in the exercise of duties. [1961 c.706 §25; 1973 evaluation, medical care, detoxification, so- c.838 §1; 1987 c.903 §5; 1989 c.993 §3; 1993 c.484 §11; 2001 cial services or rehabilitation to persons who c.900 §125; 2007 c.70 §203; 2009 c.595 §381; 2009 c.828 §23; are in custody during a prehearing period of 2011 c.720 §160; 2013 c.360 §15; 2015 c.433 §1; 2015 c.461 detention or who have been committed to the §1; 2017 c.356 §47] Oregon Health Authority under ORS 426.130. (d) “Licensed independent practitioner” (Hospitals) means: 426.010 State hospitals for persons (A) A physician, as defined in ORS with mental illness. Except as otherwise 677.010; ordered by the Oregon Health Authority (B) A nurse practitioner certified under pursuant to ORS 179.325, the Oregon State ORS 678.375 and authorized to write pre- Hospital campuses in Salem, Marion County, scriptions under ORS 678.390; or and in Junction City, Lane County, shall be used as state hospitals for the care and (C) A naturopathic physician licensed treatment of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • The Use of Conservatorships and Adult Guardianships and Other Options in the Care of the Mentally Ill in the United States
    The Use of Conservatorships and Adult Guardianships and Other Options in the Care of the Mentally Ill in the United States By: Robert Barton, Esq., Stacie Lau Esq., and Lydia L. Lockett, Esq.* Family Members as Guardians for Mentally Ill Patients World Guardianship Congress May 29, 2014, Arlington, VA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 II. PREVALENCE OF MENTAL ILLNESS IN THE UNITED STATES .............................1 A. Types of Mental Illness ............................................................................................1 1. Anxiety disorders .........................................................................................2 2. Schizophrenia ...............................................................................................2 3. Dementia ......................................................................................................3 4. Eating Disorders ...........................................................................................4 5. Addiction Disorders .....................................................................................4 B. Defining Mental Illness/Incapacity ..........................................................................5 1. Daily Activities v. Communicative Ability .................................................5 2. Undue influence ...........................................................................................6 3. Isolated
    [Show full text]
  • Title 35 Public Health and Safety
    TITLE 35 - PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY CHAPTER 1 - ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE 1 - IN GENERAL 35-1-101. Local contributions; disposition. All monies paid to the state treasurer representing contributions by city councils, county commissioners, trustees of school districts, or other public agencies, for public health purposes, shall be set up and designated on the books of the state treasurer in a separate account, and shall be expended and disbursed upon warrants drawn by the state auditor against said account when the vouchers therefor have been approved by the department of health. 35-1-102. Sanitation of public institutions. It shall be the duty of the officers, managers, superintendents, proprietors and lessees of all hospitals, asylums, infirmaries, prisons, jails, schools, theaters, public places and public institutions to remedy any and all defects relating to the unsanitary condition of such institution, or institutions, as may be under their control, when such defects shall have been called to their attention in writing by the department of health. 35-1-103. Neglect or failure of officials to perform duty. Any member of the department of health, any county health officer, or any officer, superintendent, or principal of any city, town, county or institution named in this act, who shall fail or neglect to perform any of the duties herein required of them, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in the sum of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or shall be confined in the county jail for a period of not less than six (6) months, nor more than a year, or both.
    [Show full text]
  • Paternalism, Civil Commitment and Illness Politics: Assessing the Current Debate and Outlining a Future Direction
    Journal of Law and Health Volume 7 Issue 2 Article 3 1993 Paternalism, Civil Commitment and Illness Politics: Assessing the Current Debate and Outlining a Future Direction Bruce A. Arrigo University of Delaware Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/jlh Part of the Health Law and Policy Commons, and the Law and Psychology Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Recommended Citation Bruce A. Arrigo, Paternalism, Civil Commitment and Illness Politics: Assessing the Current Debate and Outlining a Future Direction, 7 J.L. & Health 131 (1992-1993) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Health by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PATERNALISM, CIVIL COMMITMENT AND ILLNESS POLITICS: ASSESSING THE CURRENT DEBATE AND OUTLINING A FUTURE DIRECTION BRUCE A. ARRIGO 1 I. INTRODUCTION .................................... 132 II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ........................... 135 II. WHEN THE COURTS AND PSYCHIATRY SPEAK FOR THE CITIZEN/ O UTSIDER ........................................ 142 A. On The Meaning of Mental Illness ................ 142 B. Pitfalls in PredictingDangerousness .............. 144 C. The Gravely Disabled Criterion ................... 145 IV. CAUGHT IN THE CROSSFIRE: PSYCHIATRIC TREATMENT AND A PREFERENCE FOR LIBERTY ........................... 148 A. The Right to Refuse Antipsychotic Medications ...... 148 B. The Least Restrictive Alternative Doctrine .......... 151 C. Involuntary Outpatient Civil Commitment ......... 154 V. THE POLITICS OF ABANDONMENT ........................ 157 VI. THE THREE FORMS OF PATERNALISM ..................... 157 A . Social Control ................................ 157 B. Custody ..................................... 159 C. Treatment ................................... 160 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS .................................. 161 A .
    [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]
  • Involuntary Outpatient Commitment1 Myths and Facts
    Involuntary Outpatient Commitment1 Myths and Facts Under Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC), a person with a serious mental health condition is mandated by a court to follow a specific treatment plan, usually requiring the person to take medication and sometimes directing where the person can live and what his or her daily activities must include. Proponents of IOC claim that it is effective in reducing violent behavior, incarcerations, and hospitalizations among individuals with serious mental health conditions.2 However, repeated studies have shown no evidence that mandating outpatient treatment through a court order is effective; to the limited extent that court-ordered outpatient treatment has shown improved outcomes, these outcomes appear to result from the intensive services that have been made available to participants in those clinical trials rather than from the existence of a court order mandating treatment. In addition, studies have shown that force and coercion drive people away from treatment.3 “By its very nature, outpatient commitment may undermine the treatment alliance and increase consumers’ aversion to voluntary involvement with services,” according to a study cited in “Opening Pandora’s Box: The Practical and Legal Dangers of Involuntary Outpatient Commitment,” published in Psychiatric Services.4 There is ample evidence that intensive services provided on a voluntary basis can bring tremendous improvements in outcomes such as reduced hospitalizations, reduced arrests, longer tenure in stable housing, and reduced symptoms; there is no evidence that mandating outpatient services through a court order has any additional benefit. Involuntary outpatient treatment has high costs with minimal returns, is not likely to reduce violent behavior, and there are alternatives that are more effective and efficient.
    [Show full text]
  • Involuntary Civil Commitments—Common Questions and Review of State Practices
    Washington State Institute for Public Policy 110 Fifth Avenue SE, Suite 214 ● PO Box 40999 ● Olympia, WA 98504 ● 360.586.2677 ● www.wsipp.wa.gov July 2015 Involuntary Civil Commitments: Common Questions and a Review of State Practices In 2014 and 2015, the Washington State Summary Legislature directed the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) to review This review examines differences in state laws and state practices regarding civil commitments procedures for involuntarily committing for involuntary mental health treatment (see individuals who may be a danger to themselves or others as a result of mental illness. An next page). For a treatment commitment to involuntary civil commitment may involve a short- occur, the court must make a determination term emergency detention, where an individual is that as a result of a mental illness, an held in temporary custody to prevent harm to individual poses a danger to self or others. themselves or others. At an initial commitment hearing, the court may issue an involuntary This review examines state variation in the treatment order that mandates hospitalization or civil commitment process—from the participation in an agreed outpatient treatment initiation of a petition to the discharge of a plan. In a limited percentage of cases, an patient. We answer common questions extended commitment may be necessary, if an related to involuntary civil commitments individual requires ongoing treatment and and address how policy and practices differ hospitalization. from state to state. We cover the legal requirements for civil commitments, discuss The Washington State Legislature directed the who may initiate a petition, and detail how Washington State Institute for Public Policy individuals are deemed eligible for (WSIPP) to investigate state practices regarding involuntary holds.
    [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]
  • Criteria for Involuntary Commitment in North Carolina
    Criteria for Involuntary Commitment in North Carolina Mental Illness (Adults) an illness that so lessens the capacity of the individual to use self-control, judgment, and discretion in the conduct of his affairs and social relations as to make it necessary or advisable for him to be under treatment, care, supervision, guidance, or control. Mental Illness (Minors) a mental condition, other than mental retardation alone, that so impairs the youth's capacity to exercise age-adequate self-control or judgment in the conduct of his activities and social relationships that he is in need of treatment. Substance abuse the pathological use or abuse of alcohol or other drugs in a way or to a degree that produces an impairment in personal, social, or occupational functioning. Substance abuse may include a pattern of tolerance and withdrawal. Dangerous to self Within the relevant past, the individual has: 1. acted in such a way as to show that a. he would be unable, without care, supervision, and the continued assistance of others not otherwise available, to exercise self-control, judgment, and discretion in the conduct of his daily responsibilities and social relations, or to satisfy his need for nourishment, personal or medical care, shelter, or self-protection and safety; and b. there is a reasonable probability of his suffering serious physical debilitation within the near future unless adequate treatment is given. Behavior that is grossly irrational, actions that the individual is unable to control, behavior that is grossly inappropriate to the situation, or other evidence of severely impaired insight and judgment creates an inference that the individual is unable to care for himself; or 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Involuntary Outpatient Commitment1 Myths and Facts
    Involuntary Outpatient Commitment1 Myths and Facts Under Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC), a person with a serious mental health condition is mandated by a court to follow a specific treatment plan, usually requiring the person to take medication and sometimes directing where the person can live and what his or her daily activities must include. Proponents of IOC claim that it is effective in reducing violent behavior, incarcerations, and hospitalizations among individuals with serious mental health conditions.2 However, repeated studies have shown no evidence that mandating outpatient treatment through a court order is effective; to the limited extent that court-ordered outpatient treatment has shown improved outcomes, these outcomes appear to result from the intensive services that have been made available to participants in those clinical trials rather than from the existence of a court order mandating treatment. In addition, studies have shown that force and coercion drive people away from treatment.3 “By its very nature, outpatient commitment may undermine the treatment alliance and increase consumers’ aversion to voluntary involvement with services,” according to a study cited in “Opening Pandora’s Box: The Practical and Legal Dangers of Involuntary Outpatient Commitment,” published in Psychiatric Services.4 There is ample evidence that intensive services provided on a voluntary basis can bring tremendous improvements in outcomes such as reduced hospitalizations, reduced arrests, longer tenure in stable housing, and reduced symptoms; there is no evidence that mandating outpatient services through a court order has any additional benefit. Involuntary outpatient treatment has high costs with minimal returns, is not likely to reduce violent behavior, and there are alternatives that are more effective and efficient.
    [Show full text]