Attitudes of clinical psychologists toward involuntary civil commitment law (original) (raw)
Related papers
This article presents results of a national survey of psychiatrists in the United States about involuntary civil commitment. The questionnaire, created by the researcher, asked respondents about their knowledge of and support for various legal standards surrounding inpatient and outpatient commitment. Data from 739 members of the American Psychiatric Association indicated support for relatively limited definitions of mental disorder for purposes of commitment and relatively limited legal grounds for commitment. Respondents frequently gave inaccurate responses about the grounds for commitment in their states, as well as whether involuntary outpatient commitment is allowed in their states. A comparison of results with prior surveys of psychiatrists is provided, and policy implications are discussed.
Psychiatrists' opinions about involuntary civil commitment: results of a national survey
The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2007
This article presents results of a national survey of psychiatrists in the United States about involuntary civil commitment. The questionnaire, created by the researcher, asked respondents about their knowledge of and support for various legal standards surrounding inpatient and outpatient commitment. Data from 739 members of the American Psychiatric Association indicated support for relatively limited definitions of mental disorder for purposes of commitment and relatively limited legal grounds for commitment. Respondents frequently gave inaccurate responses about the grounds for commitment in their states, as well as whether involuntary outpatient commitment is allowed in their states. A comparison of results with prior surveys of psychiatrists is provided, and policy implications are discussed.
Civil commitment--the American experience
PubMed, 2006
The evolution of U.S. civil commitment law needs to be understood within the context of changes in psychiatry and medicine, as well as larger social policy and economic changes. American civil commitment law has reflected the swinging pendulum of social attitudes towards civil commitment, oscillating between more and less restriction for both procedural and substantive standards. These standards have evolved from a "need for treatment" approach to a "dangerousness" rationale, and now may be moving to a position in which these justifications are combined, particularly in the context of involuntary outpatient commitment. Civil commitment in the United States has been shaped by multiple factors, including sensitivity to civil rights, public perception of psychiatry, availability of resources, and larger economic pressures. We suggest that current American commitment practice is influenced more by economic factors and social perceptions of mental illness than by changing legal standards.
Police Involvement and Influence in Involuntary Civil Commitment
Psychiatric Services, 1984
The long-term patient in the community: life style patterns and treatment implications. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 33:291-295, 1982 75. Goldman HH, Gattozzi AA, Taube CA: Defining and counting the chronically mentally ill. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 32:21-27, 1981 76. Minkoff K: A map of chronic mental patients, in The Chronic Mental Patient. Edited by Talbott jA. Washing
The Effectiveness of Outpatient Civil Commitment
2014
The effects of outpatient civil com-mitment on community tenure and functioning were studied in a group of 20 patients with a history of recur-rent hospitalizations, noncompliance with outpatient treatment, and good response to treatment. During the first 12 months of outpatient corn-mitrnent, patients experienced sig-nificant reductions in visits to the psychiatric emergency service, hos-pital admissions, and lengths of stay compared with the 12 months before commitment. They significantly in-creased the number of appointments kept with their psychiatrist. It ap-pears that when used judiciously, outpatient civil commitment is a helpful tool in maintaining hospital recidivists in the community. (Psy-chiatric Services 47:1251-1253, 1996) U se of oritpatient civil coti)niit-ment has been advocated as a nicans to redrice the rehospitahization rate for a group of seveicly mentally ill reciclivists. However, its Potential pitfalls have also h)een well described, Dr.?wIunetz is chief clin...