Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Abortion (1)
- Addiction (1)
- Civil commitment proceedings (1)
- Civil liberties (1)
- Competency (1)
-
- Courts (1)
- Daubert (1)
- Drug court (1)
- Drug policy (1)
- Dual relationships (1)
- Electroconvulsive treatment (1)
- Federal Rule of Evidence 702 (1)
- Federal Rule of Evidence 706 (1)
- Forensic testimony (1)
- Informed consent mandate (1)
- Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1)
- Mandated abortion speech (1)
- Mental health (1)
- Mental illness (1)
- North Dakota (1)
- Planned Parenthood of Minnesota (1)
- Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1)
- Psychiatry (1)
- South Dakota v. Rounds (1)
- Speech mandate (1)
- Substance abuse (1)
- Support groups (1)
- Testimony (1)
- Treatment (1)
- West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Health Law and Policy
The Use And Abuse Of Mutual-Support Programs In Drug Courts, Sara Gordon
The Use And Abuse Of Mutual-Support Programs In Drug Courts, Sara Gordon
Scholarly Works
There is a large gap between what we know about the disease of addiction and its appropriate treatment, and the treatment received by individuals who are ordered into treatment as a condition of participation in drug court. Most medical professionals are not appropriately trained about addiction and most addiction treatment providers do not have the education and training necessary to provide appropriate evidence-based services to individuals who are referred by drug courts for addiction treatment. This disconnect between our understanding of addiction and available addiction treatment has wide-reaching impact for individuals who attempt to receive medical care for addiction in …
The Danger Zone: How The Dangerousness Standard In Civil Commitment Proceedings Harms People With Serious Mental Illness, Sara Gordon
Scholarly Works
Almost every American state allows civil commitment upon a finding that a person, as a result of mental illness, is gravely disabled and unable to meet their basic needs for food and shelter. Yet in spite of these statutes, most psychiatrists and courts will not commit an individual until they are found to pose a danger to themselves or others. All people have certain rights to be free from unwanted medical treatment, but for people with serious mental illness, those civil liberties are an abstraction, safeguarded for them by a system that is not otherwise ensuring access to shelter and …
Crossing The Line: Daubert, Dual Roles, And The Admissibility Of Forensic Mental Health Testimony, Sara Gordon
Crossing The Line: Daubert, Dual Roles, And The Admissibility Of Forensic Mental Health Testimony, Sara Gordon
Scholarly Works
Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals often testify as forensic experts in civil commitment and criminal competency proceedings. When an individual clinician assumes both a treatment and a forensic role in the context of a single case, however, that clinician forms a dual relationship with the patient—a practice that creates a conflict of interest and violates professional ethical guidelines. The court, the parties, and the patient are all affected by this conflict and the biased testimony that may result from dual relationships. When providing forensic testimony, the mental health professional’s primary duty is to the court, not to the patient, …
Abortion And Compelled Physician Speech, David Orentlicher
Abortion And Compelled Physician Speech, David Orentlicher
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.