Psychiatric and Mental Health Commons^™

Broken Promises: The Granite State’S Return To The Institutionalization Of Children With Disabilities, Elizabeth Trautz

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

In 1975, the New Hampshire legislature enacted a progressive statute which mandated the Department of Health and Human Services “to establish, maintain, implement and coordinate a comprehensive service delivery system for developmentally disabled persons.” This law was innovative for its time; it decreed that individual service plans (ISPs) be developed for every client in the state’s service delivery system, guaranteed “a right to adequate and humane habilitation and treatment[,]” and contemplated the state’s area agency system as we know it today. The statute was a steppingstone for the 1981 class action lawsuit of Garrity v. Gallen. This was one of …

Psychiatric Boarding In New Hampshire: Violation Of A Statutory Right To Treatment, James A. Mcclure

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] "New Hampshire law provides for the involuntary commitment of a patient such as Jane when she is a danger to herself or others as a result of mental illness. The patient has a right to treatment under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 135-C:1, et seq. Specifically, the patient should receive "adequate and humane treatment" pursuant to an "individual service plan" and "in the least restrictive environment necessary." However, appropriate facilities often are not available for patients waiting in emergency rooms, and patients can become trapped for hours or even days. This phenomenon is called "psychiatric boarding."

New Hampshire is …

From Trusted Confidant To Witness For The Prosecution: The Case Against The Recognition Of A Dangerous-Patient Exception To The Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege, Deborah Paruch

The University of New Hampshire Law Review

[Excerpt] “In 1996, in Jaffee v. Redmond, the U.S. Supreme Court, pursuant to the authority set forth in Federal Rule of Evidence 501, recognized a psychotherapist-patient privilege in the federal courts. In doing so, the Court acknowledged the essential role that confidentiality plays in a therapist-patient relationship and also recognized the important role that psychotherapy plays in the mental health of the American citizenry. However, in dicta set out in a footnote near the conclusion of the opinion (footnote 19 of the opinion), the Court suggested that the privilege might not be absolute, that it might need to “give way …