A call for minds: the unknown extent of societal influence on the legal rights of involuntarily and voluntarily committed mental health patients.

Annals of health law Pub Date : 2010-01-01
Teresa Cannistraro
{"title":"A call for minds: the unknown extent of societal influence on the legal rights of involuntarily and voluntarily committed mental health patients.","authors":"Teresa Cannistraro","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article begins and ends with a call for more empirical research to understand the connection between societal views of mental illness and the legal system. The author asserts that changing social perceptions of mental illness certainly affect legal outcomes and commitment levels, but the degree remains unknown. This article explores the above two topics through the framework of the Circuit Court 'split' regarding the Constitutional rights of persons committed to state mental health institutions. A main facet of the 'split' is centered on the Circuits' disagreement about whether or not all mentally ill patients committed to institutions deserve the same Constitutional protections.</p>","PeriodicalId":79788,"journal":{"name":"Annals of health law","volume":"19 2","pages":"425-40, preceding i"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of health law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article begins and ends with a call for more empirical research to understand the connection between societal views of mental illness and the legal system. The author asserts that changing social perceptions of mental illness certainly affect legal outcomes and commitment levels, but the degree remains unknown. This article explores the above two topics through the framework of the Circuit Court 'split' regarding the Constitutional rights of persons committed to state mental health institutions. A main facet of the 'split' is centered on the Circuits' disagreement about whether or not all mentally ill patients committed to institutions deserve the same Constitutional protections.

对思想的呼吁:社会对非自愿和自愿精神疾病患者的法律权利的影响程度未知。
这篇文章的开头和结尾都呼吁进行更多的实证研究,以了解社会对精神疾病的看法与法律制度之间的联系。提交人断言,社会对精神疾病观念的改变肯定会影响法律结果和承诺水平,但影响程度尚不清楚。本文通过巡回法院关于被送往州精神卫生机构的人的宪法权利的“分裂”框架探讨了上述两个主题。“分裂”的一个主要方面集中在巡回法院在是否所有被送进精神病院的精神病患者都应该得到同样的宪法保护上的分歧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信