Legal & Ethical Issues in Clinical Practice
Legal & Ethical Issues
Patients' Rights and Clinical Practice Guidelines
- Encompasses civil commitment and criminal commitment.
APA Ethical Principles
- General Principles:
- Broad, aspirational goals.
- Ethical Standards:
- Specific ethical issues.
- Comprehensive, but not exhaustive.
- American Psychological Association:
- Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.
Mental Health and the Law
- Managing care for people with serious mental illness requires balancing:
- Patient’s rights as an individual.
- Patient’s individual safety.
- Society’s right to safety and security.
- These factors may be difficult to determine and may conflict.
Civil Commitment
- Involuntary commitment to a mental hospital:
- Laws vary by state; there is no uniform standard.
- Government caring for the “mentally ill” is a relatively new concept.
- First commitment laws in the late 1800s.
- Previously, care was provided by family or the individual was abandoned.
- Evolving area of law.
- Abuses by the state and individuals have occurred.
- Recent history trends:
- “Liberal era” (1960-1980):
- Emphasized the rights of the individual.
- “Neoconservative era” (1980-present):
- Emphasized the rights of the majority.
Government Authority & Commitment Criteria
- Government uses its authority through:
- Police power.
- Parens patriae (state as parent).
- Possible commitment criteria:
- Person has a “mental illness” and needs treatment.
- Is dangerous to self or others.
- “Gravely disabled” – inability to care for self.
Legal Proceedings
- Legal proceedings to assess status:
- Person fails to seek help.
- Others feel that help is needed.
- Petition is made to a judge on behalf of the person.
- The individual must be notified of the commitment process.
- Judge makes a decision, informed by expert opinion.
- Usually waived for short-term emergency situations that require immediate action.
Criteria: Have a “Mental Illness”
- Legal concept:
- Severe thought/emotional disturbance affecting health/safety.
- APA definition:
- “Severe mental disorder”.
- Exclusions:
- Often excludes drug abuse, personality disorders, and mental retardation.
- DSM-5 diagnosis ≠ “mental illness” in legal terms.
Criteria: Dangerousness
- Psychologists are good at predicting general trends, but not specific acts.
- Misconception:
- People with mental illness are more likely to be dangerous.
- Perpetuated by sensational media portrayals.
- Stereotypes/bias: Ethnic minorities are more likely to be seen as dangerous.
- The vast majority of people with mental illness are NOT dangerous.
- Goes against basic legal rights (innocent until proven guilty).
Criteria: Grave Disability
- Unable to provide for own “basic needs.”
- Professionals (and laws) differ widely on what this specifically means.
- Goes against the rights of the individual, which are protected in the US Constitution.
Legal Rulings
- Rouse v. Cameron (1966):
- Right to treatment and not just a therapeutic environment.
- Must use proven treatments.
- Supposed to treat the individual, not punish.
- Wyatt v. Stickney (1972):
- Constitutional right to treatment.
- Right to privacy and dignity.
- Right to the least restrictive regimen necessary.
- Freedom from unnecessary/excessive medications.
- Right to send sealed mail and use the telephone.
- Individual treatment plan that is periodically reviewed.
- Mental Health Systems Act (1980) Sec. 501:
- Advisory law – not mandated.
- Appropriate treatment and services.
- No treatment without informed consent.
- Not restrained unless in extreme circumstances.
- Confidentiality of records.
- Inform about treatment/condition in a timely manner.
- Participate in/be informed about the treatment course.
Civil Commitment: Problems
- Unintended consequences & ongoing issues:
- Deinstitutionalization:
- Closing of large hospitals.
- Increase in homelessness.
- Criminalization of the mentally ill.
- Transinstitutionalization:
- Mentally ill in community care.
Criminal Commitment
- “Competency” & “insanity”.
- Process used when:
- One is accused of committing a crime and is detained in a mental health facility until assessment and/or legal proceedings.
- AND/OR
- One invokes the claim of “not guilty by reason of insanity”.
Competency
- Are able to understand proceedings?
- Do need treatment for mental illness?
- Oriented to person, place, & time?
- Know role of lawyers, judge, & jury?
- Understand nature of crime/charges?
- Understand what might happen to you?
Criminal Commitment - Necessary Elements & Insanity
- Necessary elements for criminal guilt:
- actus rea – “wrongful deed”.
- mens rea – “criminal intent”.
- “Insanity”:
- Legal concept – not a psychological one.
- Frequently portrayed (poorly) in media, but the use is rare in the real world.
- The insanity defense is an affirmative defense.
- Acknowledge the act but dispute mens rea.
Assessing Insanity
- M’Naghten rule (1843):
- Daniel M’Naghten acting on “voice of God”.
- One of the first times that psychiatric testimony was ever used in a murder trial.
- Did the person know right from wrong?
- Widely used in the US, either alone or with other rules (approximately ½ of states use the rule alone).
- Now used in the context of whether to try children as adults.
- Durham test (1954):
- Was the criminal act a product of a mental disease or mental defect?
- If so, then not responsible for actions.
- Generally judged to be too broad & overly dependent on psychiatrists’ judgments.
- Only New Hampshire still uses this test.
- American Law Institute Rule (1972):
- Able to appreciate the wrongfulness of his/her conduct AND.
- Able to conform his/her conduct to the law?
- Does not include abnormality that is only antisocial or criminal behavior.
- Used in 21 state courts.
- More specific than Durham.
- More broad than M’Naghten.
- Insanity Defense Reform Act (1984):
- Passed after John Hinckley tried to kill President Reagan.
- Dropped volitional aspect of trying crime – “could the impulse be stopped?” (Was the impulse irresistible or simply not resisted?).
- Before, prosecution had to prove that the defendant was sane.
- Now, the defense has to prove that the defendant is insane.
Ongoing Issues
- Can people be forced to take meds to be ruled “competent?”
- What should happen to individuals who commit crimes while “insane?”
- What diagnoses (if any) should be excluded from the insanity defense?..