Premium
Changing mental health law: Butting heads with a billygoat
Author(s) -
Callahan Lisa A.
Publication year - 1986
Publication title -
behavioral sciences and the law
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.649
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1099-0798
pISSN - 0735-3936
DOI - 10.1002/bsl.2370040306
Subject(s) - face (sociological concept) , informed consent , law , mental health act , mental health , medical emergency , order (exchange) , medicine , psychology , psychiatry , sociology , political science , alternative medicine , business , social science , finance , pathology
This research examines the implementation of the Davis v . Hubbard (1980) decision which granted patients at Lima State Hospital in Ohio a qualified right to refuse psychotropic medication. The issues identified by the court are addressed including informed consent, emergency administration of medication, and due process procedures. The data include a content analysis of all due process hearing records during the first 24 months of the court order which include the patient objections, staff justifications for forcing medication, and the decisions. Also included are face‐to‐face interviews with 92 patients. It is concluded that most decisions do not meet the criteria set by the court for forced medications, and that the patients perceived the procedures to be unfair.