Book contents
- From Courtroom to Clinic
- From Courtroom to Clinic
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Raising American Standards in the Treatment of Persons with Mental Illness
- 3 The Limits of Hospitalization after Commitment
- 4 Who Speaks for the Children?
- 5 The Right to Refuse Treatment
- 6 The Least Restrictive Alternative
- 7 Informed Consent
- 8 The Right to Die and End-of-Life Decision-Making
- 9 Prohibiting Psychiatrist–Patient Sex
- 10 Psychotherapist–Patient Privilege
- 11 Protecting Others from Dangerous Patients
- 12 The Insanity Defense
- 13 Conclusion
- Index
- References
1 - Introduction
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 February 2019
Edited by
Book contents
- From Courtroom to Clinic
- From Courtroom to Clinic
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Raising American Standards in the Treatment of Persons with Mental Illness
- 3 The Limits of Hospitalization after Commitment
- 4 Who Speaks for the Children?
- 5 The Right to Refuse Treatment
- 6 The Least Restrictive Alternative
- 7 Informed Consent
- 8 The Right to Die and End-of-Life Decision-Making
- 9 Prohibiting Psychiatrist–Patient Sex
- 10 Psychotherapist–Patient Privilege
- 11 Protecting Others from Dangerous Patients
- 12 The Insanity Defense
- 13 Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- From Courtroom to ClinicLegal Cases that Changed Mental Health Treatment, pp. 1 - 4Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
1.Davidson, HA. Review: Mental Illness and Due Process. Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Am J Psychiatry. 120: 202–3, 1963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Association of the Bar of the City of New York with Cornell University Law School. Mental Illness and Due Process. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1962, p. 20Google Scholar
3.Wyatt v. Stickney: A landmark decision. Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program Newsletter, July 2004. Available at: www.adap.net/Wyatt/landmark.pdf Accessed Apr. 30, 2017Google Scholar
4.Oken, D. What to tell cancer patients. A study of medical attitudes. JAMA. 175: 1120–8, 1961CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed