The Mental health court session that I observed was focused on issues regarding commitment issues. There were seven cases on the docket on the day that I attended. The cases ranged from individuals dealing with bipolar disorder to paranoid schizophrenia. Some of the individuals had been brought in because they had made threats to their families and to members of their communities, while others had reported to having hallucinations and delusions of people trying to harm them. One of the cases that stood out the most, was an individual suffering with paranoid schizophrenia had been in and out of institutions for most of his life, and the main reason for the individuals return was due to being noncompliant with medications. . This court had …show more content…
Some even made outburst during the proceedings, voicing how they did not agree with the doctor’s recommendation for them to stay a little while longer in the facilities. Some would slump down in their chair quietly and not say a word, while others came into the courtroom loud and boisterous. The judge had to ask several of the individuals to be quiet and to allow the doctors to say what they needed to say. Some of them would just start rabbling about things that were not pertaining to the hearing and would seem to become visibly upset while listening to the doctor give their report. Overall they all seemed to accept the ruling, even if they didn’t agree with it. The judge was very patient with them and offered words of encouragement while handing down her ruling.
I agreed with the judge’s decision to keep all of the client a little while longer so the doctor could keep monitoring their drugs for therapeutic effectiveness and to get some of them set up with a case manager. I think overall, it was a great experience to see firsthand what goes into trying to commit an individual for mental evaluation. The judge seemed to be concerned with the public’s safety and with connecting the individual with resources in the community to aid in their
This case was decided on June 15, 2017. Issue: This cases issue involved Timothy W. Gallagher bringing an action of medical malpractice, negligence, wrongful death, and emotional distress suit against Cayuga Medical Center for releasing his son from the hospital when he was having suicidal
Origins of this Facility: In Morris Plains New Jersey the “Greystone Parks Psychiatric Hospital” is located. This facility goes as far back as 1876 in which this facility was operated from an older building and under different circumstances. Never-the-less this facility became over crowed, housing 7000 consumers and employing 14 000 staff members. During this period, patients were free to walk around the facility and patients who were in the “backward wards” were more symptomatic.
The jury was shown videos of more normal times for the family, when things seemed to be going well. Expert testimony also played a role in the outcome of the first trial. The evidence presented in this case was able to help the jury come to a decision when determining Mrs. Yates final
Florida courts are plagued with too many people appointed or elected who are entrusted with the sole responsibilities of doing out justice in their public official capacity, who often times suffer from the common syndrome of lacking the ability to separate the administration of justice from the imbuing of their very own interest and passion. Court Judges, prosecutors, and even law enforcement officers very often cannot resist the urge to impart their very own passions and interest into the administration of justice. Far too often an individual’s social, background, and even financial status plays a significant role into the courts official’s decisions and administration of justice. The decision to impose a stiff penalty as oppose to showing
They filled out the paper work that would release them. The judge had them testify about their education and if they had been under the influence of drugs. The judge made them understand that they did not have to plead guilty. They asserted their innocence but said they were entering the plea on advice of counsel. (Leveritt)
The court case, Kent vs. United States took place in 1966. This case was about Morris Kent, a 16-year-old boy who had been on probation since he was fourteen. Morris has just been arrested again for three counts of home burglary, three counts of robbery, and two counts of rape in the state of Washington. Because of the seriousness of his charges and the fact that he had been in court before, prosecutors attempted to have Morris tried in adult court. Because of this, Kent's lawyer told the judge that he had a mental illness while committing these crimes, he wanted Morris to stay in juvenile court, where the penalties would be much less severe.
The results of the trial in Stamford was that Mercy Disborough was temporarily convicted of witchcraft while Goody Clawson was acquitted. The consequences for Mercy Disborough were that despite months and jail and continued peer accusation, she was acquitted. The consequences for the townspeople are blurrier, but it is evident that persistent hysteria was not one of them. The results of the trial in Stamford were largely reigned in from the massive hysteria and mass convictions associated with contemporary witch trials by the law.
More people get incarcerated for non-violent crimes and crimes caused by mental illnesses or drug abuse (Webb, 2009) and because these people get put in regular prisons, instead of in mental health facilities or facilities to help against drug addiction, where they could be treated to further prevent crimes driven by their illness (Webb, 2009), the prisons get overfilled and cannot hold the more ‘important’ prisoners that needed to be locked away from the public. A strong link of the criminal justice process is that the system tries to keep it fair for everyone. Every defendant has the right to an attorney so they can be defended properly and fairly and “Only judges who are adequately informed about a case can effectively control the proceedings and examine evidence” (Tochilovsky, 2002) It is also important for the criminal justice system that those involved show discretion and although this is not always the case, discretion by the judges, police, etc.
Like many mentally ill Kentuckians, Morton was neither dangerous enough to be kept in a hospital for long nor healthy enough to care for himself in the community. If successful, House Bill 94 would "keep people out of the revolving door of the hospital," Sheila Schuster of the Kentucky Mental Health Coalition told the committee. Most states have adopted some version of "assisted outpatient treatment" since the 1980s, when families of the mentally ill began to lobby for it. Police or family members can have the mentally ill involuntarily committed to a hospital for treatment once they deteriorate to the point that they pose a threat to themselves or others. First, at a hearing, a judge would decide if the individual met various criteria, including having a severe mental illness, symptoms of anosognosia, a likelihood that he would be a danger to others and a determination that outpatient treatment was the least restrictive alternative available.
In April 2016, Oregon and the physicians it employs within its Department of Corrections were sued for medical malpractice when an inmate’s unchecked kidney stone caused an abscess and ultimate removal of her kidney which occurred in 2013 and 2014. (Peterson, 2016) In 2015, an inmate was awarded almost $16 million in damages due to paralysis. In November 2006 the physician employed by the state facility failed to recognized the severity of the inmate’s spinal injuries and send him for the proper neurological evaluation and treatment.
There are so many mentally ill people in correctional facilities because most families do not know how to help their loves ones who suffer from a mental illness, so the call the police for help. Majority of the police officers do not know what to do or how to handle people with a mental illness disease. Police officers who are not trained to deal with the mentally ill often do not recognize that person is ill. Some police officers do not recognize if the individual should or not go to jail or a treatment center or medical facility. The impact of law enforcement and the judicial system dealing with people with a mental illness is to assist the inmates with the help they need.
After reading this case I was terribly shocked about the fact that something like this could happen in our medical history. I couldn’t believe how a patient could be neglected so much. Based on the material that we have learned the lack of ethical theory of deontology in Dr. Evan was disturbing. As a doctor Dr. Evan’s role is to care for patients, keep them away from harm and prolong their life. Though in the trial he stated as if he didn’t care.
Introduction Prior to the mid-1960 virtually all mental health treatment was provided on an inpatient basis in hospitals and institutions. The Community Mental Health Act of 1963 was established with its primary focus on deinstitutionalizing mentally ill patients, and shutting down asylums in favor of community mental health centers. It was a major policy shift in mental health treatment that allowed patients to go home and live independently while receiving treatment, (Pollack & Feldman, 2003). As a result of the Act, there was a shift of mentally ill persons in custodial care in state institutions to an increase of the mentally ill receiving prosecutions in criminal courts.
Suspect is 5 feet 10 inches, approximately 160 pounds. He’s being charged for breaking and entering as well as murder. The suspect admitted to doing so after the police came to his door in suspicion of foul play. He screamed in a fit of rage as he screamed “Villains, dissemble no more! I admit the deed!
Specialized Courts Specialized courts are commonly known as the problem-solving courts that promote positive reinforcement, support behavior modification, decrease victimization, and reduce recidivism. Examples of specialized courts include drug court and mental health courts. A community might benefit from establishing a specialized court such as a drug court because it follows a comprehensive model that concentrates on reducing criminal actions through treatment and rehabilitation services with the focus being on substance abuse addiction and identifying the cause without jeopardizing public safety and due process (Specialized Courts, 2013).