The Case Of Alberta Lessard Under The Wisconsin State Mental Health Act

737 Words3 Pages

Have you if wonder how much freedom do you really have as a person, What if I told you that someone could in this age and day could be pick up by the law enforcement and taken to a mentally hospital and involuntary confined against your will, well on October and November of 1971, it really happened to Alberta Lessard under the Wisconsin State Mental Health Act, Wis.Stat. § 51.001 et seq. Terms will be used such as Civil Commitment, involuntary hospitalization Parens Partriae and Police Power, understand these terms will help you to understand your rights. On October 29, 1971 James D. Mejchar and Jack Schneider who are police officers with Wisconsin police Department pick up Alberta Lessard in front of her home in West Allis Wisconsin where …show more content…

Mejchar and Jack Schneider came before defendant Judge Christ T Seraphim Milwaukee County Court both officers stated again the allegation made against Ms. Lessard on October 29, 1971 which had her confined to a Mental Health Center, Judge Seraphirm agree with James D. Mejchar and Jack Schneider basic on the ex parte proceeding confined Ms. Lessard another ten days (leagle, 1972). Ms. Lessard was seen by Dr. Georger Currier on November 4. 1971, where he then stated that Ms. Lessard suffer from Schizophrenia and requested that she be permanent detain by filling out an Application for Judicial Inquiry. Two more doctors would examine Ms. Lessard and sign another temporary detention document requiring that MS. Lessard be give and additional ten day from the date of the original order. Neither Ms. Lessard nor her family has been informed of her right or why she was detained (leagle, …show more content…

Lessard has a right to know why she was attained. Secondly the court found that Wisconsin had violated Ms. Lessard rights by not given her adequate notice of all her rights, including the right to have a jury by trial is required by law, and thirdly it is unconstitutional to hold someone for forty eight hours without a hearing and detention longer than two week with a full hearing was also unconstitutional (Remington, 1973). Another finding was that everyone has a right to counsel when it comes to civil commitment, and that hearsay evidence cannot be admitted in a civil commitment and that if a person is given a psychiatric evaluation it cannot be used against them. (Remington, 1973) both mentally ill and a danger to others, a person cannot be held without less restrictive alternatives which simply mean that a person who is mental ill do not have to put away if they have not committed no crimes (Remington, 1973).at all need to be held