The Right to Refuse Psychiatric Treatment
Title and Citation: Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990),
Type of Action: Due Process Clause allowing the state to force antipsychotic medication to a serious mentally ill inmate.
Facts of the Case: The respondent Walter Harper has been an inmate in the State of Washington Penal System since 1976. While not on antipsychotic medication, he has a tendency to become violent. On two occasions, he was transferred to the Special Offender Center (SOC). The SOC is and institution for convicted offenders who display severe psychiatric behaviors. On both occasions, he was force medicated.
Contentions of the Parties: During the second visit to the SOC, Harper filed a suit in state court under 42 U.S.C. 1983. He alleged the SOC failed to allow him a hearing prior to forcing the medication, thus violating the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The trial court rejected his claim; however the State Supreme Court reversed the decision. The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the trial court stating, “the State could administer antipsychotic medication to a competent, non-consenting
…show more content…
In addition, a motion to suppress was filed, noting inculpatory statements which Duhon had given to investigators. His attorney argued that Duhon lacked the mental capacity to provide voluntary statements and did not understand his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. Therefore, the statements provided by Duhon, even though he voluntarily gave them, cannot be used in court. The more imperative evidence, including the testimony of court-appointed experts in forensic psychology and criminal law, concludes that Duhon will remain incompetent. If the defendant is deemed incompetent, he cannot communicate with his attorney, cross examine witnesses, decide how to plea, and etc. there is a strong possibility he may not have a fair