Rights of the Mentally Ill: The Gulf Between Theory and Reality
Abstract
Within the last few years several lawsuits have significantly increased both the procedural and the substantive rights of mental patients; among them are Lessard v. Schmidt, in which the court held that persons facing involuntary civil commitment are entitled to due-process safeguards, and Wyatt v. Stickney and Donaldson v. O'Connor, concerned with the right to adequate treatment. The author draws on the problems of implementing the landmark decree of Miranda v. Arizona, guaranteeing the rights of criminal suspects, in discussing the difficulties of translating rights promulgated in the courts Into reality. He believes that enforcement of patients' rights depends not on the law alone but also on the sensitivity and good faith of mental health workers.
Access content
To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.- Personal login
- Institutional Login
- Sign in via OpenAthens
- Register for access
-
Please login/register if you wish to pair your device and check access availability.
Not a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5 library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).
