A Comparison of Clinical and Judicial Procedures for Reviewing Requests for Involuntary Medication in New York
Abstract
The Rivers v. Katz decision substituted judicial review for administrative review of requests for involuntary medication of patients in New York State mental hospitals. This change, prompted by concern for the rights of involuntarily committed patients, did not delay or diminish the use of involuntary medication in a large state hospital. Advantages of judicial review include a better understanding by clinicians of the legal basis for involuntary medication and greater patient participation in the review procedure. Disadvantages include lack of an independent clinical review and increased costs.
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.).
