NCJ Number
132059
Journal
Corrections Today Volume: 53 Issue: 5 Dated: (August 1991) Pages: 209-214
Date Published
1991
Length
6 pages
Annotation
This article examines the implications of two U.S. Supreme Court decisions -- Washington v. Walter Harper (1976) and Burch v. Zinermon (1981) -- for the involuntary administration of medication to mentally ill inmates.
Abstract
In Washington v. Harper the Court held that a prior finding of incompetence to give consent for treatment is not necessary for an inmate who has a serious mental illness that makes the inmate a danger to himself/herself or others and when treatment is found to be in the inmate's medical interests. Finding that the real debate was about the benefits and risks of antipsychotic medication, the Court held that this type of question should be decided by mental health professionals in an administrative hearing rather than by a judge. The Court emphasized that the hearing official should be independent. It approved the Washington State regulations which guarantee that the mental health professionals who preside at the hearing must not be personally involved in the current diagnosis and treatment of the inmate. In Burch v. Zinermon, the Court held that although Florida had regulations that require a valid voluntary consent to admission and an informed consent to treatment, the State had failed to develop procedures that would ensure that the patient was competent to make such decisions. In so holding, the Court left open the possibility that staff at the hospital could be personally liable for failing to ensure that Burch was competent when he admitted himself and when he agreed to treatment.