From Bedlam to therapeutic jurisprudence: Are judges adequately prepared to make civil commitment decisions?

摘要

Historically, mentally ill individuals have been subject to inhumane treatment. However, the late 1700's and early 1800's saw major changes in the manner in which the mentally infirm were both housed and treated. Beginning in Europe and then spreading to the United States, reforms designed to improve those conditions were implemented. Later reformations targeted the rights of the mentally ill, and laws were subsequently drafted and passed to protect the same. Currently, mentally ill individuals who face involuntary commitment for treatment have clear, judicially defined rights. No longer can they be involuntarily committed to treatment without legal and procedural safeguards. The judges who make involuntary commitment decisions are mandated to follow certain criteria during commitment hearings. The current study investigated the training practices of American Bar Association (ABA) and American Association of Law Schools (AALS) accredited law schools with regard to abnormal psychology and mental health law. The purpose of the study was to determine the extent to which mental health judges are educationally prepared to apply mental health law as it applies to the abnormal psychology/involuntary commitment of those appearing on their dockets. Because foundational knowledge in abnormal psychology and extant mental health law is essential to making appropriate involuntary commitment decisions, the Deans of Academic Affairs at all ABA and AALS accredited law schools in the United States and U.S. Territories were surveyed. Of the 185 accredited schools, 109 responses were received for a total response rate of 59%. The results indicate that 41% of the programs offer no coursework in the areas of mental health law and abnormal psychology, with 59% offering coursework ranging from 1--6 courses. Further, results indicate that 37% of the responding Deans rated training in mental health law as extremely unimportant to somewhat unimportant, and 65% of deans rated training in abnormal psychology the same. The results of the study were integrated with the extant literature on therapeutic jurisprudence---how the perception of one's involuntary commitment hearing affects treatment outcome---in order to develop possible training recommendations for APA and AALS accredited law programs to consider.