Discover published sets by community

Significance: Massachusetts case that established a patient's right to refuse antipsychotic medication unless it's deemed necessary for safety or the patient is declared legally incompetent. Impact: Strengthened the standards for administering involuntary treatment and medication over a patient's refusal, acknowledging patient autonomy.

Significance: U.S. Supreme Court case upholding the use of antipsychotic drugs on a mentally ill prisoner against his will under certain standards. Impact: Established procedural safeguards for involuntary medication of prison inmates, balancing individual rights with prison safety and security concerns.

Significance: Established the duty to warn and protect third parties in cases where a patient makes threats of violence. Impact: Imposed a legal obligation on mental health professionals to breach confidentiality if a client poses a risk of imminent harm to others, influencing confidentiality norms.

Significance: A U.S. Supreme Court decision that discussed the process for hospital release of a committed patient found not guilty by reason of insanity. Impact: Clarified the rights of patients committed under an insanity defense, including the requirement of periodic review of their mental status.

Significance: Established that mentally ill individuals must be provided with the necessary treatment that is in accordance with current professional standards. Impact: Acknowledged the right to appropriate treatment for patients with mental health issues, contributing to improved quality of care.

Significance: U.S. Supreme Court case allowing forced medication of a mentally ill criminal defendant in order to render them competent to stand trial in limited circumstances. Impact: Set standards for court-ordered medication in the context of the rights of a defendant and fair trial considerations.

Significance: District of Columbia Court of Appeals case advocating for the 'least restrictive environment' principle for individuals with mental illness. Impact: Encouraged deinstitutionalization and the use of community-based care as an alternative to hospitalization for the mentally ill.

Significance: U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the rights of parents to advocate for their children with disabilities in federal court without a lawyer. Impact: Allowed greater access to the legal system for families seeking appropriate educational services for children with mental health issues.

Significance: U.S. Supreme Court case holding that individuals with mental illness cannot be indefinitely detained without evidence of mental illness that poses a danger to others or themselves. Impact: Protection against indefinite confinement for individuals with mental illness and requirements for periodic review of their status.

Significance: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Arizona's insanity defense statute, which doesn't include a 'volitional incapacity' component. Impact: Maintained restrictions on the applicability of the insanity defense and its criteria in criminal cases involving mental illness.

Significance: A California case that determined mentally ill patients have the right to refuse treatment with antipsychotic medication. Impact: Lead to the requirement of 'Riese hearings' for evaluating a patient's capacity to refuse treatment, strengthening patients' autonomy and consent rights.

Significance: Established the right to adequate treatment for individuals involuntarily committed to a state mental hospital. Impact: Led to the development of minimum standards for the care and rehabilitation of the mentally ill, impacting mental health services and patient welfare.

Significance: U.S. Supreme Court case that recognized the rights of involuntarily committed mentally disabled individuals to reasonably safe conditions, freedom from restraint, and basic training to assist in developing life skills. Impact: Affirmed the rights of those with mental disabilities in institutional settings and promoted humane treatment.

Significance: U.S. Supreme Court decision that due process requires the standard of 'clear and convincing evidence' for involuntary civil commitment of individuals with mental disorders. Impact: Raised the burden of proof in civil commitment cases, leading to more rigorous legal protection for those facing potential commitment.