[DOWNLOAD] "Forcible Antipsychotic Medication and the Unfortunate Side Effects of Sell V. United States." by Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Forcible Antipsychotic Medication and the Unfortunate Side Effects of Sell V. United States.
- Author : Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy
- Release Date : January 22, 2004
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 301 KB
Description
The right to refuse medical treatment is a constitutionally protected liberty which has long been recognized in the common law as an important element of individual autonomy. (1) Yet the exercise of this right has traditionally been limited to individuals "of adult years and in sound mind." (2) As such, the degree to which mentally ill individuals--particularly those within the criminal justice system (3)--also have the right to refuse treatment, such as the administration of antipsychotic medications, has long lacked clear definition. (4) In 1990, the Supreme Court held that a mentally ill inmate may be forcibly medicated as long as an administrative hearing with sufficient procedural safeguards yields the finding that he poses a serious danger to himself or others and that antipsychotic drugs are substantially likely to reduce that risk. (5) Two years later, in Riggins v. Nevada, the Court specifically reaffirmed the right of a mentally ill criminal defendant to avoid antipsychotic medication, but held that the right could be overcome by a compelling governmental interest. (6) Harper and Riggins, however, left unresolved whether a mentally ill defendant may ever be involuntarily medicated only to restore trial competence--that is, where the medication's exclusive purpose is to enable the government to proceed with prosecution.