Administrative Psychiatric Justice: Individual Rights v. Societal Rights in Involuntary Civil Commitment

Abstract

The care of mental health law safe guards the loss of liberty in the involuntary commitment procedure. Unconnected with the criminal justice system, the civil commitment process is utilized when a mentally ill person poses a danger to himself or to others and is confined to a mental hospital for treatment. Distinct from the criminal commitment system, which is an off shoot of the criminal justice system, civil commitment is paternalistic, and enumerates the basis of public protection. Whereas, the criminal commitment system determines whether an individual is competent to stand criminal trial or the procedure may be instituted following a "successful" insanity defense. A broad perspective of the civil commitment process and related issues will be explored through extensive literature review. The civil commitment process does not have its foundation in quantifiable data or even in well established, widely accepted terminology. Concepts of mental illness, civil liberty, right to treatment and right to refuse treatment are somewhat vague— not to mention perceived and interpreted in a highly individualistic manner. The terms are even suspect amongst some sectors of professionals and nonprofessionals.