Considerations of Social Science in a Reconsideration of Parham v. J.R. and the Commitment of Children to Public Mental Institutions

Abstract

Commitment of children to public mental institutions is a particularly difficult policy problem. In Parham v. J.R., the U.S. Supreme Court used behavioral science studies in an unsophisticated and noncomprehensive manner for support of specific value positions. Available behavioral science: (1) belies the proposition that mental illness symptomatology begets stigma; (2) reflects poor professional performance by attorneys, rather than hearing disutility; (3) indicates more functional competence in children than the law presumes; and (4) supports legal procedure as therapeutic and facilitative to decision making and distributive justice, rather than obfuscative. Children facing admission to an unaccredited mental facility should receive notice, effective counsel, and a preadmission hearing before a judge or jury.