Abstract
Most mental patients have scant protection from psychiatrists’ historical, absolute control in diagnosis, treatment, and the disabling effects of treatment. This article discusses the reversal of a recent trend in the federal courts that afforded protective procedures to mental patients by requiring the involvement of decision makers outside the institution. Also discussed is the lack of constitutional, statutory, and common-law protections in all but a few states. The safeguards provided by the minority of states are explored, and it is suggested that other states follow their lead in providing human rights and dignity to the mentally ill.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.