Abstract
What rights do retarded children have not to be institutionalized? What rights do retarded people have to aggressive medical treatment that will help prolong their lives? These are questions that the Supreme Court has been asked to decide in recent years. This article examines how the court has responded to these issues and what these responses mean for public policy toward people with retardation. It concludes that the court may have been guided by negative social attitudes when it considered these issues.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.Bellotti v. Baird 1979 .
2.In re Phillip B. Court of Appeal of the State of California1979 .
3.
Parham v. J. L.
, 99 S. Ct 2493 (1979 ); J. L. v. Parham , 412 F. Supp. 112, 139 (MD Ga. 1976).
4.
Richard W. Bothman v. Warren B. and Patricia B.
, (No. 79-698), U.S. Supreme Court, 1979 .
5.
Secretary of Public Welfare v. Institutionalized Juveniles
, 61 L. Ed. 2d 142, 1979 ; Institutionalized Juveniles v. Secretary of Public Welfare , 459 F. Supp. 30, 40 n 37 (E.D. Pa. 1977).