Holding the Guardrails on Involuntary Commitment

Hastings Center Report 54 (2):8-11 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In response to the increasing number of mentally ill people experiencing homelessness, some policy‐makers have called for the expanded use of involuntary commitment, even for individuals who are not engaging in behaviors that are immediately life‐threatening. Yet there is no evidence that involuntary commitment offers long‐term benefits, and significant reasons to believe that expanding the practice will cause harm. In addition, these proposals ignore research showing that most people with mental illness have the capacity to make medical decisions for themselves. Rather than expanding the use of involuntary commitment, policy‐makers should support approaches proven to decrease the prevalence of homelessness, such as supportive housing. In addition, states should reevaluate their commitment standards for persons who pose no risk of harm to others. One promising approach is Northern Ireland's Mental Health Capacity Act of 2016, which establishes a uniform standard for imposing nonconsensual health care interventions, without any distinction between mental illnesses and other conditions in which capacity might be compromised.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,283

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A Theory of Civil Commitment.Theodore Carswell Falk - 1985 - Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh
The Ethic of Accompaniment.Laura Haupt - 2024 - Hastings Center Report 54 (2):inside_front_cover-inside_front_.
Who Should Be Committable?Michael Lavin - 1995 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 2 (1):35-47.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-04-20

Downloads
3 (#1,716,188)

6 months
3 (#984,114)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?