Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients

J. T. Young, Joseph Bloom, L. R. Faulkner, J. L. Rogers, P. K. Pati

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Although the United States Supreme Court has not offered a definite opinion, some states have established the qualified right of involuntarily committed patients to refuse treatment. Controversy continues between psychiatry and law over what procedural protections should be provided to patients when therapists seek to override nonemergency refusal of treatment. The authors review Oregon's administrative approach and its application to the treatment refusal of 33 state hospital forensic patients. Patient characteristics, refusal patterns, and implications of treatment refusal are also described.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)5-13
Number of pages9
JournalBulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
Volume15
Issue number1
StatePublished - 1987

Fingerprint

Treatment Refusal
Inpatients
Supreme Court Decisions
State Hospitals
Psychiatry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Young, J. T., Bloom, J., Faulkner, L. R., Rogers, J. L., & Pati, P. K. (1987). Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 15(1), 5-13.

Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients. / Young, J. T.; Bloom, Joseph; Faulkner, L. R.; Rogers, J. L.; Pati, P. K.

In: Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1987, p. 5-13.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Young, JT, Bloom, J, Faulkner, LR, Rogers, JL & Pati, PK 1987, 'Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients', Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 5-13.
Young JT, Bloom J, Faulkner LR, Rogers JL, Pati PK. Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 1987;15(1):5-13.
Young, J. T. ; Bloom, Joseph ; Faulkner, L. R. ; Rogers, J. L. ; Pati, P. K. / Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients. In: Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. 1987 ; Vol. 15, No. 1. pp. 5-13.
@article{656d170eabea48768002068cc9440255,
title = "Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients",
abstract = "Although the United States Supreme Court has not offered a definite opinion, some states have established the qualified right of involuntarily committed patients to refuse treatment. Controversy continues between psychiatry and law over what procedural protections should be provided to patients when therapists seek to override nonemergency refusal of treatment. The authors review Oregon's administrative approach and its application to the treatment refusal of 33 state hospital forensic patients. Patient characteristics, refusal patterns, and implications of treatment refusal are also described.",
author = "Young, {J. T.} and Joseph Bloom and Faulkner, {L. R.} and Rogers, {J. L.} and Pati, {P. K.}",
year = "1987",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "5--13",
journal = "Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law",
issn = "1093-6793",
publisher = "American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Treatment refusal among forensic inpatients

AU - Young, J. T.

AU - Bloom, Joseph

AU - Faulkner, L. R.

AU - Rogers, J. L.

AU - Pati, P. K.

PY - 1987

Y1 - 1987

N2 - Although the United States Supreme Court has not offered a definite opinion, some states have established the qualified right of involuntarily committed patients to refuse treatment. Controversy continues between psychiatry and law over what procedural protections should be provided to patients when therapists seek to override nonemergency refusal of treatment. The authors review Oregon's administrative approach and its application to the treatment refusal of 33 state hospital forensic patients. Patient characteristics, refusal patterns, and implications of treatment refusal are also described.

AB - Although the United States Supreme Court has not offered a definite opinion, some states have established the qualified right of involuntarily committed patients to refuse treatment. Controversy continues between psychiatry and law over what procedural protections should be provided to patients when therapists seek to override nonemergency refusal of treatment. The authors review Oregon's administrative approach and its application to the treatment refusal of 33 state hospital forensic patients. Patient characteristics, refusal patterns, and implications of treatment refusal are also described.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023252270&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023252270&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 3427230

AN - SCOPUS:0023252270

VL - 15

SP - 5

EP - 13

JO - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

JF - Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law

SN - 1093-6793

IS - 1

ER -