National Science Library of Georgia

Image from Google Jackets

From courtroom to clinic : legal cases that changed mental health treatment / edited by Peter Ash.

Contributor(s): Material type: TextTextPublisher: Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2019Description: 1 online resource (xiii, 170 pages) : digital, PDF file(s)Content type:
  • text
Media type:
  • computer
Carrier type:
  • online resource
ISBN:
  • 9781108377171 (ebook)
Subject(s): Additional physical formats: Print version: : No titleDDC classification:
  • 344.73/044 23
LOC classification:
  • KF3828 .F76 2019
Online resources:
Contents:
Machine generated contents note: Introduction; 1. Raising American standards in the treatment of persons with mental illness Wyatt vs. Stickney (1972) Susan Hatters Friedman; 2. The limits of hospitalization after commitment O'Connor vs. Donaldson (1975) Deborah Giorgi-Guarnieri; 3. Who speaks for the children? Parham vs. J. L & J. R. (1979) Peter Ash; 4. The right to refuse treatment Rogers vs. Commissioner of Department of Mental Health (1983) Alec Buchanan; 5. The least restrictive alternative Olmstead vs. L. C. & E. W. (1999) Megan Testa; 6. Informed consent Canterbury vs. Spence (1972) Debra A. Pinals; 7. End of life decision making Cruzan vs. Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990) Richard Martinez; 8. Prohibiting psychiatrist-patient sex Roy vs. Hartogs (1976) Jacob M. Appel; 9. Psychotherapist-patient privilege Jaffee vs. Redmond (1996) Jacob M. Appel; 10. Protecting others from dangerous patients Tarasoff vs. Regents of the University of California (1976) Phillip J. Resnick; 11. The insanity defense US vs. Hinckley (1982) Alan W. Newman; Conclusion; Index.
Summary: Why do present-day mental health professionals practice the way that they do? Over the past fifty years, a number of landmark court holdings have changed such basic principles as what material is confidential, how civil commitment and involuntary treatment are conducted, and when a therapist has a duty to protect the public from a dangerous patient. Unlike most legal texts, this volume explores these complex principles through the human stories of the litigants involved.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
No physical items for this record

Title from publisher's bibliographic system (viewed on 21 Feb 2019).

Machine generated contents note: Introduction; 1. Raising American standards in the treatment of persons with mental illness Wyatt vs. Stickney (1972) Susan Hatters Friedman; 2. The limits of hospitalization after commitment O'Connor vs. Donaldson (1975) Deborah Giorgi-Guarnieri; 3. Who speaks for the children? Parham vs. J. L & J. R. (1979) Peter Ash; 4. The right to refuse treatment Rogers vs. Commissioner of Department of Mental Health (1983) Alec Buchanan; 5. The least restrictive alternative Olmstead vs. L. C. & E. W. (1999) Megan Testa; 6. Informed consent Canterbury vs. Spence (1972) Debra A. Pinals; 7. End of life decision making Cruzan vs. Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990) Richard Martinez; 8. Prohibiting psychiatrist-patient sex Roy vs. Hartogs (1976) Jacob M. Appel; 9. Psychotherapist-patient privilege Jaffee vs. Redmond (1996) Jacob M. Appel; 10. Protecting others from dangerous patients Tarasoff vs. Regents of the University of California (1976) Phillip J. Resnick; 11. The insanity defense US vs. Hinckley (1982) Alan W. Newman; Conclusion; Index.

Why do present-day mental health professionals practice the way that they do? Over the past fifty years, a number of landmark court holdings have changed such basic principles as what material is confidential, how civil commitment and involuntary treatment are conducted, and when a therapist has a duty to protect the public from a dangerous patient. Unlike most legal texts, this volume explores these complex principles through the human stories of the litigants involved.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.
Copyright © 2023 Sciencelib.ge All rights reserved.