Civil Commitment and the Mentally Ill

Civil Commitment

Civil Commitment and the Mentally Ill

Name

Class

Date

Professor

Civil Commitment and the Mentally Ill

Civil commitment is a court process where a judge makes a determination on whether or not a person is mentally ill and should receive mental health treatment or be committed to a mental institution. When a person is subjected to the commitment process in the state of Oregon they are referred to as the Alleged Mentally Ill Person (AMIP). In order for a person to be subjected to the civil commitment process the court process must be initiated by a doctor, county health officer, a judge, or two relatives of the AMIP as well as any licensed member of the mental health community. This includes counselors, psychologists, clinicians, and psychiatrists.

Insanity statues in Oregon include Guilty Except for Insanity (GEI). This insanity defense allows the criminal defendant to plead and be found to be mentally ill or retarded but still guilty of the crime they committed. Once the criminal defendant is found Guilty Except for Insanity they will come under the authority of the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) who will place them either in a mental health facility or place them in jail under the care of a mental health clinician. If the criminal defendant accepted a plea deal or they are found guilty of a misdemeanor they will either be placed in a mental institution or be required to attend mental health treatment.

The Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) was established in 1977 with the Guilty Except for Insanity defense. The PSRB has five members including a psychiatrist, a psychologist, a member with a parole or probation background, an attorney with criminal trial experience and a member of the public (Joondepth, 2009). The PSRB will review the case of the mentally insane defendant to determine their placement. Instead of just placing a criminal defendant in a mental institution only to be allowed to enter back into society after a short time, the state created the PSRB to conduct an assessment of their mental health.

Many other states have changed their insanity laws to include Guilty but Mentally Ill (GMI) or Guilty Except for Insanity (GEI) in order to ensure the mentally ill are punished for their crimes and not just released back into society to commit further crimes. Due to the shift in perception concerning the insanity defense this type of defense is rarely used because unless the criminal defendant has an extensive mental health history they will not be found to be legally insane. In Oregon the insanity defense is hard to prove. The burden of evidence falls to the defendant to prove they were legally insane at the time of the crime.

In Oregon (and around the country) juries are generally skeptical of the insanity defense (Joondepth, 2009). This is because prior to the 1970’s anyone could claim they were insane and get off with a slap on the wrist. In order to prevent criminals faking symptoms of mental illness from getting away with their crimes the state of Oregon began to develop new policies concerning the insanity defense. Instead of just allowing defendants to plead insane for their crimes they now were responsible for providing the court with a plethora of proof they were legally insane when they committed the crime. In most cases the insanity defense is employed for cases, such as murder.

The insanity defense is one of the most controversial defenses employed by defendants in court cases. After John Hinckley was found not guilty of attempting to kill President Reagan in 1984 the public was outraged. As a result of public pressure the insanity defense in American society began to change. The insanity defense asserts that a criminal defendant should not be found guilty due to the defendant's insanity (Cole, 2011). In Oregon this is not the case. Being mentally ill does not mitigate the guilty of the mentally ill or mentally retarded defendant.

In Oregon, unlike other states that have rejected the insanity defense, a criminal defendant still has a chance to plead guilty and be placed in a mental institution. Some of these defendants will never go to jail for the crime they have committed but instead will receive care through the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) and then be released back into society. Other more serious offenders face the possibility of serving time once they have become more mentally stable. For example for the crime of murder the criminal defendant could be found guilty spend time in a mental institution before serving out a prison sentence.

In the state of Oregon the psychologists that are a part of the PSRB are responsible for determining the fate of the mentally ill criminal defendant. The judge will rely heavily on the opinion of the PSRB in determining whether or not a criminal defendant should stand trial or if they can apply the insanity defense. Since judges are not mental health specialists it is especially important for psychologists to be a part of the process in determining if a criminal defendant can stand trial or if they have sufficient history of mental illness to be considered insane or to commit the type of crime they have committed. Without the assistance of a psychologist the judge will not be provided with reliable information in which to make their determination.

When a mentally ill person is not seen as insane and is subsequently convicted of their charges and incarcerated, they face difficulties because many states have difficulty in providing appropriate psychological treatment for these offenders while they are incarcerated. What happens in states where the mentally ill are required to go straight to jail they may not receive the type of treatment they need to function properly. This is not a problem experienced in the state of Oregon due to their creative approach and the use of the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB). The PSRB protects the mentally ill criminal and ensures they have access to the treatment they need.

References

Cole, M. (2011). The high price of Oregon's insanity plea: Patients sent to the state mental

hospital cost millions. Retrieved March 18, 2014 from

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/02/the_high_price_of_oregons_insa.html

Joondepth, B. (2009). Insanity Defense and Public Morality. Retrieved March 18, 2014 from

http://www.droregon.org/the-dro-blog/draft

Civil Commitment and the Mentally Ill