|
|
Mental Health |
|
|
Mental HealthNEW: Investigative ReportsInvestigative Report of Improper Discharge at APIThis report presents the Disability Law Center of Alaska’s (DLC) investigation into an incident that occurred on March 5, 2006 at API. The report is available as a PDF file. SummaryOn June 30, 2006, the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska issued a long-awaited opinion in Faith J. Myers v. Alaska Psychiatric Institute. The Court ruled that the Alaska Constitution’s guarantees of liberty and privacy require an independent judicial determination of an incompetent mental patient’s best interests before the superior court may authorize a facility like Alaska Psychiatric Institute (API) to treat the person with psychotropic drugs. Therefore, the Court held, in a non-crisis situation, before ordering the administration of psychotropic drugs the superior court must, in addition to the statutory requirements, expressly find, by clear and convincing evidence, that the proposed treatment is in the patient’s best interests and that no less intrusive alternative is available. The Alaska Statutes provide that for a person must first be involuntarily committed. Then the state must file a second petition, and prove by clear and convincing evidence that 1) the patient is unable to give or withhold informed consent; and 2) the patient has never previously made a statement while competent that reliably expressed a desire to refuse future treatment with psychotropic medications. AS 47.30.839. These provisions left the court with no discretion to consider a patient’s best interest—if the two requirements were met, the court was required to authorize the administration of psychotropic medication. The Court determined that this statutory scheme to be inadequate to protect a patient’s constitutional rights. The Court found that the right to refuse psychotropic medication is a fundamental right, therefore the state may override a patient’s right to refuse psychotropic medication only when necessary to advance a compelling state interest and only if no less intrusive alternative is available. The Court further ruled that an independent judicial best interests determination is constitutionally necessary to ensure the proposed treatment is the least intrusive means of protecting the patient. The Court did expressly limit its holding to non-emergency situations. In cases of emergency, a different statutory scheme applies. The full text of the opinion may be found at: http://www.state.ak.us/courts/ops/sp-6021.pdf. |
Telephone |
Address |
|
Phone: 907-565-1002 Phone/TTY Fax: 907-565-1000 Toll Free: 1-800-478-1234 Phone/TTY (In State Only) |
Disability Law Center of Alaska Mail: 3330 Arctic Boulevard, Suite 103 Anchorage, AK 99503 E-mail: akpa@dlcak.org |
|
|
|
(C) 2004 Disability Law Center of Alaska |