Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned2016-01-08T19:03:41Zen
dc.date.available2016-01-08T19:03:41Zen
dc.date.created1986en
dc.date.issued1986en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationNorth Eastern Reporter, 2d series 1986; 495: 337-345en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/811683en
dc.description.abstractReversing the action of the Supreme Court, Special Term, the Court of Appeals of New York held that the due process clause of the state constitution afforded involuntarily committed mental patients the right to refuse antipsychotic medication. The liberty interest of a competent adult includes the right to refuse medical treatment, and neither mental illness nor involuntary commitment necessarily indicates that the patient is unable to comprehend the consequences of such a decision. The right to refuse antipsychotic drugs must yield, however, when there is imminent danger to the patient or others in the immediate vicinity. (KIE abstract)en
dc.formatCourt Decisionen
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherNew York. Court of Appealsen
dc.sourceeweb:63621en
dc.subjectDrugsen
dc.subjectDue Processen
dc.subjectInvoluntary Commitmenten
dc.subjectIllnessen
dc.subjectMental Illnessen
dc.subjectPatientsen
dc.subject.classificationRight of the Institutionalized to Treatmenten
dc.titleRivers v. Katzen
dc.provenanceCitation prepared by the Library and Information Services group of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University for the ETHXWeb database.en
dc.provenanceCitation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named EWEB hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection EthxWeb hosted by DigitalGeorgetown.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2018 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885