Civil commitment in the psychiatric emergency room. II. Mental disorder indicators and three dangerousness criteria
- PMID: 3395205
- PMCID: PMC7336891
- DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.1988.01800320069009
Civil commitment in the psychiatric emergency room. II. Mental disorder indicators and three dangerousness criteria
Abstract
Proponents of return to a "need for treatment" standard for civil commitment contend that the current dangerousness standard forces psychiatrists to neglect severely ill patients in favor of those who are less ill but dangerous to others. Among 198 psychiatric emergency patients in five facilities, those rated as most dangerous on Three Ratings of Involuntary Admissibility, a reliable index of indicators employed by clinicians in evaluating danger to self, danger to others, and grave disability, were also most severely ill on diagnostic and symptomatic assessments of mental disorder. Clinicians' Global Ratings of patient dangerousness on the three criteria were similarly related to severity of diagnosis and symptoms. Perceived dangerousness was associated with major mental disorder and severity of most symptom types, especially impulsivity. Danger to self was the criterion related to the fewest indicators of mental disorder.
Figures

References
-
- Doremus v Farrell, 407 F Supp 509, 514–515 (D Neb 1975).
-
- Doe v Gallinot, 486 F Supp 983 (SD Cal 1979), aff’d 657 F 2d 1017 (9th Cir 1981).
-
- Lipsitt PD, Lelos D: Decision makers in law and psychiatry and the involuntary civil commitment process. Community Ment Health J 1981;17:114–122. - PubMed
-
- Mills MJ: Civil commitment of the mentally ill: An overview. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 1986;484:28–41. - PubMed
-
- Ennis BJ, Litwack TR: Psychiatry and the presumption of expertise: Flipping coins in the courtroom. Calif Law Rev 1974;62:693–752.