Related Experiment Videos
Civil commitment as a "street-level" bureaucracy: case-load, professionalization and administration
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law
|January 1, 1981
Summary
Street-level bureaucracy significantly impacts involuntary commitment systems. Boards developed coping mechanisms, altering procedures to manage caseloads and decision ambiguity, affecting patient rights.
Area of Science:
- Sociology
- Public Policy
- Mental Health Law
Background:
- Street-level bureaucracy theory explains how frontline workers implement policies.
- Involuntary commitment systems involve complex legal and ethical considerations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To examine coping behaviors of mental health boards in involuntary commitment.
- To understand how these behaviors affect system effectiveness and patient rights.
Main Methods:
- Qualitative study of five Nebraska county boards of mental health.
- Analysis of daily procedures, routines, and member attitudes.
Main Results:
- Urban boards reduced client contact and limited decision scope.
- Rural boards engaged more with clients, creating ambiguous and tense environments.
- Both board types modified statutory procedures to cope with demands.
Conclusions:
- Understanding informal coping mechanisms is crucial for effective civil commitment reform.
- Informal procedures can undermine patient rights and system effectiveness.