Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Psychiatric and nonmedical decisions on commitment

M J Badger, J H Shore

    The American Journal of Psychiatry
    |March 1, 1980
    PubMed
    Summary

    Oregon

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Lessons Learned or Forgotten? Impacts of COVID-19 on the Future Direction of Global (e-)Mental Health Care.

    Current psychiatry reports·2021
    Same author

    Order and chaos : subspecialization and american psychiatry.

    Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry·2014
    Same author

    The organization and regulation of voluntary faculty.

    Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry·2014
    Same author

    Physician health programmes and malpractice claims: reducing risk through monitoring.

    Occupational medicine (Oxford, England)·2013
    Same author

    Response.

    The Journal of psychotherapy practice and research·2012
    Same author

    Comparative use of biomedical services and traditional healing options by American Indian veterans.

    Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)·2001

    Area of Science:

    • Forensic Psychiatry
    • Mental Health Law
    • Legal Psychology

    Background:

    • Oregon's civil commitment statutes were revised in 1973 and 1975.
    • These revisions incorporated nonphysician court examiners and public prosecutors into commitment hearings.

    Observation:

    • The study compared commitment decisions made by physician-only panels versus mixed panels (one physician, one nonphysician mental health professional).
    • Commitment decisions for five case vignettes were evaluated across six groups of medical and nonmedical personnel.

    Findings:

    • Nonphysician mental health professionals' commitment decisions did not significantly differ from those of psychiatric examiners.
    • Inclusion of nonphysicians in commitment hearings did not alter decision-making compared to physician-only panels.

    Implications:

    • Nonphysician mental health professionals can be effectively integrated into civil commitment proceedings.
    • The findings support the use of diverse professional backgrounds in mental health commitment evaluations.
    • Statutory changes in Oregon did not negatively impact the consistency of commitment decisions.

    Related Experiment Videos