Title
The Pre-Sell medication controversy: Restoring competency at the end of the 20th century
Abstract
During the last three decades of the 20th Century, significant advances were made in the recognition of rights for mental patients, first regarding involuntary confinement and then regarding involuntary medication. This article summarizes the evolution of those advances and then looks specifically at the application of those rights to incarcerated offenders and more specifically at pretrial defendants. The controversy concerning the involuntary medication of pretrial defendants is reviewed with specific focus on the major federal cases that reflected the differing interpretations of the 1992 Supreme Court decision Riggins v. Nevada. The variations concerning type of judicial review, substantive criteria to justify medication, and procedural due process requirements complicated the treatment of incompetent defendants and led to the 2003 Supreme Court decision in Sell v. U.S.
Department(s)
Psychology
Document Type
Article
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/009318530903700404
Keywords
Competency restoration, Involuntary medication
Publication Date
1-1-2009
Recommended Citation
Mrad, David F. "The pre-Sell medication controversy: Restoring competency at the end of the 20th century." The Journal of Psychiatry & Law 37, no. 4 (2009): 341-372.
Journal Title
Journal of Psychiatry and Law
