Abstract
A large empirical literature on Kendra's Law has assessed the impact of court ordered outpatient treatment on outcomes such as treatment adherence, psychiatric hospitalization, quality of life, and treatment costs. Missing from the empirical literature, however, is a better understanding of procedural due process under Kendra's Law. Procedural due process concerns the safeguards that must be in place when governments deprive persons of their liberties, for example – notice, the right to a hearing and the right to appeal. This article reports the findings from a qualitative study of procedural due process and assisted outpatient treatment hearings under Kendra's Law. Attorneys reported significant barriers to effective advocacy on behalf of their clients. Further, despite the shift from a medical model of civil commitment to a judicial model in the 1970s, by and large judges continue to accord great deference to clinical testimony.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
