Abstract
Abstract The failure to provide adequate treatment for persons committed to mental institutions has recently received considerable attention. The doctrine of “the right to treatment” has been judicially expressed in the now famous Rouse v. Cameron decision (373F 2d 451), (D.C. Cir., 1966). Rouse was sent to St. Elizabeth Hospital in the District of Columbia after he was found not guilty of a crime by reason of insanity. Three years later he sought release stating that he was not receiving adequate treatment to which he was entitled. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals stated that the possibility of ”indefinite commitment without treatment of one who has been found not criminally responsible may be so inhuman as to be cruel and unusual punishment.” A great deal of legal literature has been devoted to this issue.
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.
