[psych-hr] US Supreme Court rules on involuntary drugs for defendants (& APA brief)

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled today on a criminal defendant's rights to
refuse forcible medication in the case of Sell v. U.S., 02-5664.

The Associated Press released an article, "Justices Set Limits on Drugging
of Mentally Ill Defendants."

Here are a few excerpts:

[begin excerpts]

The Supreme Court on Monday limited the government's ability to forcibly
medicate mentally ill criminal defendants to make them well enough to stand
trial for fraud or other nonviolent charges.

The 6-3 ruling, a defeat for prosecutors, means that the government will
have to revise a common practice now of putting defendants on anti-psychotic
drugs for their trials.  Justices said that the Constitution allows the
government to administer drugs only "in limited circumstances."

The case required the court to balance the government's interest in
punishing nonviolent crime with a person's constitutional right to control
his or her body.

<snip>

The federal government puts hundreds of defendants on medication each year
to make them competent to stand trial.  Most take the drugs willingly.  In a
recent 12-month period, 59 people were medicated against their wishes and
about three-fourths were restored to competency, the government has said.

<snip>

In a dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justices Sandra Day O'Connor
and Clarence Thomas, said that the ruling would allow some criminal
defendants "to engage in opportunistic behavior" to thwart prosecutions.

[end excerpts]

The article can be found online at
<http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Scotus-Forced-Drugging.html>.

The American Psychological Association submitted an amicus brief.  According
to the APA web site, "APA's brief addresses how antipsychotic medications
are often effective in alleviating the psychotic symptoms in a number of
mental disorders, how they can restore competency to stand trial, and the
side-effects of various antipsychotic drugs.  The brief further states that
once antipsychotic drugs are administered and the defendant is brought to
trial, the government should be required to show that the drugs will not
materially impair the defendant's ability to present an effective defense."
For more details, including a copy of the brief, please see
<http://www.psyclaw.org/sell-v-us.html>.

Ken

Carolyn Payton's remarkable life & a quote:
<http://www.kspope.com/payton/index.php>

"It would have been comforting indeed to believe that Eichmann was a monster
. . . The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him,
and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and
still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal. From the viewpoint of our legal
institutions and of our moral standards of judgment, this normality was much
more terrifying than all the atrocities put together."
--Hannah Arendt, *Eichman in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil*




========== Psychology and Human Rights listserv ==========
Send mail intended for the list to <psychology-humanrights-l@hrea.org>.
Archives of the list can be found at:
http://www.hrea.org/lists/psychology-humanrights-l/markup/maillist.php
To subscribe to the list, send a message to <majordomo@hrea.org>,
with the following text in the message: subscribe psychology-humanrights-l
To unsubscribe from the list, send a message to <majordomo@hrea.org>,
with the following text in the message: unsubscribe psychology-humanrights-l
If you have problems (un)subscribing, contact
<owner-psychology-humanrights-l@hrea.org>.