Citation

Ferlauto MJ, Frierson RL. J. Am. Acad. Psychiatry Law 2011; 39(2): 209-216.

Affiliation

Department of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Science, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, 7901 Farrow Road, Columbia, SC 29203. mjf43@scdmh.org.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, Publisher American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

21653266

Abstract

Previous studies have scrutinized the decision-making process of physicians involved in the civil commitment of mentally ill persons, but few have examined the process used by probate judges when deciding to issue orders of detention and when conducting commitment hearings. This study consisted of a written survey sent to all probate court judges (n = 68) in South Carolina. Factors examined in the survey included the education and experience of the judges, their approach to the decision-making process, their view of lay and expert testimony at commitment hearings, and their knowledge about four items: two common psychiatric terms (delusion and psychosis), the leading suicide risk factor (previous attempt), and the standard of proof required for civil commitment (clear and convincing evidence). We attempt to analyze existing training standards for South Carolina probate judges and to explore possible areas for improvement so that proper dispositions of emergency psychiatric detainees are made and overcrowded emergency centers are less burdened.

Language: en