State Laws on Law Enforcement Custody and Transportation in the Process of Involuntary Civil Commitment.

IF 3.3 3区医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Psychiatric services Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.20240345

Marvin S Swartz, Megan Moore, Katie Lazar

{"title":"State Laws on Law Enforcement Custody and Transportation in the Process of Involuntary Civil Commitment.","authors":"Marvin S Swartz, Megan Moore, Katie Lazar","doi":"10.1176/appi.ps.20240345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Involuntary civil commitment statutes codify the process of involuntary admission to a health care facility. Many statutes assign law enforcement to preside over custody and transportation during the commitment process, which can be traumatizing to people taken into custody. States and localities are seeking to develop alternative crisis response approaches that reduce law enforcement involvement. This study aimed to document variations in state laws pertaining to custody and transportation during involuntary civil commitment.Methods: The research team analyzed statutes (in effect as of March 1, 2024) of 50 states and the District of Columbia governing custody and transportation during involuntary civil commitment.Results: Although every state and the District of Columbia had laws pertaining to responsibility for custody and transportation during involuntary civil commitment, laws varied on the entities that were allowed to transport individuals being considered for involuntary civil commitment and when non-law enforcement transport was permissible. Only seven states barred non-law enforcement transportation under any circumstance: Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, and Wyoming. However, even in the 44 jurisdictions where alternative transportation was permitted, law enforcement often served as the default transporter because of a lack of available alternatives.Conclusions: Laws specifying responsibility for transport of people being considered for involuntary civil commitment vary by state, and the statutory opportunities to implement non-law enforcement transport are plentiful. Research is needed to guide policy making and implementation regarding involuntary civil commitment.","PeriodicalId":20878,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric services","volume":" ","pages":"appips20240345"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatric services","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.20240345","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Involuntary civil commitment statutes codify the process of involuntary admission to a health care facility. Many statutes assign law enforcement to preside over custody and transportation during the commitment process, which can be traumatizing to people taken into custody. States and localities are seeking to develop alternative crisis response approaches that reduce law enforcement involvement. This study aimed to document variations in state laws pertaining to custody and transportation during involuntary civil commitment.

Methods: The research team analyzed statutes (in effect as of March 1, 2024) of 50 states and the District of Columbia governing custody and transportation during involuntary civil commitment.

Results: Although every state and the District of Columbia had laws pertaining to responsibility for custody and transportation during involuntary civil commitment, laws varied on the entities that were allowed to transport individuals being considered for involuntary civil commitment and when non-law enforcement transport was permissible. Only seven states barred non-law enforcement transportation under any circumstance: Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Missouri, Montana, and Wyoming. However, even in the 44 jurisdictions where alternative transportation was permitted, law enforcement often served as the default transporter because of a lack of available alternatives.

Conclusions: Laws specifying responsibility for transport of people being considered for involuntary civil commitment vary by state, and the statutory opportunities to implement non-law enforcement transport are plentiful. Research is needed to guide policy making and implementation regarding involuntary civil commitment.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

各州在非自愿民事拘押过程中的执法羁押和运输法律。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Psychiatric services 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生

CiteScore

5.80

自引率

7.90%

发文量

295

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Psychiatric Services, established in 1950, is published monthly by the American Psychiatric Association. The peer-reviewed journal features research reports on issues related to the delivery of mental health services, especially for people with serious mental illness in community-based treatment programs. Long known as an interdisciplinary journal, Psychiatric Services recognizes that provision of high-quality care involves collaboration among a variety of professionals, frequently working as a team. Authors of research reports published in the journal include psychiatrists, psychologists, pharmacists, nurses, social workers, drug and alcohol treatment counselors, economists, policy analysts, and professionals in related systems such as criminal justice and welfare systems. In the mental health field, the current focus on patient-centered, recovery-oriented care and on dissemination of evidence-based practices is transforming service delivery systems at all levels. Research published in Psychiatric Services contributes to this transformation.