This commentary explores the relationship among the 1999 U.S. Supreme Court Olmstead decision; the Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, in its application of CRIPA (the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Patients Act); and the application of both CRIPA and Olmstead to the question of individuals hospitalized in state mental institutions following commitment from criminal courts. Using Oregon as an example, the commentary illustrates the interplay between state and federal governments as Olmstead and CRIPA are expanded into the realm of criminal court commitments to state facilities and into the arena of community mental health services for deinstitutionalized persons.

译文

:本文评论了1999年美国最高法院Olmstead案判决之间的关系;司法部民权司在适用CRIPA(《住院病人的民权法》)中的适用;在刑事法院作出承诺后,CRIPA和Olmstead都适用于在国家精神病院住院的个人问题。该评论以俄勒冈州为例,说明了州政府与联邦政府之间的相互作用,因为奥尔姆斯特德(Olmstead)和CRIPA已扩展到刑事法庭对国家设施的承诺领域,并扩展到为非机构化人员提供的社区心理健康服务领域。

+1
+2
100研值 100研值 ¥99课程
检索文献一次
下载文献一次

去下载>

成功解锁2个技能,为你点赞

《SCI写作十大必备语法》
解决你的SCI语法难题!

技能熟练度+1

视频课《玩转文献检索》
让你成为检索达人!

恭喜完成新手挑战

手机微信扫一扫,添加好友领取

免费领《Endnote文献管理工具+教程》

微信扫码, 免费领取

手机登录

获取验证码
登录