Mental Health Law: Involuntary Commitment, Civil Rights, and Reforms

Abstract

Across 25 U.S. states, involuntary detention rates ranged from a low of 29 detentions per 100,000 people in Connecticut to 966 detentions per 100,000 people in Florida. Among states with continuous data, the average rate of detention is growing faster than the population.1 Before the late 1960s, people suffering from mental illness were often confined to prisons and not given control over admission or discharge. This system has changed through legal reforms, with key court decisions and legislative developments establishing the current system. The legal system attempts to balance the state’s authority under parens patriae and through police power with individuals’ rights to due process and equal pro- tection. Parens patriae is the government's responsibility and duty to care for those unable to care for themselves, such as people who are suffering from mental health issues. Police power, on the other hand, is the state's duty to act in a way that maintains order and protects the public. While systems such as involuntary commitment and emergency holds play a key role in providing resources to aid people in acute mental distress or in situations where they may have been unable to receive help otherwise, these institutions suffer from major inconsistencies between states, inadequate regulation, and potential for abuse and rights violations. Some states have even established their own body of laws, such as Florida, which passed the Florida Mental Health Act, showcasing national weaknesses in establishing adequate legislation. This paper argues that although the mental health law system has improved immensely, further reform is needed to ensure it effectively protects both those who need help and the broader community, something that can be accomplished through specialized training, greater oversight, and a stronger emphasis on voluntary treatment.