Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Fourteenth Amendment”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
PubMed2006

Clark v. Arizona: diminishing the right of mentally ill individuals to a full and fair defense.

In Clark v. Arizona, the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with two main questions: Does Arizona's insanity defense statute, with its abridged M'Naughten standard, violate the Fourteenth Amendment? And does Arizona case law, with its complete prohibition on the use of mental disease or defect evidence to combat required mens rea elements of a crime, violate due process? In a six-three decision, the Court answered both of these questions in the negative.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Videotaped interviews in child sexual abuse cases: the Texas example.

Suchrara writes [1977: 296] that "a child's right to humane treatment must be considered not an option on the part of adults, but an obligation." The use of videotaped interviews as admissible judicial evidence is an important step toward Suchrara's goal; videotaped testimony attempts to balance the emotional, psychological, and developmental needs of the child with the civil liberties afforded to alleged perpetrators. The Texas State Legislature, with the passage of Senate Bill 836, broadened the civil rights of children to include the notion of humane treatment in civil and criminal investigations and proceedings. The Texas law establishes explicit guidelines to enhance the child's dignity in a traumatic and personal experience. Furthermore, the law protects the civil rights of the accused guaranteed by the sixth and fourteenth amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The successful implementation of the videotape law, however, depends on the skills and expertise of the social worker. The practitioner must possess specialized training in the dynamics of child sexual abuse and an extensive understanding of related law and legal processes. This expertise is built on a foundation of knowledge and skills required for effective interviewing, counseling, and an exhaustive understanding of human behavior theory. Given the complexity and interplay of law, rights, and human behavior, the social worker requires ongoing training in these areas in order that the interests of all concerned parties be protected. The Texas State Legislature provides an opportunity for the social welfare and legal communities to determine jointly how and to what extent the rights of a victim and an alleged perpetrator may be protected. The law is in hand; the success of its implementation now rests with the practitioners.

Child↗
PubMed1994

Is the foetal alcohol syndrome child protected by South African law?

It is scientifically indisputable that excessive use of alcohol or drugs during pregnancy causes defects in the children who are subsequently born to the abusing mothers. In the United States any legislative intervention by a state during the pregnancy would affect the rights of both the mother and the foetus. In order to remain within the bounds of constitutionality any maternal health legislation would have to strike a clear balance between the mother's rights to reproductive and familial privacy and bodily integrity guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment and the state's right to protect the foetus. This balance is currently achieved in terms of the framework set out by the Supreme Court in Roe v Wade 410 US 113 (1973). Although South African legislation cannot as yet be tested for its constitutionality the basic problem of balancing the rights of the mother, the foetus and the state remain the same. South Africa enjoys an advantage which the United States of America does not, viz the common-law remedies presented by the Aquilian action and the actio injuriarum. Only a person can be the bearer of rights and can thus invoke an action to protect those rights. It is thus necessary to determine whether the nasciturus fiction as enunciated in D 1.5.7 would enable a foetus (via a curator ad litem) to enforce rights against its mother. It is submitted that an extension of certain principles in the decisions of our Supreme Court in Christian League of Southern Africa v Rall 1981 (2) SA 821 (O), Wood v Ondangwa Tribal Authority 1975 (2) SA 294 (A) and Clark v Hurst NO 1992 (4) SA 630 (D) coupled to the nasciturus fiction are indicative of the fact that a foetus may enjoy protection against drug abuse by its mother prior to its birth.

Child Abuse↗
PubMed1993

Regulation and federalism: legal impediments to state health care reform.

In recent years, many states have attempted to address the cost and access problems that face their health care systems. Such efforts, however, are significantly impeded by a variety of federalism doctrines that limit the ability of states to regulate the health care market. This Article surveys some of those federalism barriers, including the constitutional restraints imposed by the Commerce Clause, the Privileges and Immunities Clause, and the Fourteenth Amendment, and the statutory hurdles created by ERISA, the Social Security Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This Article concludes that the restraints that these doctrines and statutes place on states reflect not only federalism concerns, but also deeper ambivalence about governmental regulation of the health care market. Only when that ambivalence is resolved can a proper division of labor between the states and federal government be determined.

Constitution and Bylaws↗
PubMed1996

The legislative and litigation history of special education.

Between the mid 1960s and 1975, state legislatures, the federal courts, and the U.S. Congress spelled out strong educational rights for children with disabilities. Forty-five state legislatures passed laws mandating, encouraging, and/or funding special education programs. Federal courts, interpreting the equal protection and due process guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ruled that schools could not discriminate on the basis of disability and that parents had due process rights related to their children's schooling. Congress, in legislation now retitled the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), laid out detailed procedural protections regarding eligibility for special educational services, parental rights, individualized education programs (IEPs), the requirement that children be served in the least restrictive environment, and the need to provide related (noneducational) services. Decisions on instructional matters such as curricula and the elements of the IEP remain the province of local and state authorities. Advocates for students with disabilities have continually sought separate (categorical) funding for special education services. Current movements toward block grants rather than categorical programs and toward greater inclusion of special education students in general education classrooms raise concerns in some quarters about whether students with disabilities will continue to have full access to the special services they need. While the cost of special services may be an unexpressed criterion in many decisions made by school districts, nowhere does the IDEA explicitly allow cost to be considered. Where a service is necessary for an individual child, cost considerations would not allow a school district to escape its obligations to the child. However, in instances where more than one appropriate configuration of services is available to meet a child's needs, the school district may be allowed to consider the cost of different alternatives.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Lee v. Oregon.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Deciding life and death in the courtroom. From Quinlan to Cruzan, Glucksberg, and Vacco--a brief history and analysis of constitutional protection of the 'right to die'.

This article analyzes judicial determinations on the "right to die" from Quinlan to Cruzan, Glucksberg, and Vacco. The body of law known as right-to-die cases extends ordinary treatment refusal doctrine to end-of-life decisions. The courts, having affirmed a right to refuse life-sustaining treatment, held that certain categorical distinctions that had been drawn lacked a rational basis. No rational distinction could be made between competent vs incompetent patients, withholding vs withdrawing treatment, and ordinary vs extraordinary treatment. The courts, however, had persistently affirmed one categorical distinction: between withdrawing life-sustaining treament on the one hand and active euthanasia or physician-assisted dying on the other. In Washington v Glucksberg and Vacco v Quill, the Supreme Court unanimously held that physician-assisted suicide is not a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Constitution. Notably, five members of the Court wrote or joined in concurring opinions that took a more liberal view. The Court powerfully approved aggressive palliation of pain. The Supreme Court, hinting that it would find state legalization of physician-assisted suicide constitutional, invited the nation to pursue an earnest debate on physician assistance in the dying process.

Double Effect Principle↗
PubMed1999

In re Edna MF: case law confusion in surrogate decision making.

I review the recent case of Edna Folz, a 73 year-old woman who was suffering through the end stages of very advanced Alzheimer's dementia when her case was adjudicated by the Wisconsin Supreme Court. I consider this case as an example of how courts are increasingly misinterpreting the ethical and legal decision-making-standards known as "substituted judgment" and "best interests" and thereby threatening individuals' treatment decision-making rights as developed by other courts over the past two decades and creating serious roadblocks to health-care providers' ability to render appropriate patient care. The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that Edna's legal guardian could not authorize withdrawal of Edna's treatment, ruling that as a matter of law, if an incompetent person is not in a persistent vegetative state, it is not in his or her best interests for life-sustaining treatment to be withdrawn unless (s)he has executed an advance directive or other statement clearly indicating his or her desires.

Aged↗