Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Wyatt v. Stickney”

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 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1983

Wyatt v. Stickney: a historical perspective.

A decade after Federal Judge Frank M. Johnson rendered the Wyatt v. Stickney decision in 1972, the case was again scheduled for a hearing in January, 1983. Many of the same issues which were before the Court in the previous decade were again considered in the present hearing. The issues presently before the court include (a) the plaintiffs' motion for diversion of general fund and oil and gas lease funds to the Department of Mental Health for operations, (b) defendants' request for termination of the receiver-ship under which the Department presently operates, (c) plaintiffs' motion for removal of the governor as receiver and appointment of a new receiver; and (d) defendants' motion for modification of the injunction to withdraw the Wyatt standards and substitute Title XIX standards. Since the original ruling, significant changes have occurred at both the national and state levels that will effect the outcome of Wyatt. The historical antecedents of this case must be carefully scrutinized in order to understand the decision which will be rendered. What decision is ultimately rendered in the Wyatt hearings of 1983 will no doubt have a significant effect on services to the mentally retarded throughout the United States.

Alabama↗
PubMed1987

Wyatt v. Stickney: a consent decree.

On September 22, 1986, Judge Myron Thompson issued a consent decree in the Wyatt v. Stickney litigation. The settlement occurred 14 years after Judge Frank M. Johnson, Jr. rendered his landmark decision in this case. The consent decree included termination of the court's active supervision of the state's mental health system, termination of the receivership, and termination of the court monitor's powers. The state agreed to adhere to Wyatt standards, maintain Title XIX accreditation, continue deinstitutionalization efforts, and develop an internal advocacy and quality assurance program. Mechanisms are also to be put in place to apprise the plaintiffs' attorneys of progress in these efforts.

Alabama↗
PubMed1977

Wyatt v. Stickney: assessing the impact in Alabama.

In 1971 U.S. District Judge Frank M. Johnson, Jr., ruled that patients involuntarily committed to Alabama mental institutions have a constitutional right to treatment. The following year he issued a court order containing 35 minimum constitutional standards for adequate treatment of the mentally ill and appointed human rights committees at the institutions to oversee their implementation. Focusing primarily on Bryce Hospital in Tuscaloosa, the author examines the extent to which compliance with the standards has been achieved, problems that have arisen in implementing the standards, and issues that still must be dealt with. He briefly discusses changes in the state's mental health system that preceded the filing of the case, and he emphasizes that those changes may have contributed significantly to the improvements that have occurred in mental health care in Alabama after Wyatt.

Alabama↗
PubMed1975

Rights of the mentally ill: the gulf between theory and reality.

Within the last few years several lawsuits have significantly increased both the procedural and the substantive rights of mental patients; among them are Lessard v. Schmidt, in which the court held that persons facing involuntary civil commitment are entiltled to dueprocess safeguards, and Wyatt v. Stickney and Donaldson v. O'Connor, concerned with the right ot adequate treatment. The author draws on the problems of implementing the landmark decree of Miranda v. Arizona, guaranteeing the rights of criminal suspects, in discussing the difficulties of translating rights promulgated in the courts into reality. He believes that enofrcement of patients' rights depends not on the law alone but also on the sensitivity and good faith of mental health workers.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1977

The Wyatt standards: an administrative viewpoint.

The author, the fifth superintendent of Alabama's Bryce Hospital since the Wyatt v. Stickney order was issued in 1972, discusses the major problems faced by an administrator in complying with the court-set standards. They relate to qualified mental health professionals, staffing ratios, staff attitudes, individualized treatment plans, and the hospital's negative image. He also discusses the role of the human rights committee and the hospital's goal of providing treatment of sufficient quality that the court order will be lifted.

Alabama↗
PubMed1992

[The right to treatment of the institutionalized mentally ill in the United States].

In his epochmaking article, Birnbaum proposed that courts should recognize a right to treatment of institutionalized psychiatric patients based on the substantive due process. His proposal was adopted in Rouse v. Cameron as a statutory right. Wyatt v. Stickney decision was the first to hold that there was a constitutionally based right to treatment for involuntarily committed patients. The Supreme Court, though reluctantly, held in Youngberg v. Romeo that the institutionalized mentally retarded were entitled to minimally adequate training, which was drawn in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric Disorders↗
PubMed1992

Wyatt v. King.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Alabama↗