In article ,
 Josh Hill  wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 12:40:13 -0500, Kurt Ullman 
> wrote:
> 
> >  They weren't provided for prior to RR, but that is another thread 
> >altogether. I would (as much as it pains me-grin) have to agree with you 
> >on the latter. The Supremes have actually said that there is a 
> >constitutional right to refuse medications (I call it a Psychiatric 
> >Miranda--- You have the right to remain crazy). MOST of the mentally ill 
> >homeless that I worked with in a Big City Psych Street team were 
> >well-known to our inpatient system because they were frequent flyers who 
> >got better, got released (with follow-up in place) and then chose to not 
> >continue with treatment. Having worked with this population, I am not at 
> >all sure how much of difference any cuts would have made unless there is 
> >a way to compel participation.
> 
> I don't know either, but it seems that we need a means of mandating
> treatment for those who pass some kind of benchmark of severe illness.

  Technically you do. You can medicate as long as clear threat to 
themselves or others or disabled and unable to care for themselves. But 
that is only until the danger passes. THen the Psych Miranda kicks back 
in.
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32