406 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11664853)
1. Overt dangerous behavior as a constitutional requirement for involuntary civil commitment of the mentally ill.
Groethe R
Univ Chic Law Rev; 1977; 44(3):562-93. PubMed ID: 11664853
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Constitutional law: standard of proof in involuntary civil commitments.
Whiteman DL
Washburn Law J; 1980; 19(2):350-8. PubMed ID: 11658363
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Involuntary commitment of the mentally ill.
Troland MB
Mont Law Rev; 1977; 38(2):307-25. PubMed ID: 11664835
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The standard of proof necessary in involuntary civil commitment of the mentally ill.
Coleman SS
S D Law Rev; 1980; 25(2):379-91. PubMed ID: 11665199
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. If civil commitment is the answer for children, what are the questions?
Zenoff EH; Zients AB
George Washington Law Rev; 1983 Jan; 51(2):171-218. PubMed ID: 11658670
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The rights of mental patients.
Ellis JW
Ment Hyg; 1975; 59(3):35. PubMed ID: 11664515
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Constitutional law--right to liberty--involuntary confinement of mental patients.
Tenn Law Rev; 1976; 43(2):366-73. PubMed ID: 11664691
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Constitutional requirements in the commitment of the mentally ill in the U.S.A.: rights to liberty and therapy.
Flaschner FN
Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol; 1974; 18(3):283-301. PubMed ID: 11664409
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Involuntary commitment: the move toward dangerousness.
Weissbourd R
John Marshall Law Rev; 1982; 15(1):83-113. PubMed ID: 11658335
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Constitutional law--confinement of nondangerous mentally ill capable of surviving safely in freedom held to violate patient's right to "liberty".
Hancock GC
Univ Richmond Law Rev; 1976; 10(2):402-9. PubMed ID: 11664793
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Developments in the law: civil commitment of the mentally ill.
Harv Law Rev; 1974 Apr; 87(6):1190-406. PubMed ID: 11664523
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Donaldson, dangerousness, and the right to treatment.
Grant GM
Hastings Constit Law Q; 1976; 3(2):599-627. PubMed ID: 11664729
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Civil commitment--due process and the standard of proof.
Brent DJ
De Paul Law Rev; 1974; 23(4):1500-11. PubMed ID: 11664498
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. An overview of state involuntary civil commitment statutes.
Van Duizend R; McGraw BD; Keilitz I
Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 1984; 8(3):328-35. PubMed ID: 11658581
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Toward a right to treatment for civilly committed mental patients.
Belzer I
UMKC Law Rev; 1975; 44(1):23-48. PubMed ID: 11664543
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Civil commitment in Alabama.
Segall RD
Ala Law Rev; 1977; 26(1):215-71. PubMed ID: 11664721
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Addington v. Texas--standard of proof in civil commitment proceedings--a logical middle ground.
Ross JJ
Ohio North Univ Law Rev; 1979; 6(3):597-608. PubMed ID: 11665139
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Constitutional law--due process--civil commitment--absent treatment, a nondangerous mentally ill person able to survive safely in society has a constitutional right to release.
Burnstin SM
Wash Law Rev; 1976 Jul; 51(3):764-90. PubMed ID: 11664654
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Civil commitment of the mentally ill in California: the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act.
Hart MA
Loyola Los Angel Law Rev; 1974 Feb; 7(1):93-136. PubMed ID: 11664312
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Least restrictive treatment of involuntary patients: translating concepts into practice.
Keilitz I; Conn D; Giampetro A
St Louis Univ Law J; 1985; 29(3):691-745. PubMed ID: 11649207
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
