449 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6731630)
1. The Supreme Court looks at psychiatry.
Appelbaum PS
Am J Psychiatry; 1984 Jul; 141(7):827-35. PubMed ID: 6731630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Supreme Court decisions on mental health: a review.
Weiner BA
Hosp Community Psychiatry; 1982 Jun; 33(6):461-4. PubMed ID: 7095767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Warren Burger and the civil commitment tetralogy.
Shuman D
Int J Law Psychiatry; 1980; 3(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 7002809
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. A review of major implications of the O'Connor v. Donaldson decision.
Kopolow LE
Am J Psychiatry; 1976 Apr; 133(4):379-83. PubMed ID: 1267034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Pennhurst, Romeo, and Rogers. The Burger Court and Mental Health Law Reform Litigation.
Brant J
J Leg Med; 1983 Sep; 4(3):323-48. PubMed ID: 6605401
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Parham v. J. R.: "voluntary" commitment of minors to mental institutions.
Tiano LV
Am J Law Med; 1980; 6(1):125-49. PubMed ID: 7435506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Mental health commitment: the state of the debate, 1980.
Roth LG
Hosp Community Psychiatry; 1980 Jun; 31(6):385-96. PubMed ID: 7380401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Supreme Court and institutions: a comment on Youngberg v. Romeo.
Ellis JW
Ment Retard; 1982 Oct; 20(5):197-200. PubMed ID: 7176913
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Legal issues in mental health administration.
Mills MJ; Cummins BD; Gracey JS
Int J Law Psychiatry; 1983; 6(1):39-55. PubMed ID: 6642825
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. More positive supreme court views on psychiatry.
Kennelly DJ
Am J Psychiatry; 1985 Mar; 142(3):387-8. PubMed ID: 3970284
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Due process in the "voluntary" civil commitment of juvenile wards.
Glaessner PO
J Leg Med; 1981 Jun; 2(2):169-92. PubMed ID: 6972431
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. O'Connor v. Donaldson: retelling a classic and finding some revisionist history.
Behnke SH
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1999; 27(1):115-26. PubMed ID: 10212031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The hostility of the burger court to mental health law reform litigation.
Brant J
Bull Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 1983; 11(1):77-90. PubMed ID: 6850110
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. "Who are you to say what my best interest is?" Minors' due process rights when admitted by parents for inpatient mental health treatment.
Schmidt K
Wash Law Rev; 1996 Oct; 71(4):1187-217. PubMed ID: 11660505
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. O'Connor v. Donaldson: impact in the states.
Clayton T
Hosp Community Psychiatry; 1976 Apr; 27(4):272-81. PubMed ID: 1261980
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. High court establishes rights for retarded in institutions.
Barbash F
Washington Post; 1982 Jun; ():A1, A5. PubMed ID: 11647762
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Romeo, Romeo, where art thou Romeo: before the court at the mercy of institutional professionals.
Meyer SM; Soskin RM
J Psychiatry Law; 1982; 10(2):205-22. PubMed ID: 11658596
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The United States Supreme Court and psychiatry in the 1990s.
Ciccone JR
Psychiatr Clin North Am; 1999 Mar; 22(1):197-211. PubMed ID: 10083955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Youngberg v. Romeo.
U.S. Supreme Court
U S Rep U S Supreme Court; 1982 Jun; 457():307-31. PubMed ID: 12041273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A note on the meaning of the Donaldson decision.
Reinert RE
Hosp Community Psychiatry; 1979 Aug; 30(8):563-4. PubMed ID: 457050
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
