67 The Alabama Lawyer 451 (2006). Involuntary Commitment from a Probate Judge's Perspective.

• Author: BY JUDGE REESE MCKINNEY, JR.

The Alabama Lawyer

2006.

67 The Alabama Lawyer 451 (2006).

Involuntary Commitment from a Probate Judge's Perspective

Involuntary Commitment from a Probate Judge's PerspectiveBY JUDGE REESE MCKINNEY, JR. As a probate judge, I hear many types of emotionally charged cases, spanning from the joy of an adoption to the heartbreak of a contested estate matter. Some of the most difficult cases, though, involve involuntary commitment. Involuntary commitment is the process by which a mentally ill individual is ordered to receive inpatient treatment at a state psychiatric facility. The commitment process is an unfortunate but necessary court action designed to protect a dangerously mentally ill person and the public. Of course, there are legal criteria which must be met before a person can be subject to an involuntary commitment. In short, a person must: (1) be mentally ill, (2) present a real and present threat of substantial harm to self or other, (3) be unable to make a rational decision regarding the need for treatment, and (4) be found to be in a condition which will continue to deteriorate without treatment. The intent of the law is to provide for involuntary mental health treatment when necessary, while also protecting the rights of the individual.

Alabama's version of the commitment law is substantially similar to that of most states, with some exceptions. In the mid-90s, the "overt act" language in the commitment law was repealed, making it possible to commit an individual based on behavior which poses a "real and present threat of substantial harm" to self or others, without having to wait for an actual, overt act of harm to occur. Without the restrictive overt act language, the courts can better protect both the mentally ill individual and the public, because there is now no reason to wait until an act of violence has occurred before taking action. Obviously, there is a potential for abuse in this law. For instance, without the requirement of an overt act, a mentally ill individual could conceivably be committed based merely on bizarre behavior and threatening words. However, there are safeguards in place to prevent the potential slippery slope to a wrongful commitment, namely; a guardian ad litem appointment, professional recommendations, open hearings and the discretion and perspective of the probate judge. Although this system is not perfect, the current law does a fair job of accomplishing its purpose without leaving individual rights open to attack.

In addition to making difficult decisions regarding involuntary commitment, the probate court must also bridge the gap between local mental health providers and the court system. Although there are no easy answers to the issues involved in involuntary commitment, I have found that a cooperative system in which the legal and mental health fields work together is the best option. Probate Court Mental Health (PCMH) liaisons are one example of the type of partnerships which are critical to connecting the public to resources. The function of the PCMH liaison is to provide the public with a one-on-one resource during a mental health crisis, and to provide evaluations and recommendations to the court. This program has been very successful in Montgomery and has now expanded to comprise an...