Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Due process and crime control criminal justice model
Due process and crime control criminal justice model
Due process and crime control criminal justice model
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Due process and crime control criminal justice model
In 1990, a legal case was presented by an inmate that forced the legal system to reexamine the rights inmates have when it comes to medical treatment and what process to take in order to decide those rights. This case brought up the issue of the 14th amendment “due process” clause and the forcible use of anti-psychotic medications. Walter Harper was convicted of robbery and sent to prison in 1976 where he was incarcerated until 1980 at the Washington State Penitentiary Mental Health unit. While he was here, he consented to taking anti-psychotic medications with no issues raised. In 1982, Harper was transferred to the Special Offender Center (SOC) after he assaulted two nurses while on parole. That same year in November, he refused to continue …show more content…
First, these medications were found to have serious effects, possible room for abuse, and a history of incorrect use by the profession as a whole. Medications greatly effect an individual’s ability to think and feel correctly, also, their self-awareness is detiorated. Mr. Harper as well as others, should have the right to refuse medications that leave negative current and future impact on their health. Secondly, the question of whether the forcible medications violated the due process clause of the Constitution. The 14th Amendment due process clause explains the guarantee limits of what people can be forced to undergo due to the government. Petitioners challenged “allowing prison authorities to administer medications to inmates against their will” because, it was unconstitutional to deprive inmates of due process rights. However, this legal case outcome stated that it was constitutional in certain situations to force anti-psychotics. If a rigorous review doesn’t take place, the prison officials could administer dangerous drugs to prisoners with immunity. This circumstance should only happen however if; the inmate poses a risk to themselves or others, has a communicable disease that threatens the prison community, or if their condition will hurt their permanent health without medical
...92‘s Riggins v. Nevada, and 1990‘s Washington v. Harper. In Harper, the court determined that prison inmates could be forcibly medicated if they were a danger to themselves or others, and if the medication was medically appropriate. Riggins, in turn, decided that a defendant already on trial could be forcibly medicated to ensure his competency and allow for the proceedings to continue smoothly, in essence bulldozing one’s 14th amendment rights to “accomplish essential state policy” (Riggins, 1992, as cited in Breneman, 2004, p. 971). Riggins also proclaimed that forcible medication must be the least invasive means of treatment, and provide minimal side effects. Sell was clearly the child of these two rulings, fusing the competing interests of governmental prosecution with the liberty and safety of the defendant.
In the book Crazy in America by Mary Beth Pfeiffer, she illustrated examples of what people with mental illness endure every day in their encounters with the criminal justice system. Shayne Eggen, Peter Nadir, Alan Houseman and Joseph Maldonado are amongst those thousands or more people who are view as suspected when in reality they are psychotic who should be receiving medical assistance instead, of been thrown into prison. Their stories also show how our society has failed to provide some of its most vulnerable citizens and has allowed them to be treated as a criminals. All of these people shared a common similarity which is their experience they went through due to their illness.
Throughout history, segregation has always been a part of United States history. This is showed through the relationships between the blacks and whites, the whites had a master-slave relationship and the blacks had a slave-master relationship. And this is also true after the civil war, when the blacks attained rights! Even though they had obtained rights the whites were always one step above them and lead superiority over them continuously. This is true in the Supreme court case “Plessy v. Ferguson”. The Court case ruled that blacks and whites had to have separate facilities and it was only constitutional if the facilities were equal. this means that they also constituted that this was not a violation of the 13th and 14th amendment because they weren 't considered slaves and had “equal” facilities even though they were separate. Even if the Supreme court case “Plessy v. Ferguson” set the precedent that separate but equal was correct, I would disagree with that precedent, because they interpreted
Gupta, M. (2001): Treatment refusal in the involuntarily hospitalized psychiatric population: Canadian policy and practice. In: Medicine and Law, Vol. 20, Issue 2, pp. 245-265.
The passage of the 13th amendment seems simple. Lincoln declared the emancipation proclamation and set the majority of the slaves free. General opinion was already shifting toward abolition and a bill like the 13th amendment seemed inevitable. This is the well-known but extremely overgeneralized view of national abolition. Leonard L. Richards attempts to correct this general perspective in Who freed the slaves?. He argues that abolitionists were actually fighting an uphill battle throughout the civil war. Not only was there opposition from Democrats, the majority of Republicans was also against abolition. This only changed near the end of the civil war with countless endeavors to change public opinion and heavy secret bargaining.
The 4th amendment provides citizens protections from unreasonable searches and seizures from law enforcement. Search and seizure cases are governed by the 4th amendment and case law. The United States Supreme Court has crafted exceptions to the 4th amendment where law enforcement would ordinarily need to get a warrant to conduct a search. One of the exceptions to the warrant requirement falls under vehicle stops. Law enforcement can search a vehicle incident to an individual’s arrest if the individual unsecured by the police and is in reaching distance of the passenger compartment. Disjunctive to the first exception a warrantless search can be conducted if there is reasonable belief
Throughout time there have been many amendments to the United States Constitution. Some have had little to no effect on the population. One amendment that this writer will take a look at is the Fourteenth Amendment. The wording of the amendment has been debated here recently but bottom line it abolished slavery. This amendment also made an attempt to equalize everyone that is born here in America or naturalized. The ripple effect of this change to the constitution is still being felt today. It is hard to imagine living in a world where the African American community was not considered equal to the white man. A ground breaking distinction in the language written out in the document was that of it applying on the federal level as well as the state jurisdiction. This is especially important as we see the civil union marriages have conflict
I chose to analyze a report made against a county jail being that many correctional facilities lack the adequate resources to care for detainees needing mental health treatment. The allegations made against Henry County Jail was that a detainee's mental health needs were not met and they were required to pay a copay to see a physician, nurse, or access their prescribed medications. Another allegation was that the detainee and fellow inmates on suicide watch were placed in unstable conditions. The complaint stated that the detainee was placed in a cell with two other individuals who were also on suicide watch and were denied medications. It also explained that these detainees were required to sleep on a concrete floor for three months being
The 15th Amendment was written by George Washington Julian. This amendment was passed on February 26, 1869 and was ratified February 3, 1870. The 15th Amendment was very significant to many Americans of different races because it changed their lives forever by allowing them to vote. “The present difficulty, in bringing all parts of the United States to a happy unity and love of country grows out of the prejudice to color. The prejudice is a senseless one, but it exists,” said U.S. Grant, 1869.
The Constitution of the United States of America protects people’s rights because it limits the power of government against its people. Those rights guaranteed in the Constitution are better known as the Bill of Rights. Within these rights, the Fourth Amendment protects “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable search and seizures […]” (Knetzger & Muraski, 2008). According to the Fourth Amendment, a search warrant must be issued before a search and seizure takes place. However, consent for lawful search is one of the most common exceptions to the search warrant requirement.
According to the Tenth Amendment in the Bill of Rights: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Though last in the Bill of Rights, it is one of the most powerful and ever changing in interpretation over the course of America’s history. Some historical events that altered its meaning include the Civil War, The Civil Right’s Movement, and even modern event’s like the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage. In this paper I will discuss how the Tenth amendment has a large effect in both America’s history, but also how it is now portrayed America’s present.
Metzner, J. L., & Fellner, J. (2010). Solitary Confinement and Mental Illness in U.S. Prisons: A Challenge for Medical Ethics. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 38(1), 104-108.
The extents of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution has been long discussed since its adoption in mid-late 1800s. Deciding cases like Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade has been possible due to mentioned amendment. These past cases not only show the progression of American society, but also highlights the degree of versatility that is contained within the amendment. Now, in 2015, the concerns are not of racial segregation or abortion, the extent of the amendment was brought to a new field: same-sex marriage. In Obergefell v Hodges, we can see the epitome of the Equal Protection Clause.
The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments are the amendments adopted to the United States Constitution after the Civil War. In succession, these amendments were adopted to the Constitution.
The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world and of that over sixty percent of jail inmates reported having a mental health issue and 316,000 of them are severely mentally ill (Raphael & Stoll, 2013). Correctional facilities in the United States have become the primary mental health institutions today (Adams & Ferrandino, 2008). This imprisonment of the mentally ill in the United States has increased the incarceration rate and has left those individuals medically untreated and emotionally unstable while in jail and after being released. Better housing facilities, medical treatment and psychiatric counseling can be helpful in alleviating their illness as well as upon their release. This paper will explore the increasing incarceration rate of the mentally ill in the jails and prisons of the United States, the lack of medical services available to the mentally ill, the roles of the police, the correctional officers and the community and the revolving door phenomenon (Soderstrom, 2007). It will also review some of the existing and present policies that have been ineffective and present new policies that can be effective with the proper resources and training. The main objective of this paper is to illustrate that the criminalization of the mentally ill has become a public health problem and that our policy should focus more on rehabilitation rather than punishment.