When Public Health Meets the Judiciary

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 31 (s4):54-55 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The conflict between courts and medicine is best shown in the mental health cases requiring judgment of whether a person should be confined, and whether they should be medicated or left free to decide for themselves. In such cases, deprivation of liberty for noncriminal offenders is at question, but if they are released, they may be exposed to injury or injure others. “Clear and convincing” evidence is hard to prove in such cases.The TOPOFF 2 terrorism preparedness exercise was two years in planning, but the courts were involved only seven days before the exercise. Judge Murphy was put in charge of the Circuit Court building and was asked to stop all court proceedings to stop people from going into a building that might have been contaminated.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,991

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

When Public Health Meets the Judiciary.Michael J. Murphy, Anne M. Murphy, Maureen E. Conner & Linda Chezem - 2003 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 31 (S4):54-55.
Carrying Guns in Public: Legal and Public Health Implications.Jon S. Vernick - 2013 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 41 (s1):84-87.
Tort-Agency Partnerships in an Age of Preemption.Catherine M. Sharkey - 2014 - Theoretical Inquiries in Law 15 (2):359-386.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-31

Downloads
41 (#399,798)

6 months
6 (#588,740)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references