Use of outpatient treatment during civil commitment: Law and practice in Nebraska

Wood, William; Swanson, Donald A.

doi:10.1002/1097-4679(198509)41:5<723::aid-jclp2270410523>3.0.co;2-#

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The comparison groups included patients who were involuntarily hospitalized and later released, patients involuntarily admitted but discharged without being committed, involuntarily admitted patients who switched to voluntary status, and the outpatient committed patients themselves in a period prior to their mandatory community treatment orders (Fernandez & Nygard, 1990; Greeman & McClellan, 1985; Hiday & Goodman, 1982; Hiday & Scheid-Cook, 1987, 1989, 1991; Geller, Grundzinskas, McDermeit, Fisher, & Lawler, 1998; Keilitz, 1990; Munetz, Grande, Kleis, & Peterson, 1996; Schmidt & Geller, 1989; Van Putten, Santiago, & Berren, 1988; Wood & Swanson, 1985; Zanni & deVeau, 1986).…”

Section: Empirical Answers To the First Questionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outpatient commitment: The state of empirical research on its outcomes.

Hiday¹

2003

Psychology, Public Policy, and Law

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article briefly describes the historical conditions in the origin and development of outpatient commitment that framed the discourse on its merits and the empirical studies on its outcomes. It divides those empirical studies into two sets on the basis of the questions addressed and critically reviews them. The review pays particular attention to the latest studies that were able to randomize subjects to experimental and control conditions and that were able to offer enhanced services. Finally, this article presents issues not addressed by the empirical studies on outpatient commitment but that need to be addressed in order to understand the choice of using the law to force persons with mental illness to comply with treatment and receive services in the community.

show abstract