. The husband of the plaintiff file a petition to the court that his wife[plaintiff] is mentally ill and needs to have a court order directing the admission of her to the mental health hospital. The petition initiated by plaintiff’s husband is the order of the Wayne County probate court, and it is also appropriately certified by Doctors Wolodzko, who after appearing in her house and introducing himself as a doctor , and have a conversation with her in person that day and another day in telephone, determine that she is suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and Smyk.
The court gave the order and the Plaintiff was taken by ambulance from her home to a private psychiatric hospital. Before leaving, defendant would not respond to her request to use the telephone, and when she attempted to, it was taken from her. She made it clear that she certainly didn’t want to go to the hospital, but she did go anyway, escorted by the two attendants who came with the defendant.
The plaintiff refused to consent to the treatment by the defendant, refused any medication, and refused to eat for five days.
She was placed in blocked by bars, locked and bare room for six days. Defendant permitted no phone calls or letters in or out. Defendant telephoned orders in and prescribed certain medication. He often visited her during her stay. She was allowed to see her husband and children, but the no communications with the outside world, until a few days before she was discharged. She was forcibly held down by nurses until she stopped fighting to a second injection of a tranquilizer. She had previously been given a similar injection over her objection. The injections were ordered by defendant.
The jury determined that the above facts were sufficient to find defendant guilty of the torts of false imprisonment, assault and battery. The jury grants Summary judgments for defendants Anthony Smyk and Ardmore Acres Hospital. Verdict against Joseph Wolodzko, reduced by remittitur, and judgment entered. Defendant Wolodzko appeals, and Plaintiff cross-appeals. Summary judgment is a procedural device used during civil litigation to promptly and expeditiously dispose of a case without a trial. It is used when there is no dispute as to the material facts of the case and a party is entitled to judgment as a matter law.
And the veredict against the other defendant was $30,000 while the plaintiff asked for $40,000. THE CASE QUESTIONS AND THEIR ANSWERS ARE; 1. What other information would you like to have to fully consider this case? Since they were in the process of divorce was her husband had another agenda behind the petition he filed to the court? If he hadn’t why was he absent at the time she was taken to the hospital? Did her husband bribe psychiatrist? Did the conversation the plaintiff had with defendant enough to level her as mentally ill? Was she really ill? If she was , could she refuse to have the treatment?
Was she competent at the time of her refusal for the treatment? Was she capable to give her consent? What was the result of the treatment? 2. According to the opinion, Mrs. Stowers was committed on the strength of the statement of two physicians that she was “mentally ill. ” Would that evidence be sufficient today to have someone committed involuntarily? If not, what would the evidence have to prove? Why? Involuntary commitment or civil commitment is a legal process through which an individual with symptoms of severe mental illness is court-ordered into treatment in a hospital (inpatient) or in the community (outpatient).
The criteria of this commitment vary from state to state in US. In these commitment proceedings there follow emergency hospitalization for the mentally ill person to stay in the hospital or psychiatric facilities for a short period of time [72hours] to stabilize the person. In this hearing even the idea of habeas courps, which means unlawful detention, may be raised The aim of it is to prevent danger from the individual and the community. Individuals with mental illness may impair their judgment and fair thinking and become danger to themselves and others. US states include this idea in their laws with different requirements.
However in the case of Addington . v Texas the US supreme court decide that “the issue of an individual’s interest in liberty is of such weight and gravity that a higher standard of proof is required than is normal in civil cases brought under state law. Because of the uncertainties of psychiatric diagnosis, the burden of proof does not need to be as high as “beyond a reasonable doubt” in criminal cases, but should be a “clear and convincing ” standard of proof as required by the Fourteenth Amendment in such a civil proceeding to commit an individual involuntarily for an indefinite period to a state psychiatric hospital. So according to this decision the evidence of this case that is used to determine the plaintiff was mentally ill would not be sufficient in this time to have her in involuntary commitment. The evidence has to prove that she is a really threat to herself and others and this evidence needs to be clear and convincing. http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Addington_v. _Texas http://mi. findacase. com/research/wfrmDocViewer. aspx/xq/fac. 19690828_0008. MI. htm/qx http://assets. wne. edu/160/13_note_Medical_. pdf 3. How should these kinds of cases be handled today?
Today based on the state’s law different requirements could be considered before having an individual in involuntary commitment. For example in the state of Michigan where this case occurred, if an individual’s judgment found to be impaired for the person unable him or her to understand his or her need of treatment and his or her continued behavior has enable to foresee that he or she can cause significant harm to himself or herself, or others the individual may be subject to involuntary commitment. http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Involuntary_commitment Week2DQ 2
How can intentional torts arise in the healthcare field? Be sure to provide specific examples. Tort has three parts; intentional tort, negligence tort and strict liability tort, an intentional tort is a category of torts that describes a civil wrong resulting from an intentional act on the part of the plaintiff. The harm need not be intended, but the act must be intentional, not merely careless or reckless. . Compared to others it is a serious liability . For example in the abortion law of Michigan State there are requirements that the physician needs to explain to the patient.
The physician needs to give information to the patient about the procedure of the abortion, and parental care. If the physician doesn’t inform her, these in formations for different reasons intentionally and if the patient suffers damage because of it then it is considered as intentional tort. The important points in this example are having a proof that the physician keep the information from the paitnt intentionally , and the result of the lack of the information cause damage on her. http://www. michigan. gov/mdch/0,4612,7-132-2940_4909-45202–,00. html
Cite this Discuss the Stowers V. Wolodzko Case Questions
Discuss the Stowers V. Wolodzko Case Questions. (2016, Oct 06). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/discuss-the-stowers-v-wolodzko-case-questions/