Riese
Riese v. St. Mary's Hospital & Medical Center
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Kline, J.
This class action presents the question whether psychiatric patients involuntarily committed to mental health facilities under Welfare and Institutions Code sections 5150 and 5250 1 may be forced to take anti-psychotic drugs against their will in nonemergency 2 situations.
Appellant Eleanor Riese, on behalf of the class of patients institutionalized under sections 5150 and 5250 and given antipsychotic drugs over their objection, brought a petition for writ of mandate seeking a determination that the patients’ informed consent was required before such drugs could be administered. Appellants contend that California statutes, common law and constitutional guarantees of privacy and freedom of speech give them the right to refuse antipsychotic drugs.
We hold that appellants have statutory rights to exercise informed consent to the use of antipsychotic drugs in nonemergency situations absent a judicial determination of their incapacity to make treatment decisions, and do not reach the constitutional issues.
Statement of Facts
Appellant Riese has a history of chronic schizophrenia, apparently stemming from childhood meningitis. She was first hospitalized in 1968, at age 25.…
Concurring Opinion
I concur with the decision reached by my colleagues but do so solely on the basis that Welfare and Institutions Code section 5326.5, *1325 subdivision (d) directly and unequivocally addresses the issue raised on this appeal. It states: “A person confined shall not be deemed incapable of refusal [of proposed therapy] solely by virtue of being diagnosed as a mentally ill, disordered, abnormal, or mentally defective person.” Subdivision (c) of that statute recognizes limitations on the right conferred by declaring that “[a] person confined shall be deemed incapable of written informed consent if such person cannot understand, or knowingly and intelligently act upon, the information specified in Section 5326.2.” Thus the competence of the involuntarily confined patient to exercise informed consent must be determined in those nonemergency cases where antipsychotic medication is refused.
In my opinion, my colleagues’ discussion of Welfare and Institutions Code sections 5005, 5152, subdivision (c); 5325, subdivision (f); 5325, subdivision (g); 5325.1, subdivisions (b) and (c); 5326, 5326.6, 5326.7, 5326.15, 5327, 5331, 5358, subdivision (b); and 5358.2 is unnecessary to the decision…
Opinion
This class action presents the question whether psychiatric patients involuntarily committed to mental health facilities under Welfare and Institutions Code sections 5150 and 5250 [1] may be forced to take antipsychotic drugs against their will in nonemergency [2] situations.
Appellant Eleanor Riese, on behalf of the class of patients institutionalized under sections 5150 and 5250 and given antipsychotic drugs over their objection, brought a petition for writ of mandate seeking a determination that the patients' informed consent was required before such drugs could be administered. Appellants contend that California statutes, common law and constitutional guarantees of privacy and freedom of speech give them the right to refuse antipsychotic drugs.
(1a) We hold that appellants have statutory rights to exercise informed consent to the use of antipsychotic drugs in nonemergency situations absent a judicial determination of their incapacity to make treatment decisions, and do not reach the constitutional issues.
Appellant Riese has a history of chronic schizophrenia, apparently stemming from childhood meningitis. She was first hospitalized in 1968, at age 25.…