The flashcards below were created by user
on FreezingBlue Flashcards.
Rule of Thumb
derived from English rule, adopted widely in America, that a husband could discipline his wife with any reasonable instrument, including a rod no thicker than his thumb.”
“In many States, married women did not have the right to bring suit in their own name without the consent of their husbands.”
laws that provided a new legal remedy for victims of domestic violence- a quick and easy procedure for them to obtain meaningful protection against violence. These laws differ, but they all permit a court issued order, enjoining a person from assaulting, harming, or even seeing a family or household member
Promblems with procedures and state laws regarding protection of women
- Not available to certain victims.
- Definitions of domestic violence too restrictive.
- People are not aware of protective laws.
- Psychological and social barriers to using the laws.
- Complexity of procedure. Social workers assistance.
- Judges impatience with unrepresented litigants.
- Enforcing protection orders may be difficult.
Battered Women Syndrome
It is argued that some victims of repeated domestic violence develop this syndrome, which causes them to live in a constant state of fear of violence. It is further argued that if these women strike back and kill their batterers, their actions are really done in self-defense - even if they are not done at the time of a battering episode - because the actions stem form this constant state of fear.
What case was the first to accept battered women syndrome as a form of self-defense?
State v. Leidholm
Case law in relavance to Battered Women Syndrome
- Buhrle v. State.- Court refused expert testimony.
- California Supreme Court Rulings.- Admissibility of expert testimony to the BWS.
- Rogers v. State.-Florida case a murder charge was reversed, citing that expert testimony is admissible.
- State v. Thomas.- Thomas’ requested jury instruction—detailed definition of BWS and a statement.
Women received settlement for 1.9 million because police refused to arrest her husband for sever abuse.
Thurman City v. City of Torrington
“…the court stated that a police officer’s failure to arrest a batterer may have violated a wife’s right to equal protection if he failed to act…”
Bartalone v. County of Berrien
Excluding alien children (even illegal) from schools violates the 14th Amendment.
Plyer v. Doe
Disabled children could NOT be excluded from schools.
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Pennsylvania
(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). Forbids discrimination against the disabled by federally assisted entities
Supreme Court held that dependence on local property taxes to finance the schoools, a dependence that results in less funds per child in poor school districts, was not an unconstitutional denial of equal protection.
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez
The Supreme Court held that damages could be claimed under Title IX by a high school student who alleged sexual harassment by a coach/teacher
- Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools
- Appealed by Rowinsky v. Bryan Independent School District
Requirement that children within certain ages must attend school
A fifteen year old boy was involuntarily commited after having been found by a court on a petition of his father to be suffering from "paranoid schizophrenia." He made several request to be released over the years and was denied. It was found at the conclusion of the trial that he was neither dangerous to himself or others. It was also found that if he was mentally ill he did not recieve treatment and he was awarded damages for the denial of his constitutional right to freedom.
O'Connor v. Donaldson
Adult male with profound intellectual challenges, allegedly restrained and refused treatment.
Youngberg v. Romeo, 1982
Treatment in the least restrictive manner. Lessard v. Schmidt, 1972.
Freedom from restraints and seclusions.
First Amendment rights.
Petitions for redress of grievances.
Transfer to other institutions.
Freedom from discrimination.
Mental Health Patients Bill of Rights
Competency issues regarding voluntary consent
- Due process applies to “involuntary” commitment, but what about “voluntary” commitment when mental capacity is in question?
- Zinermon v. Burch, 1990. A man with mental illness found on the highway in Florida. He was commited and signed forms while medicated and not considered competent to do so.
- “Burch teaches that mental health professionals have an ongoing duty in voluntary treatment settings to ensure that the mentally disabled person has the capacity to consent to treatment before being deprived of freedoms.”
Social Worker's Roles in Commitment
- Petitioner: asking the court to commit a person
- Advocate: questioning the validity of committing a person
- Educator: provide info to the court
- Preparer of reports: for courts that are conducting reviews of the commitments
- Officers in administrative procedures.
- No medical treatment can proceed without the informed consent of the patient or one serving as a surrogate for the patient.
- Informed consent has three elements:
Exceptions to informed consent
- Emergency care providers can dispense with informed consent.
- Treatment may mandated on people based on the state’s parens patriae authority.
- People may not be allowed to refuse life saving treatment.
Right to Refusal Upheld
- If no dependents exist and family concurs.
- If treatment is highly invasive.
- If treatment is risky, experimental, or has small chance of success.
- If quality of life very adversely impacted.
- If treatment only postpones imminent death.
- If patient has deeply held religious belief opposing treatment.
Right to refuse treatment- denied
- If minor children or dependents involved.
- If treatment is minor and non-invasive.
- If treatment is generally accepted mode.
- If quality of life not impacted by treatment.
- If treatment actually saves the life.
Courts opposition to assisted suicide
- Trust to refrain from harm in physician/patient relationship.
- Risk to vulnerable populations and groups of people.
medical conditions have rendered an individual unconscious, comatose, or otherwise incompetent to make decisions for themselves
- When the court is substituting its judgement for the judgment of the incompetent person with test such as
- Subjective Test: What would this particular individual desire? or the
- Objective Test: What would a reasonable adult wish in similar circumstances
Medical Care for Children
- Emergency exception to parental consent.
- Minor treatment without parental consent.
- Emancipated minors or mature minors may consent.
- Older minors entitles to certain treatment without parental consent.
5 differences in Obamacare
- Young adults can stay on their parents plan till 26
- Cannot be denied due to pre-existing conditions
- Free preventive care and annual check ups
- No annual limits on health care
- Insurance companies can't drop you when your sick
Poor Record Keeping
Managed Care Liability
Client Transfer Liability
Civil Liability based on negligence
Consent to Treat Issues
Invasion of Privacy or Breach of Confidentiality
Intentional Infliction of Mental Distress
Assault or Battery
Breach of Contract
Civil Liability based on intentional acts
States have enacted criminal laws that target activities involving social workers.
Sexual Assault: sexual relations with a client (consent is not a deffense)
Fraudulent Billing: billing insurance companies for services allegedly performed
Practice Acts and Regulations: minimum standards enacted by the State's oversight board must be followed
Ethical Model: Hierarchy
- Protection of Life
- Equality and Inequality (Social Justice)
- Autonomy and Freedom (Self Determination)
- Least Harm
- Quality of Life
- Privacy and Confidentiality
- Truthfullness and Full Disclosure
People have the right to
- Exist with their basic needs met
- Treatment that is equal and fair
- Have free choice and freedom
- Injury that is minimal or non existent
- Cultivate a good quality of life
- Secure the privacy and confidentiality
- Understand the truth and receive available information
Brown v. Board of Education, Plessey v. Ferguson
- Plessy v. Ferguson: (1899) Separate but equal.
- Brown v. Board of Education: (1954) Any laws requiring or even permitting segregation in public schools violate the 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection.
- “To separate children from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely to ever be undone.”
- Following this decision was a long line of court decisions stating that officials were not making enough progress at desegregation efforts.
- Then, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 contained a clause noting the prohibition of federal funds for noncompliance.