Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill

Paper Summary:

This paper discusses involuntary institutionalization on the basis of two contrasting doctrines of philosophy, utilitarianism and libertarianism. Following a brief introduction to the history of civil commitment of the mentally ill, the utility of involuntary institutionalization is contrasted with its implications from a libertarian view. Both sides of the argument are discussed thoroughly and in supporting the utilitarian viewpoint, different models of involuntary institutionalization are entertained in order to provide a system with the least amount of rights infringement.

From the Paper:

"The basis of most, if not all argumentation against a system supporting involuntary institutionalization stems from the ideals under which libertarianism operates. One of the foundations of libertarianism rests on a distinction between positive and negative rights. A positive right might be, for example, the right to assistance. A negative right, by the same token, would be the right to not be interfered with. Under this conception, negative rights are usually paired with positive rights, so even though we have a positive right to assist others, they have a negative right to refuse that assistance. It is only when the negative rights are waived by that person that we may exercise our positive rights to assist them. The arguments against involuntary institutionalization will be discussed on this basis."

More papers on Civil Commitment of the Mentally Ill:

• Research Paper # 26343 : "Involuntary Commitment"
• Research Paper # 91598 : "Homelessness and the Mentally Ill"
• Term Paper # 129496 : "Psychosis and Substance Abuse"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: