Fitch W Lawrence
Forensic Services, Department of Health/Mental Hygiene, Jessup, Maryland 20794-1000, USA.
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2003 Jun;989:489-501. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2003.tb07328.x.
Fifteen states and the District of Columbia have laws for the special civil commitment of convicted sexual offenders who are about to be released from penal confinement and do not meet criteria for ordinary psychiatric civil commitment. As of summer 2002, nearly 2500 sexual offenders were hospitalized pursuant to one of these laws. An American Psychiatric Association task force declared that "sexual predator commitment laws establish a non-medical definition of what purports to be a clinical condition without regard for scientific and clinical knowledge," and thus "distort the traditional meaning of civil commitment, misallocate psychiatric facilities and resources, and constitute an abuse of psychiatry." It remains unclear how legislatures in states with these laws will respond to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Kansas v. Crane indicating that, absent a finding that an offender has "serious difficulty controlling behavior" (not an explicit commitment criterion in any state), commitment is invalid.
15个州和哥伦比亚特区制定了相关法律,针对即将刑满释放但不符合普通精神科民事强制住院标准的已定罪性犯罪者实施特殊的民事强制住院措施。截至2002年夏季,近2500名性犯罪者依据其中一项法律被送进了医院。美国精神病学协会的一个特别工作组宣称,“性犯罪者强制住院法律对一种本应属于临床状况的情况确立了非医学定义,而无视科学和临床知识”,因此“扭曲了民事强制住院的传统含义,错误分配了精神科设施和资源,构成了对精神病学的滥用”。目前尚不清楚拥有这些法律的州的立法机构将如何回应美国最高法院2002年在堪萨斯诉克莱恩案中的裁决,该裁决表明,除非认定犯罪者“在控制行为方面存在严重困难”(这在任何州都不是明确的强制住院标准),否则强制住院无效。