Watkins N J, Roth B A
Hosp Community Psychiatry. 1976 Oct;27(10):706-8. doi: 10.1176/ps.27.10.706.
The authors, co-counsel for the state of Pennsylvania in the child-commitment case to be heard this fall by the Supreme Court, outline the background of the case and present the state's arguments for preserving the rights of parents to commit their children to mental institutions. They warn of the potential psychological harm to both family and child in pitting one against the other in a formal commitment hearing. They also content that the lower-court ruling that granted due-process rights to children causes more problems than it solves. The decision, for example, effectively abolishes the state's program of respite care for mentally retarded youths.
这些作者是宾夕法尼亚州在最高法院将于今年秋季审理的儿童安置案件中的共同法律顾问，他们概述了该案件的背景，并阐述了该州关于维护父母将子女送进精神病院的权利的论点。他们警告说，在正式的安置听证会上让家庭和孩子相互对立，可能会对双方造成心理伤害。他们还认为，下级法院赋予儿童正当程序权利的裁决所引发的问题比解决的问题更多。例如，这一裁决实际上废除了该州为智障青少年提供的喘息护理计划。
