On Point blog, page 8 of 8
Wisconsin Supreme Court addresses the standard for deciding competency to refuse medication
Outagamie County v. Melanie L., 2013 WI 67, reversing unpublished court of appeals decision; majority opinion by Justice Prosser; case activity
In an important case for lawyers handling ch. 51 cases, the supreme court concludes there was insufficient evidence to prove a person subject to a commitment order was incompetent to refuse medication. Along the way, the court provides a “detailed interpretation of the statutory language”
Ch. 51 mental health commitment — sufficiency of the evidence
Winnebago County v. Gina A.R., 2013AP226, District 2, 5/22/13; court of appeals decision (1-judge; ineligible for publication); case activty
The court rejects Gina A.R.’s claim that the evidence at the final hearing was insufficient to show she is mentally ill, a proper subject for treatment, and dangerous, noting that much of her argument discusses facts not in the record and that the undisputed facts supported the commitment order. (¶¶4-6).
Outagamie County v. Melanie L., 2012AP99, WSC review granted 11/14/12
on review of unpublished decision; case activity
Issue (composed by On Point)
Whether the county adequately proved that Melanie L. is incompetent to exercise informed consent, in that: the county’s expert testified that she was incapable of applying an understanding “to her advantage” instead of “to … her mental illness … in order to make an informed choice” (§ 51.61(1)(g)4.b.); and she recognizes she is mentally ill and needs medication,
Mental Commitment – Involuntary Medication
Green County v. Janeen J. C., 2011AP2603, District 4, 5/31/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not publishable); for Janeen J.C.: Katie R. York, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
The trial court, before entering an involuntary medication order, failed to make requisite findings that Janeen J.C. wasn’t competent to make an informed choice, Virgil D. v. Rock County, 189 Wis. 2d 1,
Medication Order, § 51.61(1)(g)4.b
Outagamie County v. Melanie L., 2012AP99, District 3, 5/22/12, WSC review granted 11/14/12
court of appeals decision (1-judge, not for publication), supreme court review granted 11/14/12; for Melanie M.: Suzanne L. Hagopian, SPD, Madison Appellate; case activity
Evidence held sufficient to sustain involuntary medication order.
¶11 We reject Melanie’s argument that the expert needs to iterate the specific words of the statute in order for the evidence to be sufficient.