Skip to main content

Abstract

Crisis situations can create serious legal and ethical issues. This chapter provides guidance to service providers and parents or guardians for dealing with potential situations that may give rise to legal and ethical concerns when serving individuals with developmental disabilities. Persons being served in treatment programs have certain basic constitutional rights, including the right to reasonably safe conditions of confinement and freedom from unreasonable bodily restraint. Additionally, consumers have a right to be free from aversive procedures and involuntary servitude. People with developmental disabilities also have the right to refuse treatment, the right to treatment in the least restrictive setting, and the right to choice in their treatment and everyday lives. Legal liability issues can arise in any treatment program, and staff should be aware of the necessity to properly supervise, maintain equipment, keep living premises safe, and provide appropriate medical care. Protective mechanisms such as human rights and peer review committees offer additional protection for treatment programs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

Articles and Books

  • Bannerman, D. J., Sheldon, J. B., Sherman, J. A., & Harchik, A. E. (1990). Balancing the right to habilitation with the right to personal liberties: The rights of people with developmental disabilities to eat too many doughnuts and take a nap. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 79–89.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prosser, W.L (1971). Handbook of the Law of Torts (4th ed.). St. Paul: West Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risley, T. R., & Sheldon-Wildgen, J. (1980a). Suggested procedures for human rights committees of potentially controversial treatment programs. The Behavior Therapists, 3, 9–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risley, T. R., & Sheldon-Wildgen, J. (1980b). Invited peer review: The AABT experience. Professional Psychology, 13, 125–131. Reprinted in: The Behavior Therapist, (1980), 3, 5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foxx, R. M., & Azrin, N. H. (1973). The elimination of autistic self-stimulatory behavior by overcorrection. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 1–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon, J. (1987). Legal and ethical issues in the behavioral treatment of juvenile and adult offenders. In E. K. Morris & C. J. Braukmann (Eds.), Behavioral approaches to crime and delinquency. New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Biervliet, A., & Sheldon-Wildgen, J. (1981). Liability issues in community-based programs. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

Cases

  • Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program v. J.S. Tarwater Developmental Center, 97 F.3d 492 (11th Cir. 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein v. Department of Human Services, 392 Ill. App. 3d 875 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandt v. Monte, 626 F. Supp. 2d 469 (D.N.J. 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis v. Devereux Foundation, 997 A.2d 273 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2010) aff’d in part, rev’d in part, 209 N.J. 269 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis v. Devereux Foundation, 209 N.J. 269, 278 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Disability Law Center, Inc. v. Riel, 130 F. Supp. 2d 294 (D. Mass. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Disability Rights Washington v. Penrith Farms, CV-09-024-JLQ, 2009 WL 777737 (E.D. Wash. Mar. 20, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson v. O’Connor, 493 F.2d 507 (5th Cir. 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fialkowski v. Greenwich Home for Children, Inc., 683 F. Supp. 103 (E.D. Pa. 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson By & Through Hanson v. Clarke County, Iowa, 867 F.2d 1115 (8th Cir. 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey v. Mohammed, 841 F. Supp. 2d 164 (D.D.C. 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • In re Branning, 285 Ill.App.3d 405 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • In re Lance, 402 931 N.E.2d 734 (Ill. App. Ct. 2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • In re Nicholas L., 944 N.E.2d 384 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • In re Sealed Case (Medical Records), 381 F.3d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kentucky Association for Retarded Citizens, Inc. v. Conn, 674 F.2d 582 (6th Cir. 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch v. Maher, 507 F. Supp. 1268 (D. Conn. 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  • Madison ex rel. Bryant v. Babcock Center, Inc., 638 S.E.2d 650 (S.C. 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • Matter of Miner, 424 N.W.2d 810 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor v. Donaldson, 422 U.S. 563 (1975).

    Google Scholar 

  • Olmstead v. L.C. ex rel. Zimring, 527 U.S. 581, 587 (1999). Pennsylvania Protection & Advocacy, Inc. v. Royer-Greaves School for Blind, CIV. A. 98–3995, 1999 WL 179797 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 25, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips v. Thompson, 715 F.2d 365 (7th Cir. 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie v. Klein, 720 F.2d 266 (3d Cir. 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw by Strain v. Strackhouse, 920 F.2d 1135 (3d Cir. 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Arkansas, 794 F. Supp. 2d 935 (E.D. Ark. 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Kaufman, 546 F.3d 1242 (10th Cir. 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v. Kozminski, 487 U.S. 931 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wisconsin Coalition for Advocacy, Inc. v. Czaplewski, 131 F. Supp. 2d 1039 (E.D. Wis. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt v. Stickney, 325 F. Supp. 781 (M.D. Ala. 1971) aff’d sub nom. Wyatt v. Aderholt, 503 F.2d 1305 (5th Cir. 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  • Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yvonne L. By & Through Lewis v. New Mexico Department of Human Services, 959 F.2d 883, 892 (10th Cir. 1992).

    Google Scholar 

Federal Regulations

Federal Statutes

  • 18 U.S.C. § 1589.

    Google Scholar 

  • 42 .S.C. § 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 15001 et seq.

    Google Scholar 

  • Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act, U.S.C. § 15043(a)(2)(B).

    Google Scholar 

State Statutes

  • Illinois Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Administrative Act, 20 ILCS 1705/15(f).

    Google Scholar 

  • Illinois Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Code, 405 ILCS 5/2-102(a-5).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge Jamie Price, James Sherman, and Michael Strouse for their valuable contributions to this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Bowen Sheldon Ph.D., JD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sheldon, J.B., Sheldon-Sherman, J.A.L. (2013). Legal and Ethical Issues. In: Reed, D., DiGennaro Reed, F., Luiselli, J. (eds) Handbook of Crisis Intervention and Developmental Disabilities. Issues in Clinical Child Psychology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6531-7_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics