The Efficacy of Involuntary Outpatient Treatment in Massachusetts

  • Jeffrey Geller
  • Albert J. GrudzinskasJr.
  • Melissa McDermeit
  • William H. Fisher
  • Ted Lawlor


One means to address some of the unintended consequences of the shift of treatment for individuals with serious mental illness from hospitals to communities has been involuntary outpatient treatment (IOT). Using Massachusetts data, 19 patients with court orders for IOT were matched to all and to best fits on demographic and clinical variables, and then to individuals with the closest fit on utilization before the IOT date. Outcomes indicated the IOT group had significantly fewer admissions and hospital days after the court order. The full impact of IOT requires more study, particularly directed toward IOT's effects on insight and quality of life.


Public Health Mental Illness Clinical Variable Unintended Consequence Outpatient Treatment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 426 (1979)Google Scholar
  2. Addington v. Texas, 429.Google Scholar
  3. Cook, T.D. & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  4. Fernandez, G.A. (1992). Evaluation of involuntary outpatient commitment in North Carolina. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Division of Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities, and Substance Abuse Services.Google Scholar
  5. Fernandez, G.A., & Nygard, S. (1990). Impact of involuntary outpatient commitment on the revolving-door syndrome in North Carolina. Hospital & Community Psychiatry,41, 1001–1004.Google Scholar
  6. Geller, J.L. (1986). In again, out again: A preliminary evaluation of a state hospital's worst recidivists. Hospital & Community Psychiatry,37, 386–390.Google Scholar
  7. Geller, J.L. (1986). The quandaries of enforced community treatment and unenforceable outpatient commitment statutes. The Journal of Psychiatry and the Law,14, 149–158.Google Scholar
  8. Geller, J.L. (1990). Clinical guidelines for the use of involuntary outpatient treatment. Hospital & Community Psychiatry,41, 749–755.Google Scholar
  9. Geller, J.L. (1993). On being “committed” to treatment in the community. Innovations and Research,2, 23–27.Google Scholar
  10. Geller, J.L. (1996). Make 'em do it. Psychiatric Services,47, 1157.Google Scholar
  11. Haycock, J., Finkelman, D., & Presskreischer, H. (1994). Mediating the gap: Thinking about alternatives to the current practice of civil commitment. New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement,20, 265–289.Google Scholar
  12. Hiday, V.A. (1996). Outpatient commitment: Official coercion in the community. In D.L. Dennis & J. Monahan (Eds.),Coercion and aggressive community treatment. A new frontier in mental health law. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hiday, V.A., & Goodman, R.R. (1982). The least restrictive alternative to involuntary hospitalization, outpatient commitment: Its use and effectiveness. Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 10, 81–96.Google Scholar
  14. Hiday, V.A., & Scheid-Cook, T.L. (1987). The North Carolina experience with outpatient commitment: A critical appraisal. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 10, 215–232.Google Scholar
  15. Hiday, V.A., & Scheid-Cook, T.L. (1989). A follow-up of chronic patients committed to outpatient treatment. Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 40, 52–58.Google Scholar
  16. Lamb, H.R., & Weinberger, L.E. (1992). Conservatorship for gravely disabled psychiatric patients: A four-year follow-up study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 149, 909–913.Google Scholar
  17. Lamb, H.R., & Weinberger, L.E. (1993). Therapeutic use of conservatorship in the treatment of gravely disabled psychiatric patients. Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 44, 147–150.Google Scholar
  18. Luckstead, A., Coursey, R.D. (1995). Consumer perceptions of pressure and force in psychiatric treatments. Psychiatric Services, 46, 146–152.Google Scholar
  19. Mill, J.S. (1859). On liberty. London: J.W. Parker and Son.Google Scholar
  20. Mulvey, E.P., Geller, J.L., & Roth, L.H. (1987). Balancing the promises and perils of involuntary outpatient commitment. American Psychologist, 42, 571–584.Google Scholar
  21. Schneider-Braus, K. (1986). Civil commitment to outpatient psychotherapy: A case study. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 14, 273–279.Google Scholar
  22. Schwartz, S.J., & Costanzo, C.L. (1987). Compelling treatment in the community: Distorted doctrines and violated values. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 20, 1239–1429.Google Scholar
  23. Siegal, S., & Castellan, N.J. (1988). Non-parametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  24. Stefan, S. (1987). Preventive commitment: The concept and its pitfalls. Mental and Physician Disability Law Reporter II, 288–302.Google Scholar
  25. Stone, A.A. (1982). Psychiatric abuse and legal reform: Two ways to make a bad situation worse. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 5, 9–28.Google Scholar
  26. Torrey, E.F., & Kaplan, R.J. (1995). A national survey of the use of outpatient commitment. Psychiatric Services, 46, 778–784.Google Scholar
  27. Treffert, D. (1973). Dying with their rights on. American Journal of Psychiatry, 130, 1041.Google Scholar
  28. Van Putten, R.A., Santiago, J.M., & Berren, M.R. (1988). Involuntary outpatient commitment in Arizona: A retrospective study. Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 39, 953–958.Google Scholar
  29. Zanni, G., & deVeau, L. (1986). Inpatient stays before and after outpatient commitment. Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 37, 941–942.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey Geller
    • 1
    • 2
  • Albert J. GrudzinskasJr.
    • 3
  • Melissa McDermeit
    • 4
  • William H. Fisher
    • 5
    • 6
  • Ted Lawlor
    • 7
    • 8
    • 9
  1. 1.Public Sector PsychiatryUniversity of Massachusetts Medical CenterUSA
  2. 2.University of Massachusetts Medical SchoolUSA
  3. 3.University of Massachusetts Medical CenterUSA
  4. 4.Chestnut Health SystemsLighthouse InstituteBloomington
  5. 5.Center for Psychosocial and Forensic Services ResearchUniversity of Massachusetts Medical CenterUSA
  6. 6.University of Massachusetts Medical SchoolUSA
  7. 7.Connecticut Department of Mental Health and Addiction ServicesUSA
  8. 8.University of Connecticut Health Center;USA
  9. 9.University of Massachusetts Medical SchoolUSA

Personalised recommendations