Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Legal Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons in Twentieth Century America

  • Chapter
Book cover Ethics and Mental Retardation

Part of the book series: Philosophy and Medicine ((PHME,volume 15))

  • 68 Accesses

Abstract

The United States Supreme Court in 1972 freed a mentally retarded person from lifetime court-ordered confinement. In Jackson v. Indiana [53] the Court accomplished this result by articulating the modest proposition that “due process requires that the nature and duration of commitment bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual is committed” ([53], p. 738). Jackson, who was a mentally retarded deaf-mute, had been charged with two thefts of small amounts of property. Because of his handicaps, he was found incompetent to stand trial. Without any determination of guilt or innocence he was ordered by the Indiana court to be confined by the Department of Mental Health until “sane” ([53], pp. 717–719). The Supreme Court held that the nature and duration of Jackson’s confinement was so devoid of a legitimating purpose that the confinement was an unconstitutional denial of due process ([53], pp. 736–739).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. American Bar Association, Commission on the Mentally Disabled: 1979, Executive Summary, Exercising Judgment for the Disabled, Report of an Inquiry (prepared by M. T. Axilbund).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allen, R.C., Ferster, E.Z., and Weihofen, H.: 1968, Mental Impairment and Legal Incompetency, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baumeister, A.A.: 1970, ‘The American Residential Institution: Its History and Character’, in [4], pp. 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baumeister, A.A., and E. Butterfield (eds.): 1970, Residential Facilities for the Mentally Retarded, Aldine, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Birnbaum, M.: 1960, ‘The Right to Treatment’, American Bar Association Journal 46, 499.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brakel, S.J. and Rock, R.S. (ads.): 1971, The Mentally Disabled and the Law, An American Bar Foundation Study (Revised Edition), The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Breslin, E.R.: 1980, ‘Backlash Against the Disabled’, Mental Disability Law Reporter 4, 345.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brief for Plaintiff in Error in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) in P. B. Kurland, and G. Casper (eds.): 1975, Landmark Briefs and Arguments of the Supreme Court of the United States: Constitutional Law, Volume 25, University Publications of America, Inc., Arlington, Va., pp. 491–509.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burgdorf, R.L. and Burgdorf, M.P.: 1977, ‘The Wicked Witch is Almost Dead: Buck v. Bell and the Sterilization of Handicapped Persons’, Temple Law Quarterly 50, 995 (reprinted in [31], pp. 995–1034).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Burgdorf, R.L. (ed.): 1980, The Legal Rights of Handicapped Persons, Paul H. Brookes, Publishers, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Burt, R. and Morris, N.: 1972, ‘A Proposal for the Abolition of the Incompetency Plea’, Univ. of Chicago 1, aw Review, 66.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Comptroller General of the United States: 1976, Returning the Mentally Disabled to the Community: Government Needs to Do More, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cox, I.W.: 1934, ‘The Folly of Human Sterilization’, Scientific American 151, 188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cynkar, R.J.: 1981, ‘Buck v. Bell: “Felt Necessities” v. Fundamental Values?’, Columbia Law Review 81, 1418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dybwad, G.: 1964, Challenges in Mental Retardation, Columbia, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ferster, E.: 1966, ‘Eliminating the Unfit - Is Sterilization the Answer?’ Ohio State Law Journal, 591.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Foote, C.: 1960 ‘A Comment on Pre-trial Commitment of Criminal Defendants’, Univ. of Pennsylvania Law Review, 832.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gilhool, T.K.: 1976, ‘The Right to Community Services’, in M. Kindred, J. Cohen, D. Penrod, and T. Shaffer (eds.), The Mentally Retarded Citizen and the Law, Free Press, New York, pp. 173–207.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gosney, E.S.: 1934, ‘Eugenic Sterilization - Human Betterment Demands It’, Scientific American 151, 18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Herr, S.: 1976, ‘The Right to an Appropriate Free Public Education’, in M. Kindred, J. Cohen, D. Penrod and T. Shaffer (eds.), The Mentally Retarded Citizen and the Law, Free Press, New York, pp. 252–267.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kanner, L.: 1964, A History of the Care and Study of the Mentally Retarded, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kindred, M., J. Cohen, D. Penrod, and T. Shaffer (eds.): 1976, The Mentally Retarded Citizen and the Law, Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kindergan, C.P.: 1966, ‘Sixty Years of Compulsory Eugenic Sterilization: “Three Generations of Imbeciles” and the Constitution of the United States’, Chicago-Kent Law Review 43, 123.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Landman, J.H.: 1934, ‘Race Betterment by Human Sterilization’, Scientific American 150, 292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Laughlin, H.H.: 1922, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lippman, L. and Goldberg, I.I.: 1973, Right to Education, Teachers College Press, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Note: 1967, ‘Civil Restraint, Mental Illness, and the Right to Treatment’, Yale Law Journal 77, 87.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Note: 1967, ‘Incompetency to Stand Trial’, Harvard Law Review 81, 454.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Note: 1976, ‘The Education of (sic) All Handicapped Children Act of 1975’, Univ. of Michigan Journal of Law Reform 10, 110.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Note: 1979, ‘Enforcing the Right to an “Appropriate” Education: The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975’, Harvard Law Review 92, 1103.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Phillips, W.R.F. and Rosenberg, J. (eds.): 1980, Changing Patterns of Law: The Courts and the Handicapped, Arno Press, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  32. President’s Committee on Mental Retardation: 1976, Mental Retardation: Century of Decision, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  33. President’s Committee on Mental Retardation: 1977, Mental Retardation: Past and Present, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  34. President’s Panel on Mental Retardation: 1963, A National Plan to Combat Mental Retardation, U.S. Govt. Printing Office, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Roos, P.: 1970, ‘Evolutionary Changes of the Residential Facility’, in Baumeister, A.A. and E. Butterfield (eds.), Residential Facilities for the Mentally Retarded, Aldine, Chicago, pp. 29–58.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Roos, P.: 1976, ‘Basic Personal and Civil Rights — Reaction Comment’, in M. Kindred, J. Cohen, D. Penrod, and T. Shaffer (eds.), The Mentally Retarded Citizen and the Law, Free Press, New York, pp. 26–28.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Rosen, M., Clark, G.R., and Kivitz, M.S. (eds.): 1976, The History of Mental Retardation (2 vols.), University Park Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rothman, D.: 1976, ‘The Right to Habilitation — Reaction Comment’, in M. Kindred, J. Cohen, D. Penrod, and T. Shaffer (eds.), The Mentally Retarded Citizen and the Law, Free Press, New York, pp. 407–411.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Symposium: 1969, ‘The Right to Treatment’, Georgetown Law Journal 57, 673.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Thomalla, C.: 1934, ‘The Sterilization Law in Germany’, Scientific American 151, 126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Vukowich, W.T.: 1971, ‘The Dawning of the Brave New World — Legal, Ethical, and Social Issues of Eugenics’, University of Illinois Law Forum 189.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wolfensberger, W.: 1975, The Origin and Nature of our Institutional Models, Human Policy Press, Syracuse, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Addington v. Texas,441 U.S. 418 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Baxstrom v. Herold,383 U.S. 107 (1966).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley,102 S. Ct. 3034 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Briggs v. Arafeh,411 U.S. 911 (1973), affirming by memorandum Logan v. Arafeh,346 F. Supp. 1265 (D. Conn. 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Buck v. Bell,274 U.S. 200 (1927).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Dept. of Human Resources of Georgia v. Burnham,422 U.S. 1057 (1975), denying certiorari from 503 F.2d 1319 (5th Cir. 1974).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Halderman v. Pennhurst State School and Hospital,446 F. Supp. 1295 (E.D.Pa. 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Halderman v. Pennhurst State School and Hospital,612 F.2d 84 (3d Cir. 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Humphrey v. Cady,405 U.S. 504 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  52. In re Winship,397 U.S. 358 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Jackson v. Indiana,406 U.S. 715 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Lessard v. Schmidt,349 F. Supp. 1078 (E.D. Wisc. 1972); vacated and remanded 414 U.S. 473 (1973); 379 F. Supp. 1376 (1974); vacated and remanded 421 U.S. 957 (1975); 413 F. Supp. 1318 (1976), prior judgment reinstated.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia,348 F. Supp. 866 (D.D.C. 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Nason v. Superintendent, Bridgewater State Hospital,353 Mass. 604, 233 N.E.2d 908 (1968).

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  58. Parham v. J.R.,442 U.S. 584 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman,451 U.S. 1 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Pennsylvania,334 F. Supp. 1257 (E.D.Pa. 1971), modified 343 F. Supp. 279 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Rouse v. Cameron,373 F.2d 451 (D.C.Cir. 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Rowley v. Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District,483 F. Supp. 528 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Rowley v. Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District,632 F.2d 945 (2d Cir. 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Specht v. Patterson,386 U.S. 605 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Stump v. Sparkman,435 U.S. 349(1978).

    Google Scholar 

  67. Wyatt v. Stickney,325 F. Supp. 781 (M.D.Ala. 1971), modified 344 F. Supp. 373 (1972).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Wyatt v. Stickney,344 F. Supp. 387 (M.D.AIa. 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Wyatt v. Aderholt,503 F.2d 1305 (5th Cir. 1974).

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  71. Developmentally Disabled Assistance and Bill of Rights Act, Pub. L. No. 94–103, 89 Stat. 486 (1975), codified at 42 U.S.C. 6001–6081 (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Public Law No. 94–142, 89 Statutes 773 (1975), codified at 20 U.S.C. 1401–1461 (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Ohio Revised Code Annotated (Page 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  74. Ohio Revised Code Annotated (Page 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  75. Virginia Acts of Assembly, 1924, pp. 569–571.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Law, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA

    Michael Kindred

Authors
  1. Michael Kindred
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. East Carolina University School of Medicine, Greenville, N.C., USA

    Loretta Kopelman  & John C. Moskop  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1984 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kindred, M. (1984). The Legal Rights of Mentally Retarded Persons in Twentieth Century America. In: Kopelman, L., Moskop, J.C. (eds) Ethics and Mental Retardation. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1480-8_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1480-8_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-8387-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1480-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation