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

CASE: Children committed to a mental hospital sue the state under 42 U.S.C. 1983

FACTS: Class of children committed to a state mental hospital in Georgia (one by his parents, who relinquished parental control to the county, another who was a ward of the state after being removed from his home for neglect) contend Georgia's voluntary commitment procedures for children under the age of 18 violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Three-judge panel of District judges found the statute unconstitutional because it failed to adequately protect the class' Due Process rights; the state appealed.

The Georgia statute provides for the voluntary admission to a state regional hospital of children such as plaintiffs. Admission begins with an application for hospitilization signed by a "parent or guardian". Upon application, the superintendent of each hospital is given the power to admit temporarily any child "for observation and diagnosis". If, after observation, the superintendent finds "evidence of mental illness" and that the child is "suitable for treatment" in the hospital, then the child may be admitted "for such period and under such conditions as may be authorized by law." Any patient who has been hospitilized for more than five days may be discharged at the request of the parent or guardian. The superintendent of each hospital has an affirmative duty to release any child "who has recovered from his mental illness or who has sufficiently improved that the superintendent determines that hospitilization of the patient is no longer desirable."

CLASS ARGUES: Precedents limiting traditional parental rights of parents, of viewed in the context of the liberty interest of the child and the liklihood of parental abuse, require the court to hold that the parents decision to have a child admitted to a mental hospital must be subjected to an exacting constitutional scrutiny, including a formal, adversary, pre-admission hearing.

COURT SAYS: Reverses the determination that the statute violates procedural due process, remands.

HOLDING: Trial court erred in holding unconstitutional as a violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Georgia's procedures for admitting a child for treatment to a mental hospital, where the statute permitted commitment of children without requiring the court to hold a pre-admission, adversarial proceeding. Nevertheless, the risk of error in parental decisions to have a child commited to a mental health care institution is sufficiently great that inquiry, should be made by a "neutral factfinder" who has the authority to refuse to admit a child to determine whether statutory requirements for admission are satisfied.

RATIONALE:

  • The decisions of parents with regard to the medical care of their children should receive great deference, but there are limits on this parental authority. The state is not without constitutional control over the parental discretion in dealing with children when their physical or mental health is jeopardized.
  • Children are not able to make sound decisions concerning their need for medical care or treatment; parents can and should make these decisions; neither state officials nor federal courts are equipped to review such parental decisions.
  • Formalized, fact-finding hearings intrude into the parent-child relationship and potentially make a child's return difficult, hurting the chances for long-term recovery.


    T O P