The case that has psychiatrists running scared: Ahmed v. Stefaniu.
In the three decades since the definitive decisions regarding duty to warn and protect, several cases have shaped psychiatric practice. In this article we present a tragic case that we postulate may have a significant effect on psychiatric practice in Canada. A psychiatric patient murdered a relative some 50 days after the patient left the hospital. On the day before his release, the patient's status was changed from involuntary to voluntary. We argue that this case may result in a reversal of current mental health and social policy, whereby psychiatrists will be less willing to release difficult and potentially dangerous patients. To provide context to the case, we review some concepts of the literature and recent legal cases pertaining to the release of such patients.
Glancy
Dylan R
DR
Etobicoke School for the Arts, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Glancy
Graham D
GD
D000328:Adult; D002170:Canada; D003134:Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric Disorders / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D003617:Dangerous Behavior; D017007:Duty to Warn / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006708:Homicide / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D007298:Insanity Defense; D008257:Machiavellianism; D008297:Male; D008306:Malingering / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology; D008318:Malpractice / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D010351:Patient Discharge / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D010554:Personality Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000523:psychology; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D011618:Psychotic Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000523:psychology