Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

The ER Should Not Be a Warehouse for Disabled People

By Charles Gussow on August 8, 2014
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Washington has allowed people to be involuntarily detained if they are a risk to themselves or others or are gravely disabled under the Involuntary Treatment  Act (ITA) since 1977 – first for a short period of evaluation, then for treatment.   Close of observers of modern mental health trends will not be surprised to learn that Washington’s certified evaluation and treatment facilities have been overwhelmed with too many patients and too few resources since the law was enacted.

Pierce County has tried to get around this resource constraint by housing ITA patients in emergency rooms or acute care centers.  The county’s mechanism for doing so would be the issuance of “single bed certifications” allowing the ER or acute care center to be treated as an ad hoc evaluation/treatment facility. Ten ITA patients moved to dismiss petitions to extend their detention on the grounds that they were not being held in a facility that could evaluate or treat them.

In In Re Det. Of D.W. all nine Justices of the Washington Supreme Court found that it is illegal to use single bed certifications to “warehouse” ITA patients in medical facilities uncertified to provide treatment. Instead the single bed certification was to be used to place a patient in a more appropriate setting outside an evaluation treatment center. The example given by the Court was allowing an ITA patient with cancer to be placed in an oncology ward.  The decision was based in statute, but contained a strong hint of due process reasoning.  The Court did not, however, suggest possible ways of mitigating the bed constraint that led Pierce County to issue the single bed certifications.

The answer to this, as to other questions, is that the state needs to provide more funding for mental health treatment.

Photo of Charles Gussow Charles Gussow

Charles Gussow has experience in consumer protection law, administrative law, appellate litigation and federal practice. Before joining Stoel Rives, Charles was a law clerk for the Honorable Betty Fletcher of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (2012-2013).

Read more about Charles GussowEmailCharles's Linkedin Profile
  • Posted in:
    Health Care and Life Sciences
  • Blog:
    Notice of Appeal
  • Organization:
    Stoel Rives LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo