This is the first systematic review of federal, judicial opinions that engage the stigma of mental health commitment in the context of procedural due process. In 1979, in Addington v. Texas, the Supreme Court held that the stigma, or adverse social consequences, of civil commitment is relevant to the procedural due process analysis. The following year, in Vitek v. Jones, the Court held that the stigmatizing consequences of a transfer from a prison to a mental health facility, coupled with mandatory treatment, triggered procedural protections.
Alexandra S. Bornstein,
The Facts of Stigma: What's Missing from the Procedural Due Process of Mental Health Commitment,
Yale J. Health Pol'y L. & Ethics
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjhple/vol18/iss1/3