An analysis of the attitudes of the U.S. Supreme Court toward
psychiatry, as expressed in the Court's major opinions on mental health law
from 1975 to 1983, reveals significant discrepancies from case to case. The
explanation for these puzzling shifts in attitude lies outside the realm of
mental health law, in the justices ' aversion to judicial involvement in
professional decision making. A close examination of the cases demonstrates
the Court's willingness to alter its rhetoric about psychiatry to support
this overriding end. Psychiatrists' understanding of the Court and advocacy
for their own and their patients' interests must take this broader issue
into account.
Abstract Teaser