Persons With Mental Illness

ORS 426.235
Transfer between hospital and nonhospital facilities


(1)

The community mental health program director may transfer a person in custody under ORS 426.232 (Emergency admission), 426.233 (Authority of community mental health program director and of other individuals) or 426.237 (Prehearing detention) (1)(b) to a hospital or nonhospital facility approved by the Oregon Health Authority at any time during the period of detention.

(2)

A person in custody at a hospital may be transferred from the hospital only with the consent of the licensed independent practitioner who is treating the person and when the director of a nonhospital facility approved by the authority agrees to admit the person.

(3)

A person in custody at a nonhospital facility approved by the authority may be transferred to a hospital approved by the authority only when a licensed independent practitioner with admitting privileges agrees to admit the person.

(4)

In transporting a person between a hospital and nonhospital facility under this section, the community mental health program director has all the powers provided in ORS 133.225 (Arrest by private person) and 161.255 (Use of physical force by private person making citizen’s arrest) and may compel the assistance of any peace officer or other authorized individual.

(5)

When a person is transferred under this section, the community mental health program director shall notify immediately the court notified under ORS 426.234 (Duties of professionals at facility where person admitted) (2) or (3) of the fact of the transfer and of the location of the person. [1993 c.484 §7; 2009 c.595 §407; 2013 c.360 §43; 2015 c.461 §16]
Note: See note under 426.228 (Custody).
§§ 426.005 to 426.395

Notes of Decisions

The doctor-patient privilege applies under these sections. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

Prior to commitment there must be evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is mentally ill as defined. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

The Oregon commitment statutes are not unconstitutional on the grounds of vagueness or as an invasion of privacy as protected by the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. State v. O'Neill, 274 Or 59, 545 P2d 97 (1976)

Oregon Constitution did not require jury in mental commitment hearings. State v. Mills, 36 Or App 727, 585 P2d 1143 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Alleged mentally ill person does not have right to remain silent in civil commitment proceeding. State v. Matthews, 46 Or App 757, 613 P2d 88 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Law Review Citations

9 WLJ 63-85 (1973)

Chapter 426

Notes of Decisions

The entire statutory scheme of involuntary commitment provides adequate procedural safeguards which satisfies the requirements of due process and equal protection. Dietrich v. Brooks, 27 Or App 821, 558 P2d 357 (1976), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

County of residence paying mental commitment costs, (1979) Vol 40, p 147; civil commitment to Mental Health Division of person against whom criminal charges are pending, (1980) Vol 41, p 91

Law Review Citations

16 WLR 448 (1979)


Source

Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021