 
Contact:
Nov. 4, 2002
SUPREME COURT WILL HEAR FORCED DRUGGING CASE Washington -- The Supreme Court granted cert. today, agreeing to hear the case of a Missouri dentist who has been ordered to be forcibly drugged while awaiting trial on billing fraud for more than four years. A national physician organization that opposes forced drugging was instrumental in attracting attention to the case and giving credibility to Dr. Sell’s claims of medical abuse, fighting to prevent the government from forcibly medicating citizens who have not been convicted of any crimes with potent mind-altering drugs. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) filed an amicus brief requesting the hearing. In May, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals refused a request by AAPS and the ALCU for a rehearing to overturn the decision to drug Dr. Charles Sell of St. Louis. A March 2002 ruling that found that a defendant can be forcibly drugged even though he has not been convicted of any charges, nor has been found to be a danger to himself or others. “This could be the biggest case of the year before the Supreme Court affecting both federal power and criminal justice,” said AAPS General Counsel, Andrew Schlafly. (AAPS briefs and background information are posted at www.aapsonline.org. See bottom of page for links.) Mr. Schlafly added that it could impact other high-profile cases such as U.S. v. Weston, the accused Capitol Hill shooter who has asked to be taken off psychotropic medications, and several death penalty cases. In those cases, the courts have refused to force drugging of psychotic convicted killers, allowing them to delay execution indefinitely. Dr. Sell, charged with Medicaid fraud, has been imprisoned for more than 4 years, including one- and-one-half years in solitary confinement. He has never been brought to trial. The majority opinion of the Appellate Court found that "the evidence does not support a finding that Sell posed a danger to himself or others" but still found that "charges of fraud" alone are "serious" enough to justify forced medication. Further, the Court held that there are no limits on the quantity or type of drugs. “It’s clear the previous decisions are in conflict with Supreme Court precedents,” said Mr. Schlafly. “If they are allowed to stand, few, if any, defendants are free from the threat of being medicated against their will,” he concluded.> AAPS is a non-partisan, dues-supported professional association of physicians in all practices and specialties, dedicated since 1943 to protecting the sanctity of the patient-physician relationship from third-party interference.
Other Links
|