I'll ask again, Is it ethical for any court uin the USA to confine a person and then ask that person fund it ?

[chay]

I'm specifically asking about "civil" confinements. those that do not offer the protections of the jury system, or criminal law procedures, such the presumption of need for defense witness' and competent legal representation that is confined to "serving the client" rather than pandering to the court.

I'm reminding that bills for confinements such as this might lead to actual criminal prosecutions, such as for loss of income leading to up to two years Federal Hard Time Breaking Rocks at Hard Labor.

I'm reminding all that Maine "allows" over a month of apparently "client" billable "services" (though ordered by the court the court is not seen as the client either) to occur prior to any court hearings at all. And I'm reminding all that it is most common practice for no lawyer to see a client prior to hours before this hearing and for no lawyer or client to see one iota of evidence prior to this hearing.

The institutions do not permit meaningful "patient advocacy" prior to the hearing.

The institutions will do all in their power, when acting "aggressively", to prevent any restful sleep to occur during the "work up" to this "hearing".

The only sleep aids typically offered are typical anti-psychotics, that are described to the "patient" as "tranquilizers".

And once a bill is owed in any state the legal requirement for a move to another State might include payment of all medical bills.

Thus, to prevent a person from fleeing a court officer gone bad, said bad officer ned only threaten closure of an institution by allowing a law suit against said institution; then that institution would only have to allow confinement, bill for it to the victim, and that said victim could not leave the area controlled by said villain.

Is it ethical, knowing that the mentally ill dwell on such aspects of law and medicine, to further ask taxpayers to pay for bills generated by persons being driven mad by suspicions of wrongdoing on the part of the courts and the medical community?

Wouldn't lower taxes, based on a lessening of stress, be more advisable than higher taxes, based on the current practice of the maximum stress one can physically place on a human being being seen as proof of that person's insanity, then the lowering of the boom onto that person in terms of reining in his civil rights to the point wherein he / she cannot be a productive member of society, but rather can only be a drain to public resources?

[reid]

If they are confined, they are there against their own will.

They should not be charged for it, it wouldn't be ethical.