Source: http://masscases.com/cases/distapp/2013/2013massappdiv42.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 21:52:35+00:00

Document:
Edward J. O'Donnell for petitioner Bridgewater State Hospital.
HAND, J. The appellant, C.B., has appealed his May 2, 2012 commitment to Bridgewater State Hospital ("BSH" or "hospital") pursuant to G.L. c. 123, §§ 7 and 8 on the narrow ground that he was not a "patient" at BSH for the purposes of G.L. c. 123 ("statute") at the time that the hospital's medical director petitioned for that commitment. For the reasons stated below, we agree, and vacate the order of commitment.
The order C.B. appeals was dated May 2, 2012. Some review of the history between C.B. and the hospital puts this appeal in context. As of February, 2012, C.B. had criminal charges pending against him in the West Roxbury Division of the Boston Municipal Court Department. Having previously been found incompetent to stand trial on those charges, C.B. had been continuously committed to BSH since 2009 pursuant to G.L. c. 123, §16(c). On February 15, 2012, as the expiration of C.B.'s then-current term of commitment approached, BSH filed a petition in the Brockton District Court for C.B.'s recommitment pursuant to G.L.c. 123, §16(c).
instead, he was detained at BSH in order to be transported to court the next morning. During the afternoon on February 29, 2012, several hours after C.B.'s competency hearing was completed, the hospital's medical director filed a petition pursuant to G.L.c. 123, §7(b) seeking to commit C.B. to BSH under §7(b) of the statute. Section 7(b) applies to "any male patient at [Bridgewater State Hospital]" as "when it is determined that the failure to hospitalize [the patient] in strict security would create a likelihood of serious harm by reason of mental illness." G.L.c. 123, §7(b).
The following day, C.B. was transported to the West Roxbury Division to address his open criminal charges. Those charges were dismissed. Based on the pending petition for commitment under §§7 and 8, however, C.B. was not released on the dismissal of these charges. Instead, he was returned to the hospital to await hearing on the commitment petition. C.B. subsequently moved to dismiss the §§7 and 8 petition on the grounds that, as of the time that the hospital's §§7 and 8 petition was filed, C.B. was no longer a "patient" at ESH and so was not subject to commitment under those sections. The court issued a thoughtful written decision denying the motion, citing to the broad definition of "patient" included in G.L. c. 123, §1. On May 2, 2012, the court committed C.B. to BSH for six months pursuant to G.L.c. 123, §8(b).
to §16(b). This change in C.B.'s status did not leave BSH without recourse: the appropriate action would have been for the medical director of BSH (or any other physician or mental health provider authorized under the statute) to file a petition under G.Lc. 123, §12 for emergency restraint and hospitalization of C.B. as a person posing a risk of serious harm by reason of mental illness. See G.L. c.123, §12 (authorizing designated medical and mental health providers with reason to believe that failure to hospitalize person would create likelihood of serious harm by reason of mental illness to restrain such person and to apply for three-day hospitalization). Having followed that procedure, BSH would then have had the ability to seek further commitment pursuant to §§7 and 8, as the §12 procedure would have established a new "mental health professional-patient relationship" between C.B. and the treatment providers in the facility in which he was committed under §12.
Having determined that C.B. was not a "patient" at BSH as of the date that the hospital filed the §§7 and 8 petition at issue here, we vacate the disputed commitment.
§16(c), that a person first be found to be incompetent to stand trial. Section 16(c) states: "After the expiration of a commitment under paragraph (b) of this section, a person may be committed for additional one year periods under the provisions of sections seven and eight of this chapter, but no untried defendant shall be so committed unless in addition to the findings required by sections seven and eight the court also finds said defendant is incompetent to stand trial."
[Note 3] While G.L. c. 123, §1 does not define the term "mental health professional," it does define "licensed mental health professional" as "any person who holds himself out to the general public as one providing mental health services and who is required pursuant to such practice to obtain a license from the commonwealth." Both psychiatrists and licensed clinical social workers satisfy this definition. See G.L.c.112, §2 (licensure and registration of physicians); G.L. c.112, §8A (prohibiting use of title "physician" by one not registered with the Board of Registration in Medicine as a physician); G.L.c. 112, §§130-137 Licensure of social workers).

References: §16
 §16
 §7
 §7
 §7
 §1
 §8
 §16
 §12
 §12
 §12
 §12

§16
 §1
 §2
 §8