Opinion ID: 2561809
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Third Sell Factor: Whether Antipsychotic Medication Is Necessary to Further the State's Interest; and the Fourth Sell Factor: Whether Administration of Antipsychotic Medication Is Medically Appropriate

Text: ś 42 Sell requires that the administration of antipsychotic medication be in the patient's best medical interest in light of [her] medical condition. Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166, 181, 123 S.Ct. 2174, 156 L.Ed.2d 197 (2003). Furthermore, involuntary medication must be necessary to further the state's interest in making a defendant competent. In other words, a court must find that any alternative, less intrusive treatments are unlikely to achieve substantially the same results.' Id. In Ms. Barzee's case, all of the experts at the Medication Hearing agreed that if she were their patient, they would want to treat her with medication. Dr. Morris stated that he would absolutely encourage Ms. Barzee to take medication. Dr. Amador testified that he would do everything in [his] power to convince a patient to take medication if they had never before been medicated even if there was only a five-percent chance of a successful outcome. Dr. Jeppson believed medication was in Ms. Barzee's best medical interest because it might allow her to have a more full life, a more functional life, and be able to proceed with her case. Additionally, Dr. Jeppson testified that no less intrusive means of treatment were likely to restore her to competency, and that any progress toward restoration would require medication. Dr. Whitehead testified that he believed medication would increase her ability to function in general and would help her better relate to her family. He reiterated Dr. Jeppson's testimony that less intrusive means of restoration had not and would not be successful at restoring Ms. Barzee to competency. ś 43 In Sell, the Court stated that the specific kinds of drugs at issue should be considered. Id. The other witnesses did not testify that they had any concerns with the drug regimen suggested by Dr. Jeppson, although Dr. Whitehead preferred using a different antipsychotic medication, and Dr. Morris would possibly have used different dosages. However, Dr. Amador testified that he would use motivational enhancement therapy to encourage Ms. Barzee to take medication rather than simply forcing it upon her through a doctor knows best approach. While treatment with antipsychotic medication would be medically appropriate for Ms. Barzee in a vacuum, the trauma associated with treat[ing] people against their will could result in harmful side effects including depression, stress reaction, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Even in light of these cautionary statements by Dr. Amador, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in its conclusions that treatment with antipsychotic medication is medically appropriate in Ms. Barzee's case and that less intrusive means of treatment are unlikely to accomplish restoration to competency.