Abstract
Part I of this Article traces the development and expansion of tort rules governing psychiatric liability and the mental health field. Part II briefly examines the concept of involuntary civil commitment, generally, and in Washington. Part III presents a factual overview and analysis of Petersen v. State, followed by a criticism of the court's decision and legislative response.
Recommended Citation
Fay Anne Freedman, The Psychiatrist's Dilemma: Protect the Public or Safeguard Individual Liberty?, 11 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 255 (1988).
