GPH v. Giles

Decision Date24 September 1991
Docket NumberNo. 49A05-9101-CV-19,49A05-9101-CV-19
PartiesIn the Matter of the Commitment of GPH, Appellant-Respondent, v. David GILES, M.D., Appellee-Petitioner.
CourtIndiana Appellate Court

Winston R. Hay, Hay and Oakes, Indianapolis, for appellant-respondent.

Myra C. Selby, Sherry A. Fabina-Abney, Ice, Miller, Donadio & Ryan, Indianapolis, for appellee-petitioner.

SHARPNACK, Judge.

GPH appeals from an order of regular commitment of him to Community North Hospital upon findings that he suffers from chronic paranoid schizophrenia and is both dangerous to himself and gravely disabled. We affirm.

GPH raises several issues on appeal, which we restate as follows:

(1) Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's finding that GPH should be involuntarily committed.

(2) Whether a court's finding that a patient is dangerous or gravely disabled is without support when the record does not reflect that anyone involved in the proceedings made an attempt to locate family members or friends who would be willing to help with, or be responsible for, the patient.

(3) Whether the trial court violated GPH's constitutional right to assistance of counsel when the court allowed GPH to appear at his preliminary hearing to determine probable cause without counsel.

(4) Whether required and adequate notice of the proceedings was given to GPH.

(5) Whether the trial court violated GPH's due process rights when the court refused to allow GPH to waive his court-appointed counsel for his commitment hearing.

(6) Whether the trial court committed error by allowing Dr. Giles to have access to GPH's medical records, and to testify regarding specific information contained therein, when GPH had not employed Dr. Giles as his physician.

(7) Whether the trial court committed error by allowing Dr. Giles to testify concerning communications Dr. Giles had with GPH when Dr. Giles was acting as GPH's treating physician.

The facts are as follows. GPH is a thirty-four-year old male, with a degree in electrical engineering, who has been diagnosed as suffering from chronic paranoid schizophrenia since the onset of an acute illness in December of 1987. GPH was hospitalized for his mental illness for approximately two weeks in 1987 and again in the summer of 1988. In September of 1988, the court committed GPH to Carter Hospital for 90 days. After GPH's release from Carter Hospital in December of 1988, he was treated as an out-patient at Gallahue Mental Health Center at Community North Hospital, where Dr. David Giles served as a psychiatrist and medical director.

After his release from Carter Hospital, GPH lived with his mother. Ms. H testified at her son's final hearing that toward the end of the summer in 1990, her son became acutely ill once again, evidenced by his peculiar behavior during the last week of August. During that week in late August, GPH refused to take his medication, repeatedly turned his mother's electrical power on and off, disassembled his bed, and oftentimes sat outside at the picnic table, during the evenings, burning candles. In addition, GPH burned and scattered a video tape all over his mother's garage and storage room, and urinated in the backyard in the presence of his mother and other family members. Of particular concern to Ms. H during this week was the fact that GPH carried and fiddled a lot with a knife, once badly cutting his hand.

On the afternoon of September 1, 1990, GPH, clad only in cut-offs and a hat with a towel draped around his shoulders, wandered into the country home of Rosemary Huffman, who was there alone at the time. Ms. Huffman was both surprised and terrified to see a stranger in her foyer. When she confronted GPH, he identified himself as GPH, turned abruptly and walked out the front door.

After that incident, GPH again entered onto Huffman's property twice on September 4, 1990. Huffman, very upset, reported both incidents to the police. On that same day, Ms. H filed the necessary papers to have her son detained in Community North Hospital on an emergency basis as being both mentally ill and dangerous to himself.

On September 4, 1990, GPH's mother made a written application for GPH's emergency detention to Community North Hospital, pursuant to Ind.Code Sec. 16-14-9.1-7(a), alleging that her son suffered from a psychiatric disorder and was dangerous to himself. Along with the application, and as required by I.C. Sec. 16-14-9.1-7(a), Dr. David Giles filed a physician's statement alleging that GPH may be mentally ill and dangerous to himself. After reviewing both the application and the physician's statement, the court authorized the emergency detention of GPH. On September 10, 1990, pursuant to I.C. Sec. 16-14-9.1-7(b), Dr. Giles submitted a statement and report, indicating that GPH suffered from chronic paranoid schizophrenia and was dangerous to himself. Dr. Giles recommended that GPH remain at Community Hospital North pending a hearing to determine whether GPH was mentally ill and either gravely disabled or dangerous, and to determine whether GPH needed continued involuntary detention. The court found that Dr. Giles' report justified the continued detention of GPH, and, pursuant to I.C. Sec. 16-14-9.1-7(e)(2), ordered GPH's continued pre-hearing detention. The court set a final hearing date for September 20 to determine whether GPH was mentally ill and either dangerous or gravely disabled. The court also appointed counsel to represent GPH at his final hearing, and directed the sheriff to serve a copy of the order on GPH at Community Hospital North. Further, the court directed the clerk to give notice of the time and place of the final hearing, along with a copy of the order, to, among others, GPH's counsel.

On September 13, the court held a preliminary hearing to determine whether there was probable cause for Community North Hospital to detain GPH until his final hearing set for September 20. The court found probable cause to believe that GPH was in need of temporary commitment and ordered that GPH be detained pending his final hearing. The court directed that the parties should receive notice of the results of the preliminary hearing.

At the preliminary hearing of September 13, GPH, acting pro se, filed a motion to strike and quash the application for emergency detention. That motion alleged that the notices of hearings furnished to GPH were illegible and unreadable, and thus failed to give him adequate notice of the proceedings. In addition, GPH filed an answer to the physician's statement, to the application for emergency detention, and to the petition for court-ordered treatment and special conditions for commitment.

At the final hearing on September 20, GPH objected to the court's appointment of a public defender to represent him, and requested that he be allowed to proceed pro se. After the court discussed the matter with GPH, the court continued the hearing until October 2.

On September 27, the court, "after much reflection," ruled that GPH would not be permitted to proceed pro se. On September 25, before its ruling, the court advised GPH's public defender that she would be appointed to represent GPH, and directed that GPH be notified both of the ruling and of the need to be prepared for a hearing on October 2.

On October 2, the court held a hearing to determine whether GPH was mentally ill, and either dangerous or gravely disabled, and in need of temporary commitment. At the hearing, GPH again objected to having a public defender represent him and the court overruled GPH's objection. Following testimony, the court issued an Order of Regular Commitment finding GPH mentally ill, dangerous to himself and gravely disabled.

Dr. Giles testified at GPH's final hearing that GPH was admitted to his care at Community Hospital North on September 4, 1990, and that he had examined and treated GPH daily throughout his hospital stay. Dr. Giles diagnosed GPH as suffering from chronic paranoid schizophrenia, which he testified is characterized by a disorder of thinking. Dr. Giles stated that GPH often has delusions of paranoia, unusual thinking, and no ability to understand his diagnosis and the disorder itself.

Specifically, GPH believes that there is electricity in the air which adversely affects his brain. To protect himself, GPH wears something around his head and continuously turns off the lights in his room. Further, during his hospital stay, GPH stated that he believed his food had been poisoned, so he refused to eat. In addition, GPH stated that he believed medicine was poisonous, so he refused to take medication. During this time, GPH refused to allow the hospital to run any laboratory tests on him, and he ate two possibly poisonous mushrooms or toadstools from the secured courtyard but refused to take the suggested medicine to induce vomiting.

Dr. Giles believes that GPH is mentally ill, is gravely disabled, and, as a result of GPH's disordered thinking, is potentially dangerous to himself. Dr. Giles believes that GPH is incapable of formulating ideas about how GPH could care for himself. To Dr. Giles's knowledge, GPH has refused to take any of the medications that Dr. Giles has ordered for him. GPH generally believes he will be fine without the medicine. With the medicine, Dr. Giles believes GPH would be able to think more clearly, would function better, and would require less restrictive care. Without the medicine, Dr. Giles believes that GPH would continue to suffer from delusional beliefs, paranoia, fears and anxieties, would be unable to function or to make reasonable decisions for himself, would potentially do dangerous things to himself, (such as eating inanimate objects or toxic substances), and could become malnourished with resulting serious medical complications.

Dr. Giles believes that if GPH is not treated for his chronic condition, he will not get out of the hospital setting. With regular...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Sherman v. Four County Counseling Center
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • February 19, 1993
    ...we have found no case challenging the constitutionality of the emergency commitment procedures they contain. See G.P.H. v. Giles, 578 N.E.2d 729, 731 (Ind.App.5th Dist.1991) (reviewing procedures at length in context of plaintiff's appeal of commitment order). In G.P.H., the Indiana court g......
  • Civil Commitment of T.K. v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • March 19, 2015
    ...519 N.E.2d 135, 137 (Ind.1988). This appellate standard of review applies in civil commitment decisions. See GPH v. Giles, 578 N.E.2d 729, 732–33 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (“In reviewing a claim of insufficient evidence in a commitment case, we keep in mind that commitment may be ordered only if th......
  • A.A. v. CMHC
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • May 17, 2018
    ...at a commitment hearing allows the respondent to decide that he does not, in fact, wish to appear. Cf. GPH v. Giles (In re Commitment of GPH) , 578 N.E.2d 729, 736–38 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991) (clarifying waiver of a respondent's codified due process right to counsel at a commitment hearing when......
  • In The Matter Of The Commitment Of S.T v. Cmty. Hosp. North
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • October 1, 2010
    ...behavior in the hospital, and the relationship between problematic behaviors and the person's mental illness. See, e.g., GPH v. Giles, 578 N.E.2d 729, 731 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (involuntary commitment affirmed where GPH was admitted to hospital after stopping his medication, cutting his hand, t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT