For a person to be taken into custody under a Baker Act three criteria (rules) must be met:
- There is reason to believe that the person is mentally ill.
- Because of his or her mental illness the person has refused voluntary examination or is unable to determine whether examination is necessary; and
- Without care or treatment, the person is likely to suffer from neglect resulting in real and present threat of substantial harm that can’t be avoided through the help of others; or there is substantial likelihood that without care or treatment the person will cause serious bodily harm to self or others in the near future, as evidenced by recent behavior.
All three rules must be met for a person to be Baker Acted.
My son was wrongfully Baker Acted while under my care for a primary diagnosis unrelated to the justification of the Baker Act. I am his medical surrogate and poa. There is extenuating circumstances that need to be addressed. The social worker involved in this, filed this motion and knowingly asked him if he wanted to see a judge and to sign a paper to do so. He thought he was signing to be released from the hospital and I did not authorize this hospitalization. They had a copy of my medical surrogacy and only notified me of this court hearing the day before at noon prior to this hearing at 9:00am leaving no time to address this issue. This is all after I had been in contact with staff and her throughout him being where he was. I had asked the physicians to contact me and they did not ever do so even by phone. Visting hours were 5:30p to 6:30 and I live 65 miles away and after work is an hour away I could not be there inside nor was I allowed to be there. So I could not speak to physician directly during patient care. He was being held against his will for another treatment they wanted to treat him for totally unrelated to his primary diagnosis which was less than 30 days after a Major roll-over motor vehicle accident with head injury and bodily injury in which he was thrown from his vehicle. The Judge who tendered the Baker Act was not fully aware of the extenuating circumstance and only made the determination on this circumstance brought before him at that time. The Judge ruled for and tendered the Baker Act, wrongfully. There is many extenuating circumstances to this case. I also have a witness’ written statement to the accident and to accident itself that caused the primary hospitalization elsewhere to save his life. This ruling is absolutely unjust and detrimental to my son’s person, career, life. He wants the ruling to be rescinded and so do I. It is against his human rights. It is wrong, on so many levels to do this to an individual who has had no prior history. There has never been any mental health issue ever documented in his medical files anywhere at all previous to this wrongful decision.and to warrant this Judge’s ruling. I need your help and guidance in this as this ruling is unjust and incorrect.
An advocate from our office will email you directly. You may also call us at 800-782-2878.
If a single, never married mother had parental rights removed 7 years ago and the child was adopted by her grandmother, can the child and birth mother visit with each other if the grandmother approves?
Thank you for reaching out. We cannot provide legal advice. You should contact an attorney who specializes in Family law.
MY BROTHER WAS PLACED IN SEASIDE HEALTH AND REHAD AFTER HE LOST HIS WIFE ANDHE NEEDS A LAWYER TO GET HIM OUT OF THERE HE HAS BEEN THERE FOR 43 DAYS THEY CONTINUE TO KEEP HIM FOR NO REASON THAT I CAN SEE
If you still need help please call our office at 800-782-2878 and ask to speak to an advocate.
He may have too good of insurance. A reputable place will stabilize one and keep them only until the patient is safe to return home. Having family support helps too. I would talk to the Director if these things are in place.
Can a person who has been Baker Acted 10-12 years ago and who is under guardianship be kept from traveling out of state?
The laws governing guardianship would need to be consulted. You should contact an attorney that specializes in this type of law to find out what your rights are under your guardianship.
Baker Act would not have anything to do with the travel out of state now – 10-12 years later. However, Florida guardianship (FS 744) laws can take away the right to travel. However, it all depends on which rights the court removed for a specific individual. If a “plenary guardian” is assigned all rights are removed (marry, vote, travel, manage financed, make treatment decisions, drive etc). SO in short It depend on the nature of the guardianship.
What if it’s alcoholism? The person WILL NOT seek treatment and is out of control.
The Marchman Act exists for individuals who are in need of involuntary substance abuse treatment. You may learn more at this link: https://marchmanactflorida.com/