Therapeutic Jurisprudence in the Courts
On March 31, 2009, Professor Bernard Perlmutter and legal interns Corinne Seibert and Rebecca Schram, filed comments on behalf of hte University of Miami School of Law's Children & Youth Law Clinic with the Florida Supreme Court in connection with the Court's consideration of proposed Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.100 dealing with the shackling of juveniles in Juvenile Court. The Clinic used therapeutic jurisprudence in its submission, arguing that a policy of shackling all juveniles is antitherapeutic and counter to the rehabilitative purposes of the Juvenile Court.Professors Perlmutter and Winick had previously submitted therapeutic jurisprudence affidavits in cases throughout the state that had preiously challenged the shackling practice
Click here to read the Clinic's comments.
In 2003, Professor Bruce J. Winick argued in the Florida Supreme Court on behalf of the Children and Youth Law Clinic. He successfully advocated adoption of a Rule of Juvenile Procedure requiring children in foster care within the custody of the Florida Department of Children Services to have a hearing with counsel before they could be transferred by the Department to a mental hospital or residential treatment center. In Re Amendment to the Rules of Juvenile Procedure, 842 So.2d 763 (Fla. 2003) In Re Amendment to the Rules of Juvenile Procedure, 804 So.2d 1206 (Fla. 2001). Professor Winick’s brief and an article describing it appear in Bruce J. Winick & Ginger Lerner-Wren, .Do Juveniles facing Civil Commitment Have a Right to Counsel: A Therapeutic Jurisprudence Brief, 17 U. Cinn. L. Rev. 115-126 (2002). To see video excerpts of Professor Winick’s oral argument in the Florida Supreme Court, click the links below:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
