|
John J. Ensminger is an American attorney and a national consultant on legal issues involving skilled dogs and their handlers. He is author of the books: ''Service and Therapy Dogs in American Society: Science, Law and the Evolution of Canine Caregivers'', and ''Police and Military Dogs: Criminal Detection, Forensic Evidence, and Judicial Admissibility''. He is editor of ''The Complete Book of Dogs'', editor of ''Money Laundering, Terrorism and Financial Institutions'',〔 a treatise which he updates monthly with a newsletter as an information service to attorneys covering laws, regulations and compliance issues surrounding the USA PATRIOT Act, a contributor to GPSolo Magazine, and ''Tax Notes'' as well as a contributing editor on canine legal issues which may be found on the website of the Animal Legal and Historical Center of Michigan State University. He is a specialist in tax law and anti-money laundering programs for financial institutions, is past president of Delta Hedge Publications and past president of Delta Hedge Consulting. Ensminger graduated from the University of California, Berkeley, where as an honors student, he engaged in research on the #19 (1968) voyage of the Stanford research vessel Te Vega studying parasitic infestation of Pacific Euphausiids;〔''Te Vega log''〕 he earned his JD and LLM degrees from Hastings College of the Law and New York University School of Law, respectively, practices law in New York and is a member of the bar of the United States Supreme Court. He was chair of the Banking and Savings Institutions Committee of the American Bar Association Tax Section and was on the adjunct faculty of the Peter J. Tobin College of Business at St. John's University (New York), where he taught the taxation of complex structured finance transactions and derivatives. Ensminger reports on legal and scientific developments concerning dogs, service dogs, police dogs, and military dogs on his Dog Law Reporter 〔''Dog Law Reporter''〕 blog. ==Early years in law== While working in the Division of Mental Health Advocacy of New Jersey’s Department of the Public Advocate, Ensminger became involved in civil commitment cases representing patients that various authorities wanted to institutionalize as being dangerous to themselves or others. Under the supervision of Stanley C. Van Ness and Michael Perlin, Ensminger wrote briefs for the Public Advocate in two Supreme Court cases: Jones v. United States, 454 U.S. 1141 (1982) and Mills v. Rogers, 457 U.S. 291 (1982). He also worked on class action right-to-treatment cases against New Jersey public mental hospitals. After meeting Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare in the Carter administration, Ensminger spoke to the Secretary about the need to consider using community mental health centers to treat individuals with psychiatric problems before their conditions became severe enough to require institutionalization. Society’s tendency to put anyone with psychiatric problems in hospitals, rather than requiring outpatient treatment, was at that time a particular burden of many poor and urban neighborhoods in New Jersey. The Secretary suggested that Ensminger write a piece on the legal status of aftercare systems, which resulted in the article that appeared in 1977: John J. Ensminger and Patrick Reilly (Summer 1977), ''The Legal and Social Significance of Aftercare Systems: A Review and Analysis''. Journal of Psychiatry and Law. Those who wish to follow this thread may use the issn catalogue listing at that site or take a look at the ''Fully Searchable Digital Archive of Classic Psychoanalytic Texts'' 〔''The Fully Searchable Digital Archive of Classic Psychoanalytic Texts.''.〕 Finding that many judges and hospitals tried to avoid having individuals present at hearings in which their freedom would be taken away, Ensminger considered that there was in fact a good deal of evidence, particularly in the psychiatric literature, that people facing Involuntary commitment could profit from hearing about why a law enforcement or other agency wanted them confined to a mental hospital. The hearing also gave the individual a chance to speak in his own behalf and thereby not feel that his or her perspective was being ignored. With this in mind, Ensminger wrote an article for The Journal of Psychiatry and Law that appeared in 1978 (co-authored by Thomas Liguori) which for the first time argued that there could be therapeutic benefits to a civil commitment hearing. John J. Ensminger and Thomas D. Liguori (June 1978) ''The Therapeutic Significance of the Civil Commitment Hearing: An Unexplored Potential'' which looked deeper into the arguments presented in the 1977 article about law and psychiatric care which has grown to some significant importance in today's world in which we often read about persons with impaired mental health who may be dangerous to themselves or others. The law of mental patients' civil rights has been evolving since John was a class action litigator in the Office of Mental Health Advocacy in the New Jersey Department of the Public Advocate. One of the first references to the Ensminger and Liguori article was by M.L. Perlin and R.L. Sadoff, in Duke University's ''Law and Contemporary Problems'', in their brief before the Supreme Court, argued against Chief Justice Burger's view that "commitment hearings for juveniles are meaningless" by quoting Ensminger and Liguori that the commitment process itself has "considerable potential for therapeutic effect"〔-the commitment process itself has "considerable potential for therapeutic effect"〕 The entire Duke University School of Law article may be found online at:.〔 Duke University School of Law〕 Ensminger and Liguori's entire Journal of Psychiatry article is reprinted in David Wexler & Bruce Winick (1991) Today there are over 70 references to that article which have expanded on the original idea to become known as the area of therapeutic jurisprudence. Another book by Marilyn McMahon and David B. Wexler titled, ''Therapeutic Jurisprudence'' published in 2003, that quotes the Ensminger and Liguori article brings the reader up to date on the many ideas surrounding the legal problems arising from the current laws regarding mental patients, and Fred Zacharias in the Journal of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, A more recent cite of the Ensminger, Liguori article by Gary B. Melton in which the subject has expanded beyond Therapeutic Jurisprudence is the book ''Psychological Evaluations for the Courts''.〔 "see,e.g., John Ensminger & Thomas Liguori, ''The Therapeutic Significance of the Civil Commitment Hearing: An Unexplored Potential''",6 J. Psychiatry & L. 5(1978)〕 which places the concept into the subject of forensic psychology. To summarize. the point of all this work by so many involved professionals, is to locate and help people before they enter the criminal justice system and not after. Presently many large cities also have established a Mental health court system to help reduce the population of our prisons and increase patient health but this requires mental health trained judges, lawyers, and counselors so that the cost is beyond the means of most counties in the United States. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「John J. Ensminger」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|