Commitment of T.S. v. Logansport State Hospital, 2011 Ind. App. LEXIS 1916

T.S. was involuntarily committed to Logansport State Hospital on February 5, 2004 for schizo-affective disorder and grave disability.
He was placed in the Sexual Responsibility Program (SRP), which has multiple levels and requires behavioral change to advance.
Despite years in the SRP, T.S. had not completed it and disputed ongoing participation in the program.
On October 25, 2010, T.S. sent a letter requesting court support to refuse SRP participation, prompting a hearing on December 16, 2010.
At the hearing, the State presented clinicians who supported continued SRP participation; the trial court denied T.S.’s petition to be removed.
T.S. appeals, contending issues related to the propriety of commitment and SRP participation, with the trial court found in favor of the State.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Waiver of commitment issues	T.S. did not raise commitment issues below.	Waiver prevents review of commitment propriety on appeal.	Waiver; commitment propriety issues not reviewable on appeal.
Propriety of continued participation in the SRP	T.S. should be removed from SRP.	SRP continuation is supported by current medical assessments and expert testimony.	State proved by clear and convincing evidence that SRP continuation is appropriate.

In re M.P., 510 N.E.2d 645 (Ind. 1987) (three-part clear and convincing standard for overruling patient’s refusal to treatment)
K.W. v. Logansport State Hosp., 660 N.E.2d 609 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) (applies M.P. to non-medicinal treatment plans and necessity of considering alternatives)
In re Commitment of J.B., 581 N.E.2d 448 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991) (appellate review standard and limitations on reweighing evidence)
Elk Retail Investors, LLC v. GKC Indiana Theatres, Inc., 764 N.E.2d 647 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (waiver principles in appellate review)