Transcription
Case 2:13-cv-05038-EFS Document 153 Filed 09/24/15
told Mr. [redacted] that if he was returned to the IMU, he would start self-harming again. Id. Mr. Troupe continued his cycle of self-harm, return to MHU, return to IMU, and self-harm again, over the next few months. ECF No. 118 at 83-84.
On June 27, 2011, Mr. Troupe had a particularly bad incident of self-harm. ECF No. 118 at 84. It was his second incident in 72 hours and it required MR. Troupe to have 13 stitches. Id. It was on this day where Mr. [redacted] listed MR. Troupe as an "extreme suicide risk," and ordered that he continue on the restraint bed. Id. This contradicts Mr. [redacted]'s declaration where he stated that he "never evaluated Mr. Troupe to be suicidal." See ECF No. 86 at 3.
A month later, Dr. [redacted], Mr. Troupe's treating psychologist, conducted a psychological evaluation of Mr. Troupe and clarified Mr. Troupe's condition for the mental-health staff at the MHU. See ECF No. 118-1 at 124. In that report, Dr. [redacted] declared Mr. Troupe a "low" risk of self-harm. Id. However, he did note that Mr. Troupe's use of minor self-harm as a manipulation tactic could lead to accidental serious injury. Id. Dr. [redacted] thought that the current pattern of short, intermittent stays in the MHU provided Mr. Troupe with the attention he wanted with relatively little discomfort. Id. This would likely foster repetitious behavior leading to more self-harm. Id. His recommendation was that, if a restraint table is necessary, to put Mr. Troupe on the table for longer periods of time. Id.
ORDER - 6
-----
Other posts by this author
|
2019 jun 11
|
2019 feb 12
|
2018 jul 17
|
2018 jun 30
|
2018 jun 30
|
2018 jun 30
|
More... |
RSS
Replies