Findings and order; expiration and renewal of admission; alternative courses of treatment.
1. If the district court finds, after proceedings for the involuntary court-ordered admission of a person to a public or private mental health facility:
(a) That there is not clear and convincing evidence that the person with respect to whom the hearing was held is a mentally ill person or exhibits observable behavior such that he is likely to harm himself or others if allowed his liberty, the court shall enter its finding to that effect and the person must not be involuntarily detained in such a facility.
(b) That there is clear and convincing evidence that the person with respect to whom the hearing was held is a mentally ill person and, because of that illness, is likely to harm himself or others if allowed his liberty, the court may order the involuntary admission of the person for the most appropriate course of treatment. The order of the court must be interlocutory and must not become final if, within 30 days after the involuntary admission, the person is unconditionally released pursuant to NRS 433A.390.
2. An involuntary admission pursuant to paragraph (b) of subsection 1 automatically expires at the end of 6 months if not terminated previously by the medical director of the public or private mental health facility as provided for in subsection 2 of NRS 433A.390. At the end of the court-ordered period of treatment, the Division or any mental health facility that is not operated by the Division may petition to renew the detention of the person for additional periods not to exceed 6 months each. For each renewal, the petition must set forth to the court specific reasons why further treatment would be in the person’s own best interests.
3. Before issuing an order for involuntary admission or a renewal thereof, the court shall explore other alternative courses of treatment within the least restrictive appropriate environment as suggested by the evaluation team who evaluated the person, or other persons professionally qualified in the field of psychiatric mental health, which the court believes may be in the best interests of the person.
Last modified: February 27, 2006