Old Law:
In 1988, the California Supreme Court ruled that “nontherapist clergy” do not have a duty to refer suicidal persons to medical professionals. Nally v. Grace Community Church, 253 Cal. Rptr. 97 (1988). However, the court emphasized that its ruling applied only to clergy who are not licensed therapists. Courts in many other states have followed this ruling. The key point is this: There is no assurance that lay counselors working on behalf of a church share the significant protection from liability enjoyed by nontherapist clergy counselors. This is so whether or not the lay counselors are licensed counselors or psychologists under state law.
Law Evolving (from http://www.michiganlawreview.org/assets/pdfs/106/7/dyer.pdf):
In cases involving Schools where students committed suicide, two courts have now held laypersons responsible for suicide. The Shin and Schieszler courts seemingly brushed aside this rule of no affirmative duty by holding that the nonclinician defendants had a special relationship with Elizabeth—and thus owed her a duty of care— solely because her suicide was foreseeable.
While the common law did not impose civil liability for a failure to pre- vent suicide, the law has evolved to make room for such liability in limited circumstances.40 Under a traditional tort analysis, courts deemed the suicidal person to be the sole proximate cause of his or her own death, and the law did not impose affirmative duties on others to prevent foreseeable harm.41 An exception to this no-duty rule emerged under the tort doctrine of special re- lationships.42 Restatement section 314A states that common carriers, innkeepers, landowners, and those who have custody of another person have a duty to take reasonable action to aid or protect that person.43 A comment accompanying section 314A clarifies that “[t]he relations listed are not in- tended to be exclusive,” and, in fact, “[t]he law appears . . . to be working slowly toward a recognition of the duty to aid or protect in any relation of dependence or of mutual dependence.”44 As previously noted, the Restate- ment does not further clarify how courts determine whether a special relationship exists.
Courts have most commonly recognized a special relationship—which creates a duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent the suicide—in the con- texts of jails and hospitals and between patients and psychiatrists.45 In jails and hospitals, the defendant has “actual physical custody of and control over persons.”46 In relationships between patients and trained mental health pro- fessionals, the professionals are “deemed to have a special training and expertise enabling them to detect mental illness and/or the potential for sui- cide, and . . . the power or control necessary to prevent that suicide.”47 Courts have generally been reluctant to extend the special relationships duty to prevent suicide to noncustodial, nonprofessional counselor relationships.48
So, what does the WTS and elders tell its followers who admit they are on the verge of committing suicde?
I need your help. I need to know how the elders handle threats of suicides. I understand that the Elder's manual talks about suicide in Chapter 5, p. 58, Chapter 6 and Chapter 7, but I don't have the exact language.
If someone says, "I am going to commit suicide" or "I don't want to live longer", what do the elders do? The legal duty is, now, likely to do nothing in most parts of the world. The moral duty is to call 911.
If the person is facing a judicial meeting, then do the elders go easy(ier) on the person making a suicidal threat? (i.e. "I thought of killing myself rather then face judicial committee")
Do the elders recommend a psychologist or mental health worker?
Or, instead, do the elders look to how the JW community perceive the person (i.e. non-psychologists help the elders evaluate the person's mental capacity)? If that happens, isn't that messed up!
If the suicidal person is considered a fringe JW, how does this factor into the decision to disfellowship the person (i.e. to get rid of the problem)?
If someone (say another JW) calls 911 for the suicidal person, do the other JWs have to comment to affirm/criticize the person's actions?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Skeeter
Help.