In re S.M.Annotate this Case
The State filed a petition for the involuntary commitment of S.M., who suffers from bipolar disorder. After a hearing, the district court concluded that S.M.’s condition required commitment because she was substantially unable to care for her own health and safety and because her condition would predictably deteriorate to the point that she would become a danger to herself if she did not receive treatment. The court then ordered S.M. committed to the Montana State Hospital. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the district court (1) did not err in determining that S.M. was, at the time of the hearings, unable to provide for her basic needs, including her health and safety; and (2) did not err in concluding that, under the circumstances of this case, the Montana State Hospital was the least restrictive alternative for S.M.’s treatment.