2017 ORS 427.121¹
Choice of placement setting

(1) As used in this section:

(a) “Adult” means an adult with developmental disabilities who is eligible to receive comprehensive services as defined in ORS 427.101 (Definitions for ORS 427.115, 427.154 and 427.160).

(b) “Residential setting” means a living arrangement described in ORS 427.101 (Definitions for ORS 427.115, 427.154 and 427.160) (3).

(2) An adult has the right to choose the adult’s placement setting. The Department of Human Services or the department’s designee shall present to an adult at least three appropriate placement setting options, including at least two different types of residential settings, before:

(a) Making an initial placement.

(b) Transferring the adult from one placement setting to another placement setting.

(3) The department or the department’s designee may not transfer an adult from a placement setting without first complying with subsection (2) of this section.

(4) The department or the department’s designee is not required to present the options under subsection (2) of this section if:

(a) The department or the department’s designee demonstrates that three appropriate placement settings or two different types of residential settings are not available within the geographic area where the adult wishes to reside;

(b) The adult selects a placement setting option and waives the right to be presented with the placement setting options described in subsection (2) of this section; or

(c) The adult is at imminent risk to health or safety in the adult’s current placement setting. [2013 c.602 §2]

Chapter 427

Notes of Decisions

Former commit­ment pro­vi­sions of this chapter were constitu­tional. State ex rel Vandenberg v. Vandenberg, 48 Or App 609, 617 P2d 675 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Standard of proof in former version of this chapter was proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.” State ex rel Vandenberg v. Vandenberg, 48 Or App 609, 617 P2d 675 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

As commit­ment pro­ceed­ing is not crim­i­nal matter, principle of double jeopardy has no applica­tion. State ex rel Vandenberg v. Vandenberg, 48 Or App 609, 617 P2d 675 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Preemp­tion of the Oregon Revised Statutes by the pro­vi­sions of the Interstate Compact, (1973) Vol 36, p 297; civil commit­ment to Mental Health Division of per­son against whom crim­i­nal charges are pending, (1980) Vol 41, p 91

Law Review Cita­tions

16 WLR 439 (1979)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 427—Persons With Intellectual or Developmental Disabilitie, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors427.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 427, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano427.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.