Public Education & Policy :: Archive

CNMHC News Alert, December 2002

AB 1421 Fight Goes to the Counties

On September 28, 2002, Governor Davis signed AB 1421 (Thomason, Davis), a bill which allows counties to opt into an involuntary outpatient commitment program.

"To be eligible to implement this program, counties must provide a specific range of intensive treatment services. Three counties (Stanislaus, Sacramento, and Los Angeles) are currently implementing these services through the Integrated Services for the Homeless Mentally Ill program. The Board of Supervisors must pass a resolution identifying resources for treatment programs that do not reduce funding for voluntary mental health programs." (Press Release by Gov. Davis, 9/28/02).

Although the CNMHC and allies were able to stall initiatives to expand forced treatment for 4 years, ultimately we could not stop this well funded, highly promoted, and media supported effort. However, there is no state mandated patient commitment program and the LPS laws have not been changed. The battle now goes to the local - county - level. And the CNMHC and its allies will be there to fight this regressive idea from becoming a reality in any county.

Please read under "Position Papers", "Policy Arguments Against Implementation of AB 1421" and "Inadequate Mental Health System Capacity Precludes AB 1421 Implementation". The first describes the policy reasons why your county should not expand forced treatment. The second describes the extensive statutory requirements, including an extensive array of housing and community support services available voluntarily, and administrative, court and enforcement resources, that your county would have to meet prior to implementation of the bill.

These documents were produced by CARES (Coalition Advocating for Rights, Empowerment and Services.) CARES formed 4 years ago to guard against the expansion of forced mental health treatment and to work for increased access to and development of effective, voluntary community mental health services. CARES includes the California Association of Social Rehabilitation Agencies, the California Association of Mental Health Patients' Rights Advocates, the California Network of Mental Health Clients, and Protection & Advocacy, Inc.

These documents are for your use in your County to fight the implementation of AB 1421.

Contact the CNMHC office for assistance or for more information.

Update

We currently know of two Counties that are looking at implementing AB 1421. Yolo County and LA County.

The LA County Board of Supervisors moved very quickly and has already passed a resolution to implement AB 1421 in July 2003. The LA proposal targets individuals who have been adjudicated incompetent to stand trial in misdemeanor cases and who would go to a State Hospital. The point of intake would be Los Angeles County's Mental Health Court.

Yolo County is home to Assemblywoman Helen Thomson, author of AB 1421, who is now on the Yolo County Board of Supervisors having left the State Assembly.

Legislature looks at Seclusion and Restraints

Senate Hearings on Seclusion and Restraints to be held in February

Senate Hearings will be held in Los Angeles and Sacramento in February on Seclusion and Restraints.

In March, 2002, Senator Wesley Chesbro (D-Arcata) introduced a report entitled, Seclusion and Restraints: A Failure, Not a Treatment. In a press release, Senator Chesbro stated, "These are dangerous interventions and, despite reforms, people are still suffering from their effects."

In May, 2002, Senator Chesbro introduced Senate Resolution 31, which stated: "That the Senate Select Committee on Developmental Disabilities and Mental Health shall conduct hearings into California's standards on the use of seclusion and restraints, oversight, and reporting practices; into injuries, deaths, and trauma caused by the use of seclusion and restraints; and into the best practices developed in other states for reducing the use of seclusion and restraints in psychiatric settings and the consequent harm to patients and staff that results."

It is expected that legislation will emerge from the findings of the Hearing.

CNMHC Position on Seclusion and Restraints

On November 10, 2002, at the Client Forum 2002, both the CNMHC membership and Board approved the following Seclusion and Restraints Policy. (This same position was developed over several Summits of mental health clients/survivors from throughout the nation.)

Seclusion and Restraints

We oppose restraints and seclusion. All institutions and community providers must establish a zero involuntary restraint and seclusion policy.

Providers of mental health services must change their culture, including increasing their staffing, enhancing their supportive services or whatever steps are necessary to create a safe and therapeutic environment.

We support alternatives to restraint and seclusion, which include de-escalation techniques, crisis plan developed by the person in crisis, and anger management skills training.

If you have experienced seclusion and restraints and want to tell your story, contact the CNMHC office.