Thursday, July 3, 2008
We're all responsible
The comment I received was: "Yay. More dead psych patients to come, thanks to you and yours http://youtube.com/watch?v=dx11j0kcLn4. Hard for anyone to remain in treatment when they're killing their patients left and right."
The video is certainly a very sad, tragic story of loss of life due to neglect of the hospital staff and they should be held responsible for not providing the help that woman obviously needed. However, assisted outpatient treatment laws, such as Senate Bill 226, means that a person is provided treatment in the community where they live and they are given supportive services by the mental health agency or provider who is required by the court order to ensure the timely, consistent treatment, including medications, is provided for an individual wherever they reside.
Hospital emergency rooms aren't the only places where people are ignored. I think it is also terrible that, as a society, we walk by homeless people with a mental illness every day and ignore them as they sleep on the streets. They are often victimized (robbed, molested, left out in the elements) and sometimes commit crimes that then put them in jail or prison. People with severe mental illnesses who lack insight to seek treatment are ignored by our mental health system all the time, unless they are engaged in a dangerous activity. Even families who try to help their loved ones who are exhibiting psychotic symptoms and who desperately need help have to wait until there is a "clear and present danger" to report in our state.
So, yes, that video was a stark example of the neglect of the hospital staff and they should lose their jobs. But what consequences should the mental health administrators and agencies face because, on a daily basis, large numbers of people with a mental illness are neglected, too. You don't see them on a video in a psychiatric hospital, but just wander through the streets, visit some jails, or maybe go to a NAMI support group and listen to the families who are unable to help their loved ones obtain consistent treatment because they haven't yet done something to fulfill the "danger to self or others" that is required by law. Or visit the Treatment Advocacy Center's "Preventable Tragedies" site to see how many people we turn our backs on day after day, year after year.
In the end, we're all responsible for this negligence. Requiring our state law to allow for timely, compassionate assisted outpatient treatment would show that we understand and want to help those who lack insight to seek and remain in treatment. Passing Senate Bill 226 would show that we care...it is the responsible thing to do.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Virginia reviews involuntary commitment standard
Virginia's House of Delegates subcommittee has begun their review of the standard used for involuntary commitments for individuals with a mental illness who do not voluntarily seek treatment. VA's commitment law currently requires an imminent danger to self or others and the proposed legislation, House Bill 559, would change that to ‘There is a substantial likelihood that, as a result of that mental illness, a person will, in the near future, cause serious physical harm to himself or others as evidenced by recent behavior causing, attempting or threatening such harm, or any other relevant information,’”
Just as in Pennsylvania, where our clear and present danger criteria and inability to include a history of prior hospitalizations when determining the need for treatment, Virginia's overly strict criteria often stands in the way of timely treatment that can help prevent the type of dangerous situations that both of our states' laws now require before someone is provided treatment.
In an article from Virginia's The Daily Progress, Mental health bill vetted by panel: Proposal would ease involuntary commitment standard, by Bob Gibson, January 12, 2008, Alex R. Gulotta, executive director of the Charlottesville-based Legal Aid Justice Center, stated “If we had the time and money, we would create more services at the front end” and prevent people from getting worse and needing involuntary commitments."
Providing more services alone does not identify what is at the core of the problem for those with a severe mental illness and a lack of insight (a.k.a. anosognosia) to seek treatment. If someone does not realize that they need support because they are experiencing the symptoms of a mental illness that could be helped with treatment, they will not ask for treatment, either before they are "getting worse" or when they are in dire need of immediate help, whether or not services are available.
In my own situation and from the many families I have spoken with, services were available for their family member: club houses, day programs, group therapy during hospitalizations and mental health professionals were also available: psychiatrists, therapists, and case managers. The only thing missing was a law that would require the person in need of help for the symptoms of their illness to accept the prescribed treatment from the mental health professionals who had evaluated their needs for medication, therapy, and services.
Laws such as PA's proposed Senate Bill 226 are court-ordered assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) laws that provide the services and treatments that an individual with a severe mental illness may need for an initial period of just 6 months, followed by a review and, if required, an additional year. The law would also require the designated provider to be responsible for providing the support and follow-up of services the individual may need. This type of timely, consistent support has been proven to be effective, as the outcomes from NY's Kendra's Law show so clearly.
Hopefully, over time, the results of effective AOT laws will lead other states around the country to use that model so that individuals with a severe mental illness and lack of insight to seek support on their own will have the benefit of timely, compassionate treatment.