btn-library

Blog

Carla Jacobs – A Profile of Hope

Print

(Nov. 6, 2013) Founding Treatment Advocacy Center board member Carla Jacobs is a veteran mental health activist who helped shaped the dialogue surrounding mental health public policies in California. She is also a family member with first-hand knowledge of the devastating effects of untreated mental illness.

profileofhopeawardOn October 24, Los Angeles County recognized Carla’s enormous contributions to mental health in the Golden State by awarding her one of three 2013 Profiles of Hope, Outstanding Family & Community Advocate awards. Former Congressman Patrick Kennedy and actress Mariel Hemingway were co-recipients.  

Carla started her advocacy career in 1991 as an appointee to a Los Angeles County task force on the incarceration of people with mental illness. Since then she has been instrumental in promoting laws, policies and practices throughout California and the nation to improve recovery for people with mental illness and support their families.

 With support from many organizations and individuals, Carla has successfully directed advocacy and legislation campaigns to reduce homelessness and criminalization of people with mental illness by improving standards and practices in community care.

Carla says she is guided by a basic principle that access to treatment for mental disorders is a human right as well as an obligation of and a benefit to the society that provides it.

She has served as a founding steering committee member on both Lanterman, Petris, Short Act (LPS) Reform task forces and as a founding steering committee member of the California Treatment Advocacy Coalition. She is former executive director and current board member of Proxy Parent Foundation.

The Treatment Advocacy Center joins Los Angeles County is saluting Carla Jacobs. This award could not have gone to a more deserving – or effective -advocate.

To comment, visit our Facebook page.
Visit our blog archive to read all our recent posts.

 

All-Voluntary Treatment Looks Good Until You Look at It

Print

(Nov. 5, 2013) Opponents of court-ordered treatment often say an all-voluntary mental health system would work just fine. Totally voluntary? No provisions for involuntary treatment? Let’s think what such a system would look like.

depression_screeningThose seeking help for anxiety and depression would get it (as they should now). Those seeking treatment for learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, sleep disturbances, interpersonal problems, relationship stress, and sexual dysfunction would get it (as they should now). Even those seeking help for auditory hallucinations, paranoia, manic episodes, OCD and eating disorders would get it (as they should now). That sounds good. This world of totally voluntary treatment may not be so bad.

But then there are the nearly 50% of people with schizophrenia and 40% of people with severe bipolar disorder who don’t realize that they are ill and therefore won’t be voluntarily seeking treatment. Some of them will barricade themselves in their homes and live in fear of their paranoid delusions, stop eating, cease all communication with family and the outside world, and spend their days scared and alone. Maybe some will commit  “crimes” in response to their auditory hallucinations and end up in jail. Then they can be put in solitary confinement and begin to self-injure in response to their auditory hallucinations. 

Some will become homeless and eat out of trash cans —so disorganized in their thought processes that they can’t get their basic needs met. Some will be dressed for the winter in shorts and shoes with holes in them—so busy responding to their voices that they don’t realize that their extremities are frostbitten. Some will perpetrate violence because they are convinced that others are evil or intending to hurt them.  All the while, they will be “free” to choose to seek treatment for a disorder that they don’t believe they have.

Those in mental health institutions who sit naked smearing themselves in their own feces will be “set free” to decide if they need to voluntarily seek treatment. Those who have pulled out their own eyes because of visual hallucinations and delusional thinking with religious content (“and if thine eye offend thee…”) will be on their own to live their lives free of all of those pesky health care workers. Those who haven’t slept in days and believe that their mothers are possessed by the devil will return home to decide when the time is right to seek help. Those who believe that they are already dead with internal organs rotting inside them will be “liberated” to seek treatment on their own. Of course they will, right?  

So, this world of completely voluntary mental health treatment . . . it sounds good for those who don’t have a severe mental illness; actually it sounds like the world we live in now. However, this world of completely voluntary mental health treatment doesn’t sound so nice for those who are too sick to realize that they need treatment.  It doesn’t sound so good for the most ill among us, the most severely mentally ill who do not even know that they are ill.

It looks like those folks will end up homeless, scared and alone, in jails, freezing on the street, blind, covered in waste, or dead. Does that sound like a better world? The world in which we recognize the human right to starve, freeze, live in fear, permanently injure one’s self and spend one’s life incarcerated . . . all because that person doesn’t even know that they are sick.   

To comment, visit our Facebook page.
Visit our blog archive to read all our recent posts.

 

 

Maryland Needs to Modernize Its Mental Health Laws

Print

(Oct. 31, 2013) Two letters in this week’s Baltimore Sun are calling for better treatment options for people who don’t recognize they are sick – a category that includes about half of those suffering with the most severe mental illnesses.

saint-elizabeths“Imagine you have a 24-year-old daughter with schizophrenia, delusional, living on the street, eating out of garbage cans and hearing voices telling her not to trust you or anyone else,” writes Arlene Saks-Martin in a call for assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) in Maryland (“Helping Maryland's mentally ill,” Oct. 30).

“She denies wanting to hurt anyone or herself so for years you cannot get treatment for her. Although she is gravely disabled, police and doctors have told you she does not meet the ‘dangerousness’ standard for involuntary hospitalization. Her teeth are falling out, her body has sores and she is a victim of crime, even rape. Can you honestly tell me she knows or cares or can exercise her civil rights?”

Kathleen Branch, the mother of an adult child with mental illness who is all too familiar with the shortfalls in the Maryland treatment laws, also weighs in. “It is critical for lawmakers to know that many of us desperately want to get a loved one evaluated and potentially hospitalized before something worse happens, but the laws stand in our way,” she writes  (“Laws surrounding mental illness make it harder for victims to get treatment,” Oct. 30).

Even though Maryland is one of the more well-resourced mental health systems in the country, the system exists largely for those who recognize they are ill and can voluntarily seek services.

The state is one of only five that remain without a law providing for mandatory outpatient treatment, and it has a high threshold for providing mandatory treatment in a hospital. If the state were to modernize its civil commitment laws to provide for court-ordered outpatient treatment and lower its threshold for involuntary hospitalization, those who are too ill to recognize it would be more likely to receive services.

“It is up to society — you and me — to rescue those with anosognosia by assuring they get timely, extended treatment to enable recovery,” urges Saks.

We agree.

To comment, visit our Facebook page.
Visit our blog archive to read all our recent posts.

 

Schizophrenia Robbed My Son of His Dignity - personally speaking

Print

(Oct. 30, 2013) I have a 33-year-old son suffering from schizophrenia who is currently homeless. He is too paranoid to stay in a rented room and too delusional regarding our intentions as his parents to remain at home. And despite his multiple hospitalizations there have never been any positive outcomes upon his discharge. Despite all our efforts with him (since he was 20) in multiple counties with different doctors, he has been unable to avail himself of current treatment resources. Like many, he suffers from anosognosia, rendering him incapable of knowing that he is ill. This devastating form of denial is the impact of the disease of schizophrenia on the brain.

homelessness-feetThe other day he called and asked if I would bring him his books. I did and brought him home with me. When we got home I discovered what I have heartbreakingly discovered many times before: his legs were full of sores from bug bites caused by sleeping in the grass; his face was seriously sunburned, having no protection from the elements; the bag he was carrying smelled of urine; and his clothes did not come clean even after two washings. I let him shower, fed him, and let him sleep—hoping he would be free of the terror of being accosted while he slept.

And then I sat down and cried. I’m still crying as I write this, for I know the outcome already. He will stay here a few days but no longer. I can say this with certainty because the pattern is a very old one. After just a few days of rest he will begin to pace and then he will begin to accuse us of things that make no sense to the actual behaviors we exhibit. Then he will start to yell frightening comments and he will leave, sometimes voluntarily, but sometimes only with a call to 911.

With over fifteen years of hospitalizations and outcomes leading to homelessness each time, I have learned the horrifying reality that the only role I seem able to play in his life is to give him some respite now and then.

The good news is that my son has a group of supporters that we have never met: men and women who have struggled with their own severe mental illness. They are the heroes I watch with hope in my heart for my son. They are the men and women fighting for those who cannot fight for themselves. These men and women have found recovery, restoring the best of themselves with the help of medications, group and community support, county resources, and the ability to choose their own best approach. Sometimes they fight “for” and sometimes they fight “against” mental health recovery changes, like certain laws or regulations they feel steal a person’s dignity or human rights. Their motto is “nothing about us without us.” I like it.

They are saying to those who change the laws “please consider the human rights of each individual before you finish printing that law, or protocol, or program.” We need their voice! Grounded in their own experience and strengths, they have insights I may not have.

But as a parent of man who has been homeless and suffering for 16 years, I too, like many other parents with similar stories, have insights and experiences that others simply may not have. I have watched this illness rob my son of all personal dignity, of all ability to gauge what is real.  On the continuum of illness, he has been robbed of his ability to choose a path that creates the life his supporters now have.

And so I remind each of us: we are all on the same team. Our stories, however different, have informed our advocacy. We are fighting for people like my son—not against his ability to choose, but for the platform created by interventions that will get him to the same playing level that you, his supporters, now stand on. It is our job as fellow human beings to fight for the right to have the right to choose recovery.

Sometimes mandatory compliance and intervention are the only things that will restore a person to sanity so that he or she is no longer wandering city streets with a sleeping bag and “dying with [his] rights on.” (E. Fuller Torrey).

Gloria Davidson, MS, LMFT
California

Davidson hopes that sharing her story might reinforce the desperate need for Laura’s Law, California’s assisted outpatient treatment program, in Alameda County

 

Everyone Suffers In Fatal Encounters

Print

(Oct. 28, 2013) “A police dispatcher had sent Officer LaRosa to what seemed like a routine accident call. When he arrived, [Billy] Lane, 25 years old, was outside his wrecked SUV, bloodied, holding a butcher's knife and threatening passersby. Mr. Lane advanced relentlessly on the police officer, who shot him four times. Mr. Lane died on the spot (“Lives of Mentally Ill, Police Collide,” the Wall Street Journal, Oct. 22).”

lane_larosa“You go through the academy expecting Joe Bad Guy to bail out of a car and start shooting at us," Officer LaRosa told Wall Street Journal reporter Gary Fields. "They don't train us for Billy."

Encountering “Billy” and other people in the throes of psychosis is often what leads to deadly encounters between law enforcement and people with severe mental illness. Our report “Justifiable Homicides: What is the Role of Mental Illness?” found that untreated severe mental illness is an increasing factor in officer-involved homicides.

When the responsibility for seriously mentally ill persons is shifted away from the mental health system to law enforcement, many people get hurt. "No police officer does well with shooting someone, let alone someone with mental illness," Michael Biasotti, Treatment Advocacy Center board member, told the Journal. “That destroys a bunch of people at once.”

We couldn’t agree more. Until states improve and use their assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) laws to support at-risk individuals and communities use crisis intervention team (CIT) policing to train law enforcement to handle encounters with people in psychiatric crisis, officer-involved shootings will continue to increase.

Read this powerful piece in the Wall Street Journal about collisions between people with severe mental illness and law enforcement.

To comment, visit our Facebook page.
Visit our blog archive to read all our recent posts.

 
Page 10 of 106

Visit Your State