How do you treat people with mental illness if they don't think they're sick? How much autonomy should be given to someone with severe schizophrenia? Why is it okay to intervene after someone with paranoid delusions commits a crime, but not before?
These questions are at the center of a new report with some controversial recommendations. The LPS Reform Task Force II is made of long-time advocates in the area of mental-health laws. Their number one recommendation is about an individual's ability, or lack thereof, to consent to treatment. In California, the legal rights of mentally ill patients have been paramount since an act passed in 1967. The Lanterman-Petris-Short Act sought to protect sick people from being committed to institutions without any due process. Since then, these task force advocates argue, too many people aren't being treated at all. They end up in jail. They are on the streets and in emergency rooms.
One of the editors of the Task Force report, Mark Gale whose son has a schizoaffective disorder, believes the LPS Act served its purpose for a time, but that some people are too "gravely disabled" to choose their own care. Gale added: "Every day, doctors and family members make decisions for their relatives sick in hospitals.... Why do we have a whole different set of rules for this class of people?" But who decides? What protections will be in place for those without family or friends to advocate on their behalf?
GUESTS
Mark Gale, Editor, The LPS (Lanterman-Petris-Short) Reform Task Force II; long-time advocate in the area of mental health laws
Rusty Selix, Executive Director, California Council of Community Mental Health Agencies