County officials are balking, at least for now, at a Grand Jury recommendation that a special court for mentally ill offenders be created to divert more people from jail into treatment instead.
Critical issues include not only the cost and staffing needs in tight budget times, but also the shortage of housing programs where the offenders could recover successfully, county managers said in letters to be reviewed Tuesday by the Board of Supervisors.
In a report issued in June, the Ventura County Grand Jury said officials should establish such a court, as most of the state’s 58 counties have done.
These courts can pay off for both the taxpayers and the mentally ill, but they vary markedly in effectiveness, a mental health expert said.
“If you’ve seen one, you’ve seen one,” said Rusty Selix, executive director of the Mental Health Association in California.
Selix said the best mental health courts are “incredibly effective,” cutting costs for incarceration and hospitalization as well as helping people to get their lives back on track.
But Ventura County law enforcement, mental health and legal officials suggested such a move might be premature. The broad range of county staff needed to work in the court probably can’t be spared now, managers said.
Selix said counties with successful courts have judges who understand the concept and a strong community mental health system. One component of that community program is housing, but Ventura County mental health officials said there isn’t enough of it locally.
Such units typically provide rent subsidies and case workers to help residents get transportation and employment, manage their medication and handle life skills such as cooking and banking.
In partnership with other agencies, the county Behavioral Health Department has developed 141 permanent units of housing offering support services for mentally ill people, with another 48 units in the pipeline, Director Meloney Roy said. But gaps still exist, she said, and additional funding would have to be found.
In its report called “Mentally Ill Housed in Ventura County Jails,” the Grand Jury recommended converting an existing diversion program into a permanent mental health court.
Jurors said that on average, 20 clients are enrolled in the diversion program, called the Multi-Agency Referral and Recovery Team. But many are barred because of the type of offense they committed.
People committing violent crimes or with a history of violence are not considered, Chief Deputy Public Defender Jean Farley said. Specific crimes that could exclude an offender include sexual assault, domestic violence and drunken driving. Usually those whose primary problem is substance abuse are not suitable, prosecutors said.
Of 203 people reviewed for eligibility, 76 were deemed suitable, 59 entered the program and 14 continued with voluntary treatment, the Grand Jury said.
One critic said it’s not enough. “It works in a handful of cases, but it is not close to being a mental health court,” said Ratan Bhavnani, executive director of the Ventura County chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness.
District Attorney Greg Totten and Public Defender Duane Dammeyer are not opposed to a mental health court, while both Roy and Sheriff Bob Brooks support the idea. But all question whether they could assign full-time staff as the Grand Jury wanted.
“The MARRT (diversion) program is a valuable program and should continue to play an important role in the criminal justice system. ...” Totten wrote. “There is not, however, a present need to assign personnel full-time to a mental health court.”
About 160 to 190 people in Ventura County’s jail system are being treated for mental illness on an average day, the Sheriff’s Department says. They are accused of crimes ranging from petty theft to murder, according to sheriff’s officials.
Bhavnani said many cases could be handled in mental health court, rather than sending those individuals through the normal court process. He said public officials could determine the types of cases the special court would consider, barring serious felonies if they chose.
Some mental health courts consider every type of mental health case, including involuntary commitments and insanity pleas, Farley said.
“We can’t not afford it,” Bhavnani said. “Times are difficult, we understand that, but we as a community need to look at where are we spending the money and what is the right thing for people least able to protect themselves.”
Read the report
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/aug/10/officials-balk-at-mental-health-court-plan/
No comments:
Post a Comment