Saving Lives or Cementing Stigma? A Review of “Just Like You…”

127
1920

EDITOR’S CORNER

I’ve been Mad in America’s Family Resources Editor for more than three years now, but except for a brief mention in my bio, I haven’t shared much about my lived experience with psychiatry. I wanted to maintain a proper journalistic distance from the content I manage and focus on amplifying others’ voices. But I have a story, too, so that’s about to change.

This blog will be the first in a regular series of “Editor’s Corner” columns for the Family Resources page, in which I’ll write about relevant trends from my perspective not just as a journalist but also as a mental health consumer/survivor/ex-patient. I hope they will stimulate discussion and, where appropriate, spur organizing around shared experiences and goals.

Here, I take a look at a new short film in the growing “mental health awareness” genre from my perspective as someone who’s experienced the very “disorders” it portrays.

Just Like Me?

I receive a fair number of press releases about new research, books, and multimedia initiatives designed to address the perceived youth mental health crisis.  These efforts are designed to encourage kids to normalize talking about emotional distress, help them feel less alone, urge help-seeking, and above all “end the stigma!” One from a few weeks ago piqued my interest:

 “In ‘Just Like You: Anxiety and Depression,’ 10 brave kids, 2 Emmy-award-winning journalists, 1 determined parent and 1 clinical psychologist at Columbia University take on the fear and stigma plaguing the mental health community by immersing us in life with an anxiety disorder and depression in a way that leaves us enlightened, empowered and equipped to … support people living with an anxiety disorder and depression and prevent death by suicide….”

I was interested in screening JLY because, well, I’ve lived it. In my junior year of high school in 1975, I entered psychotherapy for what would now be labeled panic disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. Despite often paralyzing emotional pain and scary symptoms, I pretty much hid my struggles except for telling my few friends  that I was “seeing a shrink.” Then, in my sophomore year of college, the end of my first romance and a transfer to a new school flipped me back into panic mode, accompanied by inconsolable sadness and insomnia diagnosed as “reactive depression.”

I got better, though. And though I’ve had a few of what some would call relapses, I’ve never let them define me (despite the best efforts of some prescription-pad-wielding psychiatrists). So I hoped the film would characterize the experience accurately and provide wisdom I and those around me could have benefited from along the way. However, after screening it I fear that despite its good intentions, it may stoke the very stigma it seeks to stop.

Grand Goals

Just Like You: Anxiety and Depression (now available for rent or purchase on iTunes) is the latest and longest in the Just Like You series of short educational videos, an anti-bullying effort started by a Kansas documentary filmmaker for an audience of youth, their families, and teachers, among others. They feature portraits of real kids with various differences and disabilities such as autism, diabetes, Down Syndrome, food allergies, and more. The videos follow a template in which the youth, their best friends, and some of the caring adults in their lives take turns explaining their condition, what it’s like to live with it, and how others can best support them. The take-home: We have challenges others might not, but we are more similar to than different from our peers.

But the feature-length JLY:A&D has a grander goal behind its didactic mission: to “save lives.”  Less documentary than info-mercial, the tightly scripted film is built around specific messages delivered in phrases recited and reiterated by endearing kids and relatable adults with lived experience of anxiety and depression.

What are those messages? The usual outdated, pathologizing myths from the APA/NAMI playbook, dressed up in new, kid-friendly metaphors with a few welcome nods to more humanistic and holistic concepts such as peer support and self-care.  Let’s take a look.

Stigma and Suicide

The first message is as grim as it is familiar: Anxiety and depression among youth are at crisis level, leading kids (and adults) to suffer in silence and even die by suicide. But stigma, it’s said, prevents them from getting help. Families and peers thus have a responsibility to “know better” so they can “do better,” say the parents of Pierson, a 15-year-old mental health activist who died by suicide. We then meet those “10 brave kids” from Kansas—Morgan, Allie, Jana, Roshaun, and Dylan and each of their best friends or close family members—learning a bit about their different talents and passions. We also meet the two adult journalists (Fox network broadcasters Abby Eden and Ryan LeFebvre). All of them have one thing in common:  “I live with depression and an anxiety disorder.” “So do I.” “Me, too.”

Here and throughout the film, they tell us what their suffering feels like, from spiraling worries to inconsolable tears, and the pressure to remain stoic and silent, along with the desperation that sometimes leads to hospitalization or a plan for self-harm. Their stories, and later medical information, are sometimes illustrated with cartoons and offset by the stories of those who love them but sometimes labor to understand their moods. I strongly identified when, about halfway through, Ryan recalls, “So many times, I wanted to sleep, but my anxious mind wouldn’t let me. And I wanted to do something, but my depressed mind wouldn’t let me.”

Pushing the Medical Model

Ryan also delivers the second and overarching message, repeated multiple times from many mouths: “Anxiety and depression are real medical conditions….” And so begins the promotion of the biological model of “mental illness,” which research has shown actually increases stigma. The medical myth is further muddied by a novel analogy I’d never heard before. According to JLY, anxiety disorders and depression are not exactly “chemical imbalances” but malfunctions in how our body reacts to emotions, “no different from being attacked by a virus or an allergen.”

The film’s chipper Columbia psychologist, Dr. Ali Mattu, explains that the “right,” or “normal” amounts of fear and sadness are natural reflexes, reactions to stress akin to coughing or hunger pangs. But “too much” fear or sadness constitutes a disorder that can harm us, he claims. “Just like asthma or flu,” says Abby, they can become “extremely severe, even life-threatening.” In this telling, emotional distress is not only a problem innate to the individual, but also somehow an outside invader like a virus.

Fatalism and Helplessness

Worse, we’re told the prognosis is poor. JLY’s third message is that anxiety and depression aren’t just a dangerous “real medical condition” but an incurable one. These kids and adults tell us that not only can’t they “just get over it,” but are also helpless to control it. Ryan recommends “surrendering” to this fact and recognizing that “we need other people to help us.” After this fatalistic take, we learn we’re not to blame them nor make a big deal of it. (Jana: “It’s not my fault, just like it’s not my fault if my stomach growls.” Dylan: “It’s just how my body works.”)  Dr. Mattu explains that this horrible disease can be managed with cognitive behavioral therapy, medication (likened inaccurately to an asthma rescue inhaler), and self-care including diet and exercise.

You Can (Must) Help

This leads to the fourth message, which may be the best aspect of the film: Peer support really helps. The emphasis is on what friends can—and, it’s implied, have a duty to—do on a daily basis to engage and support their fellow youth.

To its credit, the film emphasizes that talking about suicide won’t make it happen and shows through often touching scenes how, say, songwriter Allie’s best friend, Michael, has learned how to read when she is in the throes and finds ways to just be with her, listening and responding to what she says helps her feel better. At one point, Roshaun (whose champion is big brother Breydon and who uses journaling as an outlet for his struggles) shares his vision for ending mental health stigma. But it sounds like a recipe for healing human pain: “[…Come] together as a community and help people…to feel loved and heard.”

Other recommendations also sound sensible but have risky downsides. For example, teens are encouraged to steer overanxious or depressed friends and family members toward professional help. (We’re reassured that that won’t lead to being locked away or ruin one’s future job prospects, but as MIA has documented, both of these outcomes happen too often.) The film even urges teens to report friends to the authorities if they have a hunch the person might be suicidal. But that can lead to further trauma when one is hauled away in handcuffs.

Besides being paternalistic, taking it upon oneself to monitor others and potentially save their lives is a lot of responsibility to put on youth. I worry that adolescents, who can sometimes be self-absorbed, may want to steer clear of rather than befriend peers portrayed as fragile or “high maintenance.”

Inaccuracies and Omissions

The film ends by reassuring viewers that kids with anxiety and depression are, in the end, “just like you.” This seems to conflict with the medical model of mental illness, which is othering by definition. Mixed messages aside, I’m concerned about the inaccuracies and omissions that reveal the filmmakers’ lack of awareness of recent research and social movements.

For example, the film uses this statistic: “Depression and anxiety disorders are one of the leading factors for death by suicide.” Yet according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, while about 60% of people who died by suicide had a diagnosed “mood disorder,” only 2% of those ever treated for depression will die of suicide. A recent meta-analysis on the link between anxiety disorders and suicide (estimated in one 2010 review to be as high as 70%) found that “anxiety is a statistically significant, yet weak predictor of suicide ideation…and attempts.”  This suggests we need to focus less on someone’s diagnosis and more on what’s going on in their lives—not just if they’re suicidal but if they’re depressed or anxious in the first place.

Take JLY’s Morgan, an equestrian, who couldn’t get out of bed when her favorite horse died. This event prompted her diagnosis. But grief isn’t a pathology. Similarly, Roshaun (whose mother, featured in the film, mistook his meltdowns for misbehavior) tells of being repeatedly called the N-word in school. Racism—a cultural and structural problem—has repeatedly been linked to poor mental health in youth of color and exists outside the individual. So has discrimination against LGBT+ youth of all races. As MIA Science News reported recently, suicide is inherently cultural and political, yet activism around righting social injustices isn’t mentioned as an intervention.

More important, in its desire to “teach” viewers about anxiety and depression as simply as possible, the film’s adherence to standard DSM definitions, explanations, and treatments overlooks newer, empirically validated, and more optimistic approaches to the feelings and behaviors labeled mental illness. These include everything from trauma-informed care (which focuses on adverse childhood experiences such as abuse), the recovery model, and the Power-Threat-Meaning framework to neuroplasticity, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, and even the Mad Movement. Perhaps that’s too much to ask of a film like this. (Information on all of these ideas can be found in MIA’s Family Resources pages and elsewhere on this site.)

Hope and Empowerment

So what should parents, loved ones, and friends of kids who are struggling with debilitating worry, fear, sadness, and/or hopelessness do? I’d like to offer some alternative messages.

In my experience, episodes of anxiety and depression dwindle in the face of hope and empowerment. Let’s loop back to adolescent Miranda, plagued with insecurity and dread. When I first came into my therapist Marilynn’s office, I was convinced that I was physically ill due to frequent symptoms such as rapid heartbeat, de-realization, sweating, and trembling – and I wanted medication, stat!

Marilynn never told me I was “mentally ill.” She explained that my physical sensations were psychological in origin and not dangerous per se. She eschewed drugs, viewing them as a cop-out from dealing with underlying issues. And she reassured me that if I worked hard to change, I could recover. This framing saw me as anything but helpless against a supposedly permanent disease, helping me envision a future I could look forward to.

And we did that work, getting to the root of my emotional problems, which back then were viewed as primarily environmentally driven and person-specific. She helped me to get in touch with conflicting and often unconscious emotions, identify better ways to cope with my current situation, and understand and undo some toxic family dynamics—of which my admittedly loving family had plenty. “You,” she told 16-year-old me, “are being born.”

If anyone had told me that there was something fundamentally wrong inside of me that could never be healed, only managed—and just might kill me unless I let others steer me from its clutches—it would have tipped me into deeper despair. So I worry that JLY: A&D may do the same for today’s kids and their families. Indeed, research confirms that the disease model of conceptualizing distress not only increases stigma, but also leads to more prescriptions for antidepressants, which science has linked to suicidality in children and youth. This link led the U.S. FDA to include a “black box” warning on the drugs.

So if we want to be a supportive friend, teacher, or parent (rather than a savior), then we need to help the kid that’s hurting to discover the underlying driver(s) of the intense fear and sadness that manifest as a “disorder.” To quote trauma-informed child psychiatrist Dr. Bruce Perry, we want to help them articulate “Not what’s wrong with you; what happened to you?” If, as the film says, fear and sadness help keep us alive, what threats or unfulfilled needs are the anxiety and depression screaming at us to address? No doubt some of these concerns are very real, and global: the climate crisis, the pandemic, and possibly nuclear war.

As for suicidality, former therapist and hotline worker Steve McCrea wrote recently that youth “considering suicide almost always see ending their life as a solution to a problem they are experiencing” because they are often “trapped by the actions of adults who have power over them.” Sometimes we need to hold space for these taboo feelings so we can help them figure out a different solution. Not blame a broken brain.

. . .

Resources

Rethinking Suicide Prevention: An Interview on Critical Suicide Studies with Jennifer White”

“Jodi Amen: Anxiety, I Am So Done with You!”

“Emotional CPR: Heart-Centered Peer Support”

 

***

Mad in America hosts blogs by a diverse group of writers. These posts are designed to serve as a public forum for a discussion—broadly speaking—of psychiatry and its treatments. The opinions expressed are the writers’ own.

127 COMMENTS

  1. Is stigma more like magma? And if you cemented it, is there a possibility the mountain will explode while trying to realize a release? For lights gets in and out through the cracks? Though for a Bell to have been cracked can be linked to a flow in the casting? Humans though are not cast nor set in stone but I tend to think We are trying to figure the way our Being can be realized through some level of Becoming? But all these people who have lost their lives, can push one over the edge, as the systems are trying to realize “Outcomes” as if that is the Key to Training? Seemingly, to me the words that go along with quantity are all over the verbiage. As a result of what? See WHO event from this morning!

  2. Hi Miranda,
    thank you for writing this insightful review, and also, thank you for sharing some of your story with the rest of us. Personally, I’ve struggled with suicide ideation and depression/despair/despondency most of my adult life, and I do agree with you that hope and strong relationships are some of the best ways I fight against these overwhelming feelings. Hope is also part of the reason I work so hard to be a good healing companion for my wife, since our ‘fortunes’ are inextricably linked to each other’s, and her ‘win’ will be mine, too.

    But as for empowerment. I often thought about the categorical difference between my older sister being raped in her 20’s and my wife’s experience of being molested as a 2-year old and her childhood growing up with emotionally distant and at times abusive parents. My sister quickly moved thru the healing process as she fought to get back to healthy and a few years later she was speaking to other women about her experience and how she had healed.

    But my wife? When we first started our journey together, she told me repeatedly that she didn’t even know what ‘healthy’ looked like. She had no goal to fight for like my sister because she had never known what it was in the first place. On top of that, we spent 5 years of continuous extreme states, where she was literally, constantly overwhelmed, and I had to be there with her ‘in the emotional hurricane waters”…holding her up from drowning, being the calm in her storm. I was her lifeguard, her ‘savior,’ in a very real sense…until I got her stabilized, and we moved out of that phase.

    15 years later she is in a much different place and I rarely have to ‘rescue’ her and yet I still have to help her heal in a way that my sister never needed. It’s been a struggle for me so that I don’t infringe upon her agency in any way, and yet be willing to provide her the support and help that she needs as she still is moving toward the goal of becoming healthy…having never experienced it.

    And so each person’s experience of suicide ideation, depression or any other mental distress and what each needs to heal from it and move past it will depend on their own history. Empowerment can feel overwhelming and almost like the same abandonment s/he experienced during childhood to someone who has never known ‘healthy’ like my wife until s/he has healed and stabilized enough. That doesn’t give the helper license to transgress someone’s agency, but it does mean basing the help and depth of involvement according to the needs of the sufferer and realizing much more help may be needed at the start of the healing journey.
    Sam

  3. The prevalence of anxiety and depression can be easily explained if one is not promoting psychiatry and its toxic drugs and brutal treatment of those who come under its power.

    Our society(and of course, many families) is full of events that anyone would be anxious and depressed about. But it works better for those who run our society to keep people in line and prevent them from doing something about these events. Thus, the cult of psychiatry and its lies help our oppressive “leaders” to stay in power. Are you poor? Have you been sexually abused as a child? Worst of all, as I was, have you been under the power of psychiatry since you were a child? Of course you feel anxious and depressed.

    I have a wonderful new friend, fifty years younger than me, who was almost literally born under the power of psychiatry. And so we have a lot in common. She is really an admirable person, intelligent, ethical, helpful and nurturing toward other people, and a young woman of many talents. I love her, and it is heartbreaking for me to see all the self-blame and lack of self respect she has, that I instantly recognize as the result of what the psychiatrists did to her.. I have had fifty more years than she to heal from psychiatry, but how can one heal from a childhood under the power of a “helping profession” that spends so much of that power telling you over and over that you’re a subhuman mental case?

  4. I want to look for any update on CA Governor Gavin Newsom’s attempt to target the homeless and create mental health courts, and to have forced mental health procedures.

    March 3rd:
    https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/03/03/governor-newsom-launches-new-plan-to-help-californians-struggling-with-mental-health-challenges-homelessness/

    12 hours ago:
    https://www.highlandernews.org/84173/californias-mental-health-bill-for-youth-is-too-little-too-late/

    ^ Says that what Newsom proposes is not enough, but they still seem to support the idea of Mental Health.

    4/13:
    In governor’s race, challengers attack Newsom’s record on homelessness

    Two of Newsom’s most vocal challengers — Republican state Sen. Brian Dahle of Bieber in Lassen County and Bay Area energy and homeless policy activist Michael Shellenberger, a Democrat turned independent.

    They have accused the governor of being beholden to the failed housing and homelessness policies of the far left. While ideologically different, both men are calling for a crackdown on homeless encampments and greater incentives for drug users and the mentally ill to receive treatment when provided housing.

    March 22:
    Newsom’s new push for homeless mental health treatment lacks details. That has some worried
    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-03-22/newsom-homeless-plan-court-ordered-treatment

    ^^
    All of this does seem predicated on the idea that the homeless are a pitiful lot who best be herded into internment camps and the concepts of drug addiction and mental illness are central to this.

    Joshua

  5. “Newsom’s administration believes that 7,000 to 12,000 people could qualify for the court-ordered care, a fraction of the estimated 161,000 people experiencing homelessness in California. Those who would qualify are characterized by experts as the hardest to reach and most difficult to treat, largely because they have a variety of complex needs and are often hesitant to trust government intervention.”

    March 22
    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-03-22/newsom-homeless-plan-court-ordered-treatment

    Holy Shit!

    https://www.chhs.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/CARE-Court-Stakeholder-Slides-20220314.pdf

    This stuff looks like Frank Jordan’s Martix Plan, from when former police chief Frank Jordan got elected mayor of San Francisco. His Matrix was just more cops, criminalizing homelessness.

    And then when Newsom got elected mayor his first act was an initiative Care Not Cash, making it so that the homeless were not eligible to receive the full GA allotment.

    Joshua

  6. I just heard on NPR that a new panel on the mental health of children is conveying (headed by a (psychiatrist?) from Georgetown U. The working recommendation is that all children over 8 be screened for anxiety, and all 12 year olds for depression, so as to get them the mental health care “they need” ASAP. This 60 second report acknowledged the pandemics affect on children’s mental health, as well as the increase in the percentage of children affected (of which I missed). Well…perhaps the first recommendation from this panel will be the type of psychotherapy Miranda received in 1975? If not, 2050 should be, to cynically borrow from Ted’s wise post, a real boom for psychiatry.

  7. “But stigma, it’s said, prevents them from getting help.” Well, there’s something to be said for avoiding being defamed with a so called “life long, incurable, genetic illness” – especially since none of the DSM disorders is even a valid diagnosis.

    http://psychrights.org/2013/130429NIMHTransformingDiagnosis.htm

    “anxiety disorders and depression are not exactly ‘chemical imbalances’ but malfunctions in how our body reacts to emotions, ‘no different from being attacked by a virus or an allergen.’ This seems to imply our efforts in debunking the fraud of the ‘chemical imbalance’ theory have possibly made some progress. And if the “mental illnesses” are ‘no different from being attacked by a virus or an allergen,’ that would imply the “mental health” industry may have gotten rid of their “genetic” theory of etiology?

    “JLY’s third message is that anxiety and depression aren’t just a dangerous ‘real medical condition’ but an incurable one.” Yet they’ve maintained the “incurable” aspect of their DSM disorders, despite the fact that “viruses” don’t tend to cause “life long, incurable” illnesses?

    “I’m concerned about the inaccuracies and omissions that reveal the filmmakers’ lack of awareness of recent research and social movements.” Indeed, by chance were the filmmakers funded by big Pharma, the APA, and/or NAMI?

    “In my experience, episodes of anxiety and depression dwindle in the face of hope and empowerment.” I agree, but all the current “medical model” has to offer is “life long, incurable,” “invalid,” “mental illnesses” and forced neurotoxic poisonings … which rob individuals of hope and empowerment.

    Honestly, it is past time to stop blaming “a broken brain,” and actually admit to the scientific fraud of the “medical model” and the DSM stigmatizations. And, let’s be realistic, coerced and forced drugging people is the epitome of stealing one’s power and rights.

    “Human rights” and “forced treatment” are mutually exclusive concepts. So if the “mental health professions” ever want to claim to be about “human rights,” their “right” to force “treat” people needs to end.

  8. Jean, what Gavin Newsom is trying to do is just like Frank Jordan’s Matrix Plan, except for maybe the fact that it can put a roof over people’s heads. So Gavin’s plan is much more expensive.

    But that roof is a room in a Mental Health Internment Camp. What Gavin is trying to do is what Donald Trump tried to do after he came to San Francisco.

    Joshua

  9. Opposition mounts against Newsom’s plan for court-ordered treatment of homeless people

    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-19/homeless-advocates-lash-out-at-newsom-homeless-plan-court-ordered-treatment

    Calif. lawmakers rollout Newsom’s homeless mental illness court plan

    https://sjvsun.com/california/calif-lawmakers-rollout-newsoms-homeless-mental-illness-court-plan/

    California’s New CARE Court Is Justice Option for People Addicted, Mentally Ill

    https://sacobserver.com/2022/04/californias-new-care-court-is-justice-option-for-people-addicted-mentally-ill/

    Gov. Gavin Newsom Discusses Mental Health Court Plan In Napa Visit

    https://www.einnews.com/pr_news/566589725/gov-gavin-newsom-discusses-mental-health-court-plan-in-napa-visit

    Joshua

  10. Miranda, thank you for sharing a part of your story and for your thoughtful review and critique of the film Just Like You. My heart aches every time I hear someone on the news talk about the “teen mental health” crisis, and they act like problems with anxiety and depression come out of nowhere. There’s always a reason why someone becomes anxious or feels depressed and instead of offering compassion, careful listening, and support, our society tells people there is something wrong with their brains. At the rate this “brain disease” is sweeping across our country, it’s a wonder anyone is surviving.

    I experienced a traumatic event when I was a young teen and managed to push my way through the dense fog of depression and anxiety and move on with my life. As a teen, I would hear been devastated if a doctor had told me there was something wrong with my brain.

    Thanks for your continuing advocacy for kids and families and for your insightful and thoughtful writing.

  11. Yeah, Gavin’s plan has got Republicans calling for Mental Health. Gavin is a dangerous man.

    https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article260557137.html

    “The letter references Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposal to fund “CARE Courts” to move thousands of mentally ill and addicted people into mandatory treatment plans, but says it doesn’t go far enough.”

    “Success of Gavin Newsom’s plan to tackle severe mental illness could hinge on California’s housing efforts”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Gavin-Newsom-homeless-care-court-17084367.php

    Joshua

  12. Opposition mounts against Newsom’s plan for court-ordered treatment of homeless people
    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-19/homeless-advocates-lash-out-at-newsom-homeless-plan-court-ordered-treatment


    More than three dozen organizations and individuals, including the American Civil Liberties Union, Disability Rights California and the Western Center on Law and Poverty, signed an April 12 opposition letter raising serious concerns with Assembly Bill 2830, one of two nearly identical measures moving through the Legislature to implement Newsom’s Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment Court. The groups often have significant sway among liberal legislative Democrats, the kind of influence that could hinder Newsom’s hopes for a new law to be in place by July 1.


    Cynthia Castillo, a policy advocate for the Western Center on Law and Poverty, said Newsom’s plan “seems to be expanding the bureaucracy of homelessness services.”
    “We are adding judges and attorneys into the mix in hopes of better connecting unhoused individuals with housing and medical care, but nothing else really changes,” she said.
    Castillo said the anti-poverty group will remain opposed to the CARE Court framework unless lawmakers address the concerns outlined in the letter, especially the plan’s failure to address access to housing and its insistence on empowering judges to mandate care.
    “We vehemently oppose the proposal because it has this coercive court process implemented, and no right to housing,” Castillo said.
    AB 2830 was originally scheduled to be heard this week by the Assembly Judiciary Committee, but the hearing is now set for next week, similar to plans for its companion measure, Senate Bill 1338.

    4/25
    California mental health court won’t help homeless, advocates say. ‘This idea is broken’

    https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article260398172.html

    The policy is moving through the Legislature in the form of two bills — Assembly Bill 2830 from Assemblyman Richard Bloom, D-Santa Monica, and Senate Bill 1338 from Sen. Susan Eggman, D-Stockton, and Sen. Thomas Umberg, D-Santa Ana.

    AB-2830 The Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Court Program.(2021-2022)

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830

    SB-1338 Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Court Program.(2021-2022)
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338
    Introduced by Senators Umberg and Eggman


    The bill is getting push-back from disability rights advocates, who say CARE Court forces treatment on mentally ill people with little regard for their civil rights. They also argue it wastes money that would be better spent on public education, early intervention and programming that doesn’t involve coercion. “We are neglected throughout the whole process, up until the point our condition is so severe that we can’t control it and we start doing things like breaking the law,” said John Vanover, legislative committee chair for the Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance of California. “And at that point, now, the governor wants to step in and make us criminals. So fundamentally, this idea is broken, just from that.”


    HOW WOULD CARE COURT WORK? CARE Court would effectively create a new wing of the civil court system in all 58 of California’s counties that would allow a judge to order a mental “care plan” for those dealing with severe untreated mental illness. The program would apply to everyone who meets the criteria, but Newsom has repeatedly referenced it as a tool to help the homeless population. A person qualifies for CARE Court if they’re at least 18, diagnosed with “schizophrenia spectrum or other psychotic disorder,” are not receiving treatment, and lack “medical decision-making capacity,” according to SB 1338. California was home to nearly 162,000 homeless people in 2020, according to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development data. Nearly 38,000 people from that population — about 23% — were considered “severely mentally ill.”


    Disability rights advocates say the CARE Court system won’t help the homeless in the way Newsom wants. They also argue it perpetuates stigmas around mental illness and does little to help those suffering. A group of organizations — including Disability Rights California and the California Association of Mental Health Peer Run Organizations — wrote a letter to the Assembly judiciary committee considering AB 2830 that says CARE Court is “antithetical to recovery principles, which are based on self-determination and self-direction.”


    Instead, the letter urges a housing-first approach that guarantees a place to live and investment in “intensive voluntary outpatient treatment.” That approach, the authors say, has better outcomes than involuntary treatment. The letter also points out that those who qualify for CARE Court are supposed to be incapable of making medical decisions. However, someone found to be in need of a care plan is also meant to participate in developing and adhering to it. “If an individual lacks medical decision-making capacity, why are they not being served in the LPS system or Laura’s Law?” asked Matt Gallagher, assistant director of Cal Voices. “Why do we need to create a new $1 billion system in all California counties, when these individuals presumably meet the criteria to be served in other existing systems?” In addition, Vanover, from the Depression and Bipolar Alliance, said that linking homelessness and mental illness is not helpful and perpetuates stereotypes. He wants to see early intervention to help people with mental illnesses stabilize before they need CARE Court, as well as public education to help people better understand those who are struggling.


    “That’s the gross stigma that is involved in this legislation and the governor’s messaging — stigma that says all homeless are mentally ill, and, therefore, mental illness is responsible for homelessness,” Vanover said. “And stigma that says mentally ill are criminals. We are statistically way more likely to be victims of violent crime than perpetrators.”


    NEWSOM’S OFFICE SAYS CARE COURT IS NEEDED California needs an entirely new way to help care for those suffering from psychosis, as current systems aren’t sufficient, said Elliott, Newsom’s senior counselor. CARE Court provides a way for those people to remain in the community while receiving mental health treatment, Elliott said. He disagreed with assertions that CARE Court represents involuntary treatment.

    Joshua

  13. So continuing to track Gavin’s proposal and to identify the people who are behind it:

    Assembly Bill 2830 from Assemblyman Richard Bloom, D-Santa Monica, and Senate Bill 1338 from Sen. Susan Eggman, D-Stockton, and Sen. Thomas Umberg, D-Santa Ana

    HRW Opposition to CARE Court, California AB 2830
    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/04/12/hrw-opposition-care-court-california-ab-2830

    Assembly Member Mark Stone
    Chair, Judiciary Committee
    California State Assembly

    https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/media_2022/04/HRW%20Opposition%20%28CARE%29%20Court%20AB%202830.pdf

    Richard Bloom
    https://a50.asmdc.org/

    https://a50.asmdc.org/press-releases/20220407-assemblymember-richard-bloom-releases-statement-ab-2830-bloom-community

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/04/12/hrw-opposition-care-court-california-sb-1338

    Senator Tom Umberg
    Senator Susan Talamantes Eggman
    California State Senate

    Joshua

  14. https://calmatters.org/legislator-tracker/home/?gclid=CjwKCAjwsJ6TBhAIEiwAfl4TWKJ_Vw_-bDT3bVRw-S3WHYoW4e7-SIS0KXd_e-hwlV6WDTbE8Gj62RoC9WAQAvD_BwE

    CA Legislative Info
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billSearchClient.xhtml

    ^ maybe this only lists bills which have already passed?

    This is the State Assembly
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/

    This is the Judiciary Committee
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/

    says to look here for bills
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/

    AB2830, right here
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830

    okay, so 4.22 there was a hearing and it was cancelled at the request of the author
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830

    status:
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billStatusClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830

    and here is SB1338
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Says it is set for hearing April 26
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Status, and it says it is in the Senate Judiciary Committee
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billStatusClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    CA State Senate
    https://www.senate.ca.gov/

    So this is the Senate Judiciary Committee
    https://sjud.senate.ca.gov/

    Senator Thomas J. Umberg (Chair)
    Senator Andreas Borgeas (Vice Chair)
    Senator Anna M. Caballero
    Senator María Elena Durazo
    Senator Lena A. Gonzalez
    Senator Robert M. Hertzberg
    Senator Brian W. Jones
    Senator John Laird
    Senator Henry I. Stern
    Senator Bob Wieckowski
    Senator Scott D. Wiener

    Hearings
    https://sjud.senate.ca.gov/content/2022-bill-hearings

    Yes, April 26, it lists SB1338
    https://sjud.senate.ca.gov/content/april-26-2022-hearing

    41 page PDF, I guess written by the Chair and Co-sponsor Umberg
    https://sjud.senate.ca.gov/sites/sjud.senate.ca.gov/files/sb_1338_eggman_sjud_analysis.pdf

    here, 6 hours ago. Looks like we only get one free view perday
    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-26/newsom-care-court-homelessness-plan-faces-new-questions-before-first-hearing

    here:
    California Governor Gavin Newsom Convenes Growing Coalition in Support of CARE Court
    https://goldrushcam.com/sierrasuntimes/index.php/news/local-news/38162-california-governor-gavin-newsom-convenes-growing-coalition-in-support-of-care-court

    It comes across that this is mainly gov’t employees behind this. No different from Newsom’s hysterical COVID response.

    Joshua

  15. More resistance to Gavin’s Psychiatric Internment Camp Plan

    DISABILITY, CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS SAY FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED REGARDING ‘CARE COURT’ PROPOSAL

    https://www.aclusocal.org/en/press-releases/disability-civil-rights-groups-say-fundamental-questions-must-be-answered-regarding

    Newsom’s ‘CARE Court’ homelessness plan faces new questions before first hearing
    https://www.einnews.com/pr_news/570058972/newsom-s-care-court-homelessness-plan-faces-new-questions-before-first-hearing

    Joshua

  16. News update after today’s CA Senate Committee Hearing, people talked about their experiences with the mental health system.

    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-26/newsom-care-court-homelessness-plan-faces-new-questions-before-first-hearing

    That is not going far enough though, not a outright condemnation of the mental health system.

    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-26/newsom-care-court-homelessness-plan-faces-new-questions-before-first-hearing

    Joshua

  17. have to give these guys an email address to be able to read for free. I did not.
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/newsoms-court-ordered-care-for-homeless-advances_4431433.html

    From Newsom’s Office
    Governor Newsom’s CARE Court Proposal Cleared First Legislative Hurdle with Broad Support
    https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/04/27/governor-newsoms-care-court-proposal-cleared-first-legislative-hurdle-with-broad-support/

    Governor Newsom Convenes Growing Coalition in Support of CARE Court
    https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/04/25/governor-newsom-convenes-growing-coalition-in-support-of-care-court/

    CARE Court
    https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/04/27/governor-newsoms-care-court-proposal-cleared-first-legislative-hurdle-with-broad-support/

    4/27
    Newsom’s CARE Court framework clears first hurdle but skeptics linger
    https://www.kpvi.com/news/national_news/newsoms-care-court-framework-clears-first-hurdle-but-skeptics-linger/article_06389a67-303c-51d4-a6ea-d05f79a96b31.html

    4/15
    Extended Interview: Dr. Ghaly discusses CARE Court
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9iF8hUi1d4

    This situation is bleak. Newsom makes all Liberals look like Fascists, and he makes all Democrats look like Idiots.

    Joshua

  18. It is important that those subject to this Care Court System be educated that they must remain silent and refuse to cooperate in any way at all. And since this is tied to some free housing plan, it is going to be hard to get people to stand up for themselves.

    These type of housing plans are always anti-chambers for the mental health system, and the primary function of the mental health system is to convince people that they are “mentally ill”.

    We must drop Gavin. From his COVID Gaslighting and Grandstanding he has been trying to turn CA into a 40 million bed mental hospital.

    Joshua

  19. Trying to find the CA State Senate Judiciary Committe Vote Count. Seems like they are very slow to update. And I compare with other bills, and it does not make sense. I want to know who vote and how so I know who to further focus on as this continues to unfold.

    More news:

    Disability Rights Opposition to Gavin’s Care Courts:

    https://www.disabilityrightsca.org/latest-news/disability-rights-california-coalitions-letter-in-opposition-to-care-court

    and just yesterday:
    https://www.disabilityrightsca.org/press-release/disability-civil-rights-groups-say-fundamental-questions-must-be-answered-regarding

    Joshua

  20. Lawmakers move CARE Court proposal forward to next committee, has video
    https://fox40.com/inside-california-politics/lawmakers-to-decide-whether-care-court-moves-forward/

    Fox, has video
    https://fox40.com/inside-california-politics/lawmakers-to-decide-whether-care-court-moves-forward/

    Newsom’s Care Court, Santa Cruz Paper, but need to give email to be able to read it
    https://lookout.co/santacruz/civic-life/story/2022-04-26/homelessness-newsoms-care-court-homelessness-plan-faces-new-questions-before-first-hearing

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HEALTH. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 26). Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    State Senate Health Committee, seems to have goin at 3pm 4/27
    https://shea.senate.ca.gov/

    Senator Richard Pan (Chair)
    Senator Melissa A. Melendez (Vice Chair)
    Senator Susan Talamantes Eggman (one of the two sponsors of this SB1338)
    Senator Lena A. Gonzalez
    Senator Shannon Grove
    Senator Melissa Hurtado
    Senator Connie M. Leyva
    Senator Monique Limón
    Senator Richard D. Roth
    Senator Susan Rubio
    Senator Scott D. Wiener

    This is from Newsom’s office. Can’t find any other record. Seems to be all coming out behind the curve.

    Governor Newsom’s CARE Court Proposal Cleared First Legislative Hurdle with Broad Support
    https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/04/27/governor-newsoms-care-court-proposal-cleared-first-legislative-hurdle-with-broad-support/

    Seems that these two committees were both rigged, unanimous votes. The supporters are all gov’t employees, This was pretty much how it was with Gavin’s COVID hysteria too.

    Here:
    State Senate Committee Votes On Homeless Mental Health Bill
    https://www.ksro.com/2022/04/27/state-senate-committee-votes-on-homeless-mental-health-bill/

    The reason that we have this Mental Health Industry and the Autism – Aspergers Industry is because we live in a society of advanced industrial and information technology, and so to uphold the Work Ethic and to keep the securities and real estate ponzi schemes going, we have to designate some of the population as scapegoats and pubic symbols and put them into medical internment camps.

    The alternative would just be to have Universal Basic Income, Public Housing, and Medicare for All.

    Joshua

  21. Thanks Miranda.

    CA Senate Judiciary Members
    Senator Thomas J. Umberg (Chair and Care Court Bill co-author)
    Senator Andreas Borgeas (Vice Chair)
    Senator Anna M. Caballero
    Senator María Elena Durazo
    Senator Lena A. Gonzalez
    Senator Robert M. Hertzberg
    Senator Brian W. Jones
    Senator John Laird
    Senator Henry I. Stern
    Senator Bob Wieckowski
    Senator Scott D. Wiener

    CA Senate Health Members
    Senator Richard Pan (Chair)
    Senator Melissa A. Melendez (Vice Chair)
    Senator Susan Talamantes Eggman (one of the co-authors of this SB1338)
    Senator Lena A. Gonzalez
    Senator Shannon Grove
    Senator Melissa Hurtado
    Senator Connie M. Leyva
    Senator Monique Limón
    Senator Richard D. Roth
    Senator Susan Rubio
    Senator Scott D. Wiener

    Dated 4/28 it says now:
    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 27). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    So I guess it goes to a third committee now. The first two committees passed it unanimously, and these have bipartisan membership. To me this sees rigged. There was much testimony against it, but no one voted against it, and on one tried to amend it.

    It was first scheduled for the State Assembly Judiciary Committee, but the bill’s author pulled it, letting it go to these Senate ones first. Curious.

    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/

    Members
    Senator Anthony J. Portantino (Chair)
    Senator Patricia C. Bates (Vice Chair)
    Senator Steven Bradford
    Senator Brian W. Jones
    Senator Sydney Kamlager
    Senator John Laird
    Senator Bob Wieckowski

    Looks like May 2nd is the next hearing, and this pdf doesn’t list SB1338
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/sites/sapro.senate.ca.gov/files/Agenda%205-2-22%20Hearing.pdf

    I’m not finding any new news about it.

    Joshua

  22. okay I just found this 4/28 video. This is the newest news I could find.

    Care Court: Gov. Newsom’s plan for care courts as one solution for homelessness faces challenges
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKcI_9T1wpA

    This video makes it sound like passage is not a done deal, and that if it passes it will be amended.

    As I look at it though, it got through the first two State Senate Committees by unanimous votes.

    I am not a fan or Republicans at all. But I also see the importance of having some organized opposition. During the worst of the COVID hysteria, one newspaper was saying that California had become a Parliamentary System. That is, the Chief Executive is also the leader of his party in the legislature. I see Gavin’s plan as getting through the first two Senate committees by unanimous vote as demonstrating that.

    So there are 31 Democrats and 9 Republicans. Going through 2 committees and slated for a 3rd, that could commit enough senators to guarantee passage.

    If people start amending it, that could give some cover for changing their vote.

    Current Bill Status, SB1338

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    set for May 9th hearing, a week from Monday

    CA Senate Committees
    https://www.senate.ca.gov/committees

    Appropriations
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/

    Senator Anthony J. Portantino (Chair)
    Senator Patricia C. Bates (Vice Chair)
    Senator Steven Bradford
    Senator Brian W. Jones
    Senator Sydney Kamlager
    Senator John Laird
    Senator Bob Wieckowski

    They don’t show the schedule yet for May 9th. IMHO, all of this official reporting is running too far behind the curve.

    Joshua

  23. Current Bill Status, SB1338
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Says set for May 9th in State Senate Appropriations Committee

    They say they will post the May 9th Agenda on May 6th.

    Looks like we get one free LA Times view per day. This article title is the best I have seen yet, a letter to the editor. May 2nd.

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/story/2022-05-02/care-courts-homeless-autonomy


    To the editor: As a worker in the mental health field and incoming therapist, I am beyond horrified at the “CARE Court” proposal. (“Newsom’s ‘CARE Court’ homelessness plan faces new questions from lawmakers,” April 26)

    It blatantly ignores scientific evidence on the causes of homelessness as well as best practices in therapy. Not only that, but it amplifies the potential effects of medication, something that is not always effective nor a universal panacea. It also assumes that somehow people can be forced to get “better.”

    It would be far better and more effective to combat the causes of homelessness rather than the symptoms. The root cause is nearly always trauma related. For suggestions on how to handle this, I recommend Dr. Gabor Maté’s work, particularly “In The Realm of Hungry Ghosts.”

    The CARE Court proposal will not help anything. It will create more work for the courts, create trauma for many, and make those who actually could benefit from the supports offered far less likely to seek them.

    I urge state leaders not to take people’s autonomy from them in the name of helping them.

    [ Gabor Mate’s book is really good, Holocaust Survivor ]

    Opposition mounts as Newsom’s mental health care overhaul clears first hurdles, May 2nd
    https://www.record-bee.com/2022/05/02/opposition-mounts-as-newsoms-mental-health-care-overhaul-clears-first-hurdles/

    Governor Gavin Newsom, right, confers with California Health & Human Services secretary Dr. Mark Ghaly before a media event announcing the CARE Court program, Thursday, March 3, 2022, in San Jose, Calif.


    But supporters argue some people will never accept desperately needed assistance without a court’s intervention.


    The alternative is to say, ‘you know what, I’m going to let you live under a bridge because I want to respect your autonomy,’” said the bill’s co-author, Sen. Thomas Umberg, D-Santa Ana. “I’m going to let you languish under a bridge in your own feces and I hope you make the right decisions.”


    “People are fed up and they want something done,” said Mike Herald, director of policy advocacy for the Western Center on Law & Poverty, which opposes the bill. “It’s just that what we’re proposing to do is highly unlikely to work.”


    If SB 1338 is approved, people with severe mental illness could be referred to CARE Court by family members, first responders, county mental health officials, hospitals or clinicians. The court would then order a clinical evaluation of the patient. If a judge decides they are eligible for the program, the patient would be ordered to work with a trained “supporter” to develop a care plan. Participants, who would be represented by a public defender, would be required to follow a plan for their mental health and substance abuse treatment, medication and housing.

    To make this work, the state would have to come up with new funding for the courts, public defenders and “supporters.”

    Care plans would last one year, and could be extended for an additional year. If a participant does not comply, they could be placed in a more restrictive conservatorship in a locked facility, or jail if they have a pending criminal case. But participants cannot be forcibly medicated or jailed solely for noncompliance.

    It’s estimated between 7,000 and 12,000 Californians would be eligible.

    The National Alliance on Mental Illness, the California Medical Association and California’s Big City Mayors — led by Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf — all support CARE Court. But the ACLU and other opponents argue it won’t give people what they need most — housing. Though the bill says participants should be offered a housing plan, it doesn’t hold anyone accountable for actually providing that housing.

    Newsom has big plans to get rid of California’s homeless camps. Will they work?
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/01/20/newsom-has-big-plans-to-get-rid-of-californias-homeless-camps-will-they-work/

    His Oakland neighbors tried to save Kenyon Graham. But the system was too broken
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/17/his-neighbors-tried-to-save-him-but-the-system-was-too-broken/

    Homicide victim in Oakland’s Temescal district is identified
    Police are still trying to determine a motive and have not made any arrests yet
    https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2021/12/16/homicide-victim-in-oaklands-temescal-district-is-identified/

    This Kenyon Graham was a product of the Mental Health System.

    Joshua

  24. Gavin started talking about a Police State with his COVID response.  He said there was going to be “an army of 10,000 contact tracers”, and that he was going to do “targeted testing into marginalized population groups”.  Well that is a Police State right there, and this was always the real danger in COVID.  Gavin was taking his cues from Fauci, but Fauci’s experience was with AIDS.  AIDS does not transmit by casual contact, it has a long incubation period which could be over a year, and it has an extremely high mortality rate.  On all three of these points, it is the exact opposite with COVID.  So what Gavin was saying was just grandstanding and muscle flexing.  But there was in it a threat of really harming people’s lives.  Gavin was fostering superstitious irrational fear, and prejudice.

    And the COVID precautions hit the lowest income people the hardest, and this is why it put more people into encampments.

    This concept of Mental Health is just a way of taking someone’s liberty away without due process and when they have broken no law.  It also attacks one of the most basic principles in our system of justice, the Right to Remain Silent.

    Anyone who is living on the street has at some point had their life shattered.  How this happened, or when, will vary.  And many have been so beaten down that they do not know.  But trying to force them to talk will always be very harmful.  For most, privacy is the only thing in this world they have left.  Trying to make people talk is another version of what is known as Second Rape.  And usually the idea that someone is “Mentally Ill” has started within the family.

    Looks like we get one free LA Times view per day. This May 2 letter to them is the most succinct analysis I have seen.

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/story/2022-05-02/care-courts-homeless-autonomy


    To the editor: As a worker in the mental health field and incoming therapist, I am beyond horrified at the “CARE Court” proposal. (“Newsom’s ‘CARE Court’ homelessness plan faces new questions from lawmakers,” April 26)

    It blatantly ignores scientific evidence on the causes of homelessness as well as best practices in therapy. Not only that, but it amplifies the potential effects of medication, something that is not always effective nor a universal panacea. It also assumes that somehow people can be forced to get “better.”

    It would be far better and more effective to combat the causes of homelessness rather than the symptoms. The root cause is nearly always trauma related. For suggestions on how to handle this, I recommend Dr. Gabor Maté’s work, particularly “In The Realm of Hungry Ghosts.”

    The CARE Court proposal will not help anything. It will create more work for the courts, create trauma for many, and make those who actually could benefit from the supports offered far less likely to seek them.

    I urge state leaders not to take people’s autonomy from them in the name of helping them.

    [ Gabor Mate’s book is really good, Holocaust Survivor ]

    Gavin is targeting the homeless right now, but once such scapegoating starts, it knows know bounds.
    https://www.amazon.com/Pink-Triangle-Nazi-Against-Homosexuals/dp/0805006001

    Joshua

  25. Sacramento
    City Mayors Address Unhoused ‘Fiscal Cliff’
    https://sacobserver.com/2022/05/city-mayors-address-unhoused-fiscal-cliff/


    Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, and other mayors of the Big City Mayors coalition, call on Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state legislature to approve $3 billion over three years in the state budget for flexible homeless funding to go directly to the cities, during a news conference in Sacramento, Calif., Monday, April 25, 2022. The mayor’s said flexible homeless funding is approved annually and are asking for a three-year commitment from lawmakers and the governor.

    Current Bill Status, SB1338
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Set for May 9th, but schedule not published yet
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/node/59

    Joshua

  26. Raising money for education by selling CA lottery tickets always was a scam. Focus groups were held and that looked like the combination the voters would most likely go for. But the net increase in education funding has always been zero, because right off Governor Pete Wilson started raiding the money out the back door.

    The budgeting in CA has long been really tough because of 3 strikes and other mandatory minimum prison laws, and because of Jarvis-Gann, separating property prices from property taxes. We incarcerate a greater percentage of our people than any other state, and that costs money. And then Jarvis-Gann has led to wild real estate inflation, while gutting tax revenue. Property taxes are actually a better way to fund the government than income tax, because it can be more progressive and it is much harder to evade, and it is more stable.

    Ideas about raising money for homeless needs by gambling are equally suspect. And there should never be any kind of mental health programs. So these proposals are a gimmick, running in the confusion generated by Gavin.

    What we need are Universal Basic Income and a Strong Public Housing Offering. Universal programs taking the place of needs tested programs.

    Thanks Miranda

    SB1338, Gavin’s Care Courts, current status unchanged, Appropriations Committee hearing postponed.
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    So here is the May 9 schedule for the CA Senate Appropriations Committee, and SB1338 is absent from it, as expected. They do not say when the next hearing will be, or what is instore for SB1338, or why its hearing was postponed.
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/sites/sapro.senate.ca.gov/files/Agenda%205-9-22%20Hearing.pdf

    News

    20 hours ago
    HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS
    Bill Would Put Homeless Courts Near Where The Unhoused Live
    https://laist.com/news/housing-homelessness/bill-would-put-homeless-courts-near-where-the-unhoused-live

    AB-2220 Homeless Courts Pilot Program
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2220

    https://calmatters.org/legislator-tracker/al-muratsuchi-1964/

    I had not heard of this AB2220 bill before. It has not yet passed and it still seems highly suspect, criminalizing homelessness in order to get people under court authority.

    And most of these programs to house the homeless are already internment camps and are designed to funnel people into the mental health system.

    AB2220 was re-referred to the Assembly Committee, but it is not here on the list for Wed May, 11.
    https://apro.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    I think that with Democratic super majorities in both houses they probably just keep everything tabled until they decide there is something they are ready to proceed with, as this avoids open debate.

    So I am not seeing any more recent news on Gavin’s SB1338

    Joshua

  27. So here is more about this AB2220
    https://openstates.org/ca/bills/20212022/AB2220/

    https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB2220/2021

    Here is the first news I have found on AB2220
    Board of Supervisors Support Muratsuchi Homeless Court Legislation


    “Homeless courts in Los Angeles County have been successful in helping the homeless,” said Assemblymember Muratsuchi, the lead author of AB 2220. “Rather than criminalizing poverty and mental illness, homeless courts provide pretrial diversion programs for minor criminal offenses with one-stop, wraparound services like housing assistance, mental health treatment and addiction treatment. The California Supreme Court Chief Justice’s Work Group on Homelessness recommends more homeless court programs. The Governor and Legislature should support this bill to establish a grant pilot program administered by the Judicial Council to provide funding for more homeless courts throughout the state.”

    What the Assembly Member does not tell you is that he is getting people into court by issuing citations for minor things, and then forcing them into services, which are already designed to funnel people into the mental health system.


    A bill sponsored by Torrance Democrat Al Muratsuchi, AB 2220, would create a homeless courts pilot program, offering grants to counties that can tailor programs to their own communities. Outdoor court in Sacramento in August may be less appealing than a spring beach day in Los Angeles County.

    None of this sounds good at all. And of course if anyone tries to resist, then they are of course ~Mentally Ill~.

    This started when Donald Trump came to San Francisco and started talking about internment camps, and that was when Gavin Newsom started talking about involuntary psychiatric procedures. This AB2220 is just another angel on the whole thing.

    Joshua

  28. The first objective of the mental health system is to make people believe that there is such a thing as Mental Illness, and then to make people believe that they have it.

    These homeless housing and support services already try to do that and to funnel people into mental health and on to drugs.

    The test for whether one should be on drugs is whether or not they are angry or agitated.

    Joshua

  29. This is worst than I had thought. It isn’t just Gavin.

    Al Muratsuchi

    April 22, 2021
    The Lookout: Cal Bill Aims to End Homelessness; Make Housing a Basic Human Right
    https://lasentinel.net/the-lookout-cal-bill-aims-to-end-homelessness-make-housing-a-basic-human-right.html

    Assembly Bill (AB) 1372

    would “require every city, or every county in the case of unincorporated areas, to provide every person who is homeless, as defined, with temporary shelter, mental health treatment, resources for job placement, and job training — until the person obtains permanent housing, if the person has actively sought temporary shelter in the jurisdiction for at least three consecutive days and has been unable to gain entry into all temporary shelters they sought for specified reasons,” according to the language of the bill.

    So this is Muratsuchi’s earlier bill. It still is clearly using court authority and criminal enforcement to put the homeless into some kind of case management and to break down their privacy, and to put them into internment camps, where mental health is a central component.

    AB2220, not passed yet, but being implemented:
    https://www.redding.com/story/news/2022/05/06/southern-california-beach-city-took-its-homeless-court-outside-near-food-donation-centers-and-attend/9675344002/

    This is an attempt to force people into these housing programs which may be very disruptive to their on going affairs of life because of the location. And it all seems intended to break down people’s privacy, which is a way to delegitimate them and to make them vulnerable to the mental health system.

    SB1338
    no more recent news

    Joshua

  30. Current Bill Status

    CA SB1338 Care Courts
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338
    says set for hearing Set for hearing May 16, Appropriations Committee
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/node/59
    doesn’t actually list May 16 schedule yet

    AB2830 Care Courts Companion Bill
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830
    04/26/22 In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

    AB2220 Homeless Courts, Al Muratsuchi
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2220
    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 1.) (April 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    Most recent news:

    Letter to California Senate Appropriations Committee
    Human Rights Watch’s Opposition to CARE Court (SB 1338)
    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/05/05/letter-california-senate-appropriations-committee#


    CARE Court Denies Due Process

    The CARE Court proposal authorizes family members, first responders, including police officers or outreach workers, the public guardian, service providers, and the director of the county behavioral health agency, to initiate the process of imposing involuntary treatment by filing a petition with the court.[21] These expansive categories of people with the power to embroil another person in court processes and potential loss of autonomy, many of whom lack any expertise in recognition and treatment of mental health conditions, reveals the extreme danger of abuse inherent in this proposal. For example, interpersonal conflicts between family members could result in abusive parents, children, spouses, and siblings using the referral process to expose their relatives to court hearings and potential coerced treatment, housing, and medication.

    Law enforcement and outreach workers would have a new tool to threaten unhoused people with referral to the court to pressure them to move from a given area. These state actors could place those who disobeyed their commands into the CARE Court process and under the control of courts. Given the long history of law enforcement using its authority to drive unhoused people from public spaces, a practice that re-traumatizes those people and does nothing to solve homelessness, it is dangerous to provide them with additional powers to do so.[22]

    The legislation does not set meaningful standards to guide judicial discretion and does not delineate procedures for those decisions.[23] It establishes a contradictory and unworkable procedure by which a petition may be made on an allegation that a person “lacks medical decision making capacity”[24] On a mere showing of “prima facie” evidence that the petition is true, the person is then required to enter into settlement discussions with the county behavioral health agency.[25] If someone lacks decision-making capacity, they would not be able to enter a settlement agreement voluntarily. Unless the parties stipulate otherwise, failure to enter a settlement agreement results in an evaluation by that same behavioral health agency, which is used to impose a mandatory, court-ordered course of treatment.[26] This process is entirely involuntary and coercive. The role of the behavioral health agency poses a great potential for conflicts of interest, as they will presumably be funded to carry out the Care Plans that result from their negotiations and their evaluations.

    The CARE Court plan threatens to create a separate legal track for people perceived to have mental health conditions, without adequate process, negatively implicating basic rights.[27] Even with stronger judicial procedures and required clinical diagnoses by mental health professionals, this program would remain objectionable because it expands the ability of the state to coerce people into involuntary treatment.

    CARE Court will harm Black, brown, and Unhoused people

    The CARE Court directly targets unhoused people to be placed under court-ordered treatment, thus denying their rights and self-determination. Governor Newsom, in pitching this plan, called it a response to seeing homeless encampments throughout the state of California.[28] CARE Court will empower police and homeless outreach workers to refer people to the courts and allow judges to order them into treatment against their will, including medication plans. Despite allusions to “housing plans,” CARE Court does not increase access to permanent supportive housing and, indeed, the bill prohibits the court from requiring the county to provide actual housing.[29]

    Due to a long history of racial discrimination in housing, employment, access to health care, policing and the criminal legal system, Black and brown people have much higher rates of homelessness than their overall share of the population.[30] The CARE Court plan in no way addresses the conditions that have led to these high rates of homelessness in Black and brown communities. Instead, it proposes a system of state control over individuals that will compound the harms of homelessness.

    Further, much research shows that mental health professionals diagnose Black and Latino populations at much higher rates than they do white people.[31] One meta-analysis of over 50 separate studies found that Black people are diagnosed with schizophrenia at a rate nearly 2.5 times greater than white people.[32] A 2014 review of empirical literature on the subject found that Black people were diagnosed with psychotic disorders three to four times more frequently than white people.[33] This review found large disparities for Latino people as well. CARE Court may place a disproportionate number of Black and Latino people under involuntary court control.

    AB2220, the other attempt to criminalize homelessness and make the homeless submit to social services and shelter programs.
    https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2022/05/06/southern-california-beach-city-took-its-homeless-court-outside-near-food-donation-centers-and-attend/9675344002/

    Joshua

  31. Current Bill Status

    CA SB1338 Gavin’s Care Courts
    Set for Appropriations Committee Hearing May 16
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/node/59
    May 16th schedule not to be posted until May 13th

    AB2830 Gavin’s Care Courts Companion Bill
    Looks to have been tabled on April 26
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830

    AB2220 Homeless Courts Pilot Program, Al Muratsuchi
    Seems to have been pending in Assembly Appropriations Since April 26
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2220

    https://apro.assembly.ca.gov/

    today’s hearing
    https://apro.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    AB2220 not listed

    Recent News

    repeat of AB2220 news in Desert Sun
    https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2022/05/06/southern-california-beach-city-took-its-homeless-court-outside-near-food-donation-centers-and-attend/9675344002/?utm_source=ourcommunitynow&utm_medium=web

    May 9th
    Can CARE Court curb CA’s homelessness and mental health crises?
    https://www.kcrw.com/news/shows/greater-la/homelessness-criminal-justice/care-courts

    Of course what they think is indicative of mental illness will just be someone who refuses to discuss their affairs with a therapist and listen to lectures on self-reliance and forgiveness. And indicative of severe mental illness and warranting forced treatment will be someone who refuses to listen to their doctor at all and to take their meds

    Joshua

  32. Current Status

    SB1338, Gavin’s Care Courts
    set for May 16th, Appropriations Committee

    May 16th hearing announced, but no schedule yet
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/node/59

    AB2830, Gavin’s companion bill, tabled for now.
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830

    AB2220 Homeless Courts Pilot Program. Tabled for now
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2220

    Homeless Courts Pilot Program.
    A.B.No. 2220 Muratsuch
    https://apro.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    They don’t seem to have a specific schedule. So I cannot guarantee from the above that it is tabled.

    Can’t find any more recent news

    Joshua

  33. SB1338 set for appropriations committee hearing May 16.

    Senate appropriations committee has suspense hearing May 19. Don’t know that that means.

    AB2830, tabled since 4/26
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2830

    AB-2220 Homeless Courts Pilot Program
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2220

    says ” In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to suspense file.”

    I think that means the Appropriations Committee, but I don’t know what the suspense file is.

    Assembly Appropriations, nothing today
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/todaysevents

    Yesterday “Board of Supervisors Support Muratsuchi Homeless Court Legislation”
    https://www.randomlengthsnews.com/archives/2022/05/11/homeless-courts/39421?v=7516fd43adaa


    The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, led by Supervisor Janice Hahn and Chair Holly Mitchell, May 3, threw their support behind AB 2220, legislation that would provide state funding for local Homeless Court programs. Homeless courts, like those that already exist in Redondo Beach and Long Beach and will soon be launched in Torrance, are proving effective in helping the hardest-to-reach individuals get connected with services and housing.

    http://file.lacounty.gov/SDSInter/bos/supdocs/168613.pdf?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term=

    They are just using the concept of Mental Health and the associated idea of moral defect to criminalize a group of people that is already vulnerable and to take away their autonomy and bread down what little dignity they may have left.

    Joshua

  34. Current Status:
    SB1338 set for appropriations committee hearing May 16.

    SB 1338 Umberg Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Court
    Program.

    Schedule shown for the first time ^

    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/sites/sapro.senate.ca.gov/files/Agenda 5-16-22 Hearing.pdf

    May 19, 2022 – Suspense Hearing, schedule to be posted May 18. Don’t know what Suspense Hearing means.

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    AB2380 still tabled. AB2220 set for suspense file ( does this mean they are maybe suspending it, and does this mean that Gavin’s bills are taking its place? )

    More recent news:

    Washington Post
    Forcing homeless people into treatment can backfire. What about a firm nudge?
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/05/11/care-courts-california-homeless-coercion/

    ^ this has a 9min audio, but seems to be just a reading of the article text.


    The state has an astonishing 160,000 unhoused people. In Los Angeles, an estimated 20 percent of them have a formal diagnosis of serious mental illness, and the county jail claims the dubious distinction of being the country’s largest de facto psychiatric facility. In San Francisco, homeless deaths last year more than doubled — mostly because of overdoses. In response to the crisis and voters’ restlessness on the issue, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) proposed in March tackling the problem with a sweeping new plan involving something called Care Courts that could push people with psychosis into treatment.

    .
    .
    .

    One side sees the homelessness problem largely as a result of civil rights protections that make it too difficult to force treatment on people who desperately need it; the other asserts that there simply aren’t enough care and housing resources available and that the argument about “excessive” civil rights is at best a distraction.

    [ This is stupid article. The authorities always want to cast poverty and homelessness as mental health issues, and they always want to keep the homeless doped, especially the women. It makes it easier for cops when they have to deal with them.

    There are civil rights voices in this, but there are no anti-psychiatry voices.

    And the people behind this just want the streets cleared, they want the homeless in internment camps. And of course mental illness will always mean someone who refuses the internment camp. And severe mental illness will always mean someone who defends and upholds their privacy and refuses to take their meds.]

  35. We do have this May 14th news:

    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-05-14/newsom-new-california-budget-offers-little-on-costs-for-court-ordered-homeless-help

    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-04-26/newsom-care-court-homelessness-plan-faces-new-questions-before-first-hearing

    https://www.capradio.org/articles/2022/05/13/newsom-california-budget-proposal-may-2022/

    ‘We have to do more.’ Newsom wants $65 million to set up California mental health courts
    Shows someone who has been beaten into submission and compliance.

    San Jose wins $25 million to turn downtown hotel into homeless housing
    And Newsom wants to ramp up statewide funding for homeless housing
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/05/11/san-jose-wins-25-million-to-turn-downtown-hotel-into-homeless-housing/

    Joshua

  36. So SB1338 says now:

    “May 16 hearing: Placed on APPR suspense file.”

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Now as to what that actually means:

    Their hearing results document does not seem to list 1338

    Suspense hearing will be on the 19th, and they don’t allow public comment. The schedule should be up on the 18th. But what does Suspense really mean?


    What is Suspense?
    The Suspense File process has been a part of the Committee Rules since the mid-1980s as a way to consider the fiscal impacts to the state of legislation as a whole. The committee analysis indicates whether a bill’s fiscal impacts meet the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

    Bills that meet the Committee’s Suspense threshold will be placed on the Suspense File after testimony is taken at a regular-order hearing. A vote-only Suspense Hearing will be held prior to the deadlines for fiscal committees to hear and report bills to the Senate Floor. Bills will either move on to the Senate Floor for further consideration or be in held in committee and under submission.

    Not sure if this is really new, but it is the most recent I can find:

    A dramatic new idea for addressing homelessness | Vince Bzdek
    https://gazette.com/mental-health-crisis/a-dramatic-new-idea-for-addressing-homelessness-vince-bzdek/article_778e5c4c-d24f-11ec-a250-8b1601887332.html


    Newsom’s plan is to create an entirely new legal process to compel the mentally ill into treatment.

    The idea, known as Care Courts, would be to create a new branch within the civil court system where those suffering from severe mental illness and substance abuse disorders could be brought before a judge. Rather than face forced commitment or imprisonment, they would receive a treatment plan and be a appointed a “Supporter” to oversee their care.

    This is simply a way of breaking down people’s privacy and autonomy. For someone who is surviving abuses it is Second Rape.

    Things like this are already going on in Colorado.

    Joshua

  37. Says SB1338 is set for hearing May 19th. I assume this means APPR Suspense.

    Nothing says how the committee senators voted to make this happen.

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    State Senate Appropiations
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/

    This 10 page PDF is the schedule for Wed May 19th Suspense Hearing, and 1338 is on it.
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/sites/sapro.senate.ca.gov/files/Agenda%205-19-22%20Suspense%20Author.pdf

    Not sure what is likely to happen. It is a very long list. Are they looking for when they feel they are clear to allocate the money, looking at all the other things on the list? No public hearing.

    More Recent News?
    Can’t find any.

    Joshua

  38. Don’t know about this guy:

    Michael Shellenberger’s number one issue: Homelessness, housing and the drug crisis. He’s hoping that even as a long-shot candidate, by running on these issues he’ll be able to break through.

    https://news.yahoo.com/meet-san-fransicko-author-hoping-201651055.html

    https://secure.shellenbergerforgovernor.com/list/ad/donation1/?InitiativeKey=LOWFBSNJJI7S&utm_source=Google&utm_medium=CPD&utm_campaign=search-D&gclid=EAIaIQobChMItfnr84rq9wIVKwytBh29MAxAEAAYASAAEgLiPvD_BwE

    Michael Shellenberger’s narrative of California homelessness is seductive. It’s also dangerous
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Michael-Shellenberger-s-narrative-of-California-17172493.php


    Shellenberger’s agenda is downright menacing.


    As governor, Shellenberger would create an agency he calls “Cal-Psych,” a bizarre Big Brother-style structure of mass institutionalization run by the state whose mission would be to round up the unhoused and coerce them into a system of shelters and “treatment.”

    And people who don’t want to enter his benevolent Cal-Psych program? They can go straight to jail.

    DOES NOT SOUND GOOD!

    Joshua

  39. Michael Shellenberger’s ideas are exteme. But in essence they are the same as what Newsom is trying to do. Newsom just seems to have some more procedural red tape.

    MIA should be educating the entire society against the Mental Health System.

    Joshua

  40. This is the official Care Court web site:
    https://www.chhs.ca.gov/care-court/

    SB1338, set for hearing 19th, but no further info yet
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Senate APPR
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/

    SB1338 is on this 10 page list.
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/sites/sapro.senate.ca.gov/files/Agenda%205-19-22%20Suspense%20Author.pdf

    Recent News yesterday:

    Forced treatment provision of California mental health initiative draws support from patient families

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/forced-treatment-provision-of-california-mental-health-initiative-draws-support-from-patient-families/ar-AAXoGgP

    “Disability rights groups say that’s a violation of civil liberty. But some family members of the severely mentally ill say it may be the only way for them to survive.”

    has interesting TV news video

    In my observation the idea that someone is “Mentally Ill” is usually coming from the family, even if it were not spoken or if there were never any white coats involved. Some adults had so internalized this they they were primed for the shrinks.

    Joshua

  41. Disability Rights California’s Response to Governor Newsom’s Framework for CARE Courts
    https://www.disabilityrightsca.org/latest-news/disability-rights-californias-response-to-governor-newsoms-framework-for-care-courts

    And an hour and 25 min town hall meeting video:
    https://www.disabilityrightsca.org/post/disability-rights-california-town-hall-on-governor-newsoms-framework-for-care-courts-in

    Gavin is just trying to use the Mental Health System to enforce laws, because the laws have become otherwise unenforceable.

    Joshua

  42. CA SB1338
    So it says:

    “From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (May 19).”

    and then the last entry says:

    “Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.”

    I don’t know that that really means, and when it is supposed to be happening.

    IMHO, one problem with this is that so many State Senators have committed themselves to this in these committee, that it is very hard to block.

    But if it is getting amended that means there is some dissent, and it could give people cover for changing their position.

    Amendment history:

    AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 19, 2022
    AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 07, 2022
    AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 16, 2022

    We should have a plan in place for opposing this, and for resisting it should it pass. Most of the time the psychiatric system runs because most of its victims cooperate with it.

    And this CARE COURT plan is just a means of using the psychiatric system because their being so many unhoused people, people with little to lose, that many laws have become unenforceable. This is a blatant attempt to use Psychiatric Procedures and Courts, to modify people’s behavior and to make them compliant.

    Recent News?

    Gavin Newsom’s CARE Court plan for mentally ill is controversial — and long overdue

    Read more at: https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article261620232.html#storylink=cpy

    https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article261620232.html

    This has a 19min video, but warning, Gavin is infuriating to listen to. It was like this with his daily COVID briefings.

    THEY ARE TRYING TO TURN THE POVERTY AND HOMELESSNESS CREATED BY ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, INTO A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE.

    Here is an interesting article:

    Helping mentally ill people: The debate over ‘involuntary treatment’

    https://capitolweekly.net/helping-mentally-ill-people-the-debate-over-involuntary-treatment/

    Lamentable that this author supports involuntary treatment.

    Joshua

  43. CA SB1338
    “Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.”
    This means the Appropriations Committee. Still not sure where it stands or what the amendment means. Previously it had zero cosponsors. Now it has a whole bunch.
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    has the voting history
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVotesClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    analysis
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    So here their are the 4 versions
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVersionsCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    sponsorship:

    Introduced by Senators Umberg and Eggman
    (Coauthors: Senators Allen, Archuleta, Caballero, Cortese, Dodd, Hertzberg, Newman, Portantino, Stern, and Wiener)
    (Coauthors: Assembly Members Gipson, Irwin, O’Donnell, Petrie-Norris, and Villapudua)

    February 18, 2022

    Comparsison showing most recent modification
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVersionsCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338&cversion=20210SB133897AMD

    I don’t feel pleased with this, or qualified to fully analyze it.

    Need to look to the human rights groups.

    Opinion: Gavin Newsom’s CARE Court plan for mentally ill is controversial — and long overdue
    https://www.einnews.com/pr_news/573342363/opinion-gavin-newsom-s-care-court-plan-for-mentally-ill-is-controversial-and-long-overdue

    Very negative that this has gotten this far, and with the number of Senate Co-Sponsors, it seems like it is impossible to stop it.

    Need to start organizing resistance, Safe Houses, Underground Railroad, and Legal. Need to prepare people for how to stand up to this.

    Advanced industrial and information technology has made an economy of gross surplus and the middle-class family creates scapegoats, and so you have a huge number of people on the margins. So many are unhoused and so large areas of the law have become unenforceable, so they are turning homelessness into a ~mental illness~.

    Joshua

  44. CA SB1338
    still says
    “Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    from March 7, still the same
    https://www.disabilityrightsca.org/latest-news/disability-rights-californias-response-to-governor-newsoms-framework-for-care-courts

    AAPR
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/

    Says, “No Hearings Currently Scheduled”

    So I don’t really know what to expect.

    Joshua

  45. ^ So I find on the full senate’s schedule for SB 1338

    “May 19
    From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (May 19). Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.”

    I still don’t really know what that means.

    Of Recent News:

    ‘NIMBYism is destroying the state.’ Gavin Newsom ups pressure on cities to build more housing
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/newsom-housing-17188515.php

    This isn’t going to end homelessness, but perhaps it is a shift away from the mental health perspective. But the danger of Gavin is not over yet.

    This candidate is challenging Gavin Newsom in California — and he has Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson’s support
    https://www.deseret.com/2022/5/20/23100404/michael-shellenberger-california-governor-candidate-gavin-newsom-culture-wars-tucker-rogan

    Seems to be it for now.

    Joshua

  46. SB1338, not it says:
    “05/23/22 Read second time. Ordered to third reading.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    I still don’t really understand what this means.

    Appropriations, still nothing scheduled.
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/

    Version history

    Recent News:

    a curious case, but it seems specific
    https://www.manisteenews.com/news/article/Freed-California-siblings-feared-opposing-rundown-17188261.php

    Calif. ‘CARE Courts’ Spark Concerns Over Forced Treatment
    https://www.law360.com/articles/1487625/calif-care-courts-spark-concerns-over-forced-treatment


    On the other side, CARE courts are opposed by more 50 advocacy organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union California Action, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, the California Psychological Association, Disability Rights Advocates, Human Rights Watch, Mental Health America of California, the National Homelessness Law Center, Psychologists for Social Responsibility and the Racial and Ethnic Mental Health Disparities Coalition.


    “The [CARE court] process is you either enter into an agreement to have the treatment that we want you to have, or the judge will order you to do the treatment that we want you to have, so it’s coerced care, and that’s highly problematic from a civil and human rights perspective,” Raphling said.

    “The [CARE court] process is you either enter into an agreement to have the treatment that we want you to have, or the judge will order you to do the treatment that we want you to have, so it’s coerced care, and that’s highly problematic from a civil and human rights perspective,” Raphling said.


    Kevin Baker, director of government relations at ACLU California Action, said in a recent interview with Law360 that the CARE court plan is also flawed because people who are homeless and severely mentally ill are unlikely to come to court to respond to a petition against them.

    “This model assumes that the person who needs services is sort of the bad guy who needs to get hauled into court,” Baker said.


    Shonique Williams, a statewide organizer for Dignity and Power Now, a Los Angeles-based grassroots organization that advocates for people who are incarcerated and their families, said she experienced firsthand how Black people are misdiagnosed with severe mental illness by behavioral health specialists.

    Williams, now 30, said that when she was 15 she was misdiagnosed with bipolar disorder after her best friend was murdered, even though she was experiencing normal grief and loss at the time.

    According to Williams, her best friend was the only person she confided to about family abuse, and after her friend was murdered, she became depressed and attempted suicide. She was hospitalized for her suicide attempt.


    Mental health advocates say a better alternative to CARE courts would be more affordable housing and voluntary, community-based mental health services.

    According to a 2001 study conducted by the RAND Institute and commissioned by the California Senate Committee on Rules, court-ordered treatment in itself is not more effective than voluntary treatment. Instead, an outpatient treatment program’s success is determined by its resources and ability to deliver services.

    Gallagher said that California will not be able to build out its voluntary mental health services if the state keeps funneling funding into involuntary treatment programs.

    “There will never be enough services to meet the need in the voluntary sphere as long as we continue to divert voluntary funds away from that,” he said.

    Joshua

  47. SB1338 history
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Nothing scheduled for appropriations.
    https://sapro.senate.ca.gov/

    Recent News:

    this is 5 days ago, but still interesting. Looks like we get one free LA Times read per day

    “Given a chance to avoid jail and criminal charges, mentally ill, addicted and homeless people in L.A. pass”
    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-05-20/given-chance-to-avoid-jail-and-criminal-charges-mentally-ill-addicted-and-homeless-people-in-l-a-pass

    It looks to me like the only reason for Gavin’s Care Courts is to be able to force people into these programs via court authority. And then of course “Severe Mental Illness” will always mean anyone who refuses to submit.

    Joshua

  48. Now the history says
    “Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 38. Noes 0.) Ordered to the Assembly.’
    I guess this means it has passed the State Senate
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Our local government always tries to turn poverty and homelessness into mental health issues, so that they can further subjugate people.

    Resistance needs to be organized, Underground Railroad, Safe Houses, and strategies to resist the authorities f2f. And of course the problem is compounded because some of the targets will go along with all of this.

    Recent News:
    California Senate Votes to Support CARE Court, as Leading State Business Organizations Join Expanding Coalition
    https://tdpelmedia.com/california-senate-votes-to-support-care-court-as-leading-state-business-organizations-join-expanding-coalition


    Prior to today’s affirmative Senate floor vote, the CARE Court bill – SB 1338 by Senators Tom Umberg and Susan Eggman – passed the Senate Appropriations committee in a 7-0 vote last week. This means that CARE Court has been considered by three separate committees and has passed every single one without any opposing votes, and has now cleared the Senate with bipartisan support.

    Joshua

  49. This is Saturday. It still says
    “In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Recent News
    we still have these:

    Op-Ed: ‘CARE Court’ is no solution for unhoused people in California
    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-05-27/care-court-california-mental-illness-homeless-treatment

    Opinion: Can Newsom’s ‘Care Courts’ actually help?
    https://www.sfexaminer.com/the_fs/forum/opinion-can-newsom-s-care-courts-actually-help/article_da59890f-818a-512c-8efc-dcf13f13921c.html

    Joshua

  50. “05/26/22 In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    this was 3 days ago, I think the reporting is too slow:
    https://www.oc-breeze.com/2022/05/27/213692_umberg-eggman-care-court-legislation-passes-senate/

    Newest News:
    https://www.latimes.com/california/newsletter/2022-05-31/california-has-billions-why-is-homelessness-still-a-problem-essential-california

    “The state government’s surplus is expected to balloon to $97.5 billion by next summer under the budget plan recently unveiled by Gov. Gavin Newsom. “No other state in American history has ever experienced a surplus as large as this,” Newsom said at a news conference.”

    Joshua

  51. Still says,
    “05/26/22 In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.”

    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    I interpret this as meaning it is for now, tabled. But for how long? Tabled forever means until the end of the year’s legislative session. After that, if anyone wants to revive it, they need to submit a new one.

    But as of now I fear that this tabling could evaporate at any moment.

    Recent News
    Without funding, governor’s CARE Court plan is just an empty gesture
    https://calmatters.org/commentary/2022/06/without-funding-governors-care-court-plan-is-just-an-empty-gesture/

    ( this whole thing is just Gavin’s Grandstanding, but it would still be extremely dangerous for many people.)

    Business groups get behind Newsom’s plan for behavioral health care for homeless people
    https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2022/06/01/care-court-calchamber-newsom-homeless.html

    (when Gavin was elected Mayor of San Francisco he out spent his Green Party Opposition, Matt Gonzalez, 11 to 1. But it was still a close election. The Business Community just decided that they wanted Gavin. This today seems to be more of the same)

    Joshua

  52. Now it says, “06/02/22 Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HEALTH.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    These committees should take public testimony.

    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/

    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/

    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/

    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    I’m not seeing this on the schedule for either yet.

    Recent News

    this is old news, but it was just published yesterday
    https://www.theriverbanknews.com/news/proposed-care-court-legislation-passes-senate/

    Joshua

  53. Still says:
    “06/02/22 Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HEALTH.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Does not show in schedule for either committee

    Recent News:

    THis was written 3 days ago by State Assembly Member Marie Waldron. Probably the highest ranking Republican.
    https://ad75.asmrc.org/
    https://timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2022/06/04/there-are-proven-solutions-to-homelessness-california-must-consider-them/

    She also references these two:

    https://saintjohnsprogram.org/

    https://solutionsforchange.org/

    Yeah, the stuff Waldron is endorsing are for those who want to live by the rules. Gavin’t stuff is just internment camps, and that is why it gets into mental health.

    Waldron is not directly opposing the mental health and care courts dimension.

    More Recent News? Can’t find any, and today is election day.

    I don’t agree with this guy, but I still like to be able to respond to the other side’s arguments.

    https://www.amazon.com/San-Fransicko-Progressives-Ruin-Cities/dp/B08V3DV718/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2296EP9UVCNMY&keywords=Michael+Shellenberger&qid=1654630214&s=books&sprefix=michael+shellenberger%2Cstripbooks%2C108&sr=1-1

    Joshua

  54. still says the same.

    Marie Waldron
    Waldron is serving as the minority leader emeritus of the California State Assembly. Waldron is a Republican member of California State Assembly from District 75, encompassing parts of inland northern San Diego and southwestern Riverside counties.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Waldron

    https://www.marieforcalifornia.com/

    https://www.marieforcalifornia.com/issues

    I look at her because she is a high ranking State Republican, and because of her article seeming to oppose Newsom’s Care Courts:

    https://timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2022/06/04/there-are-proven-solutions-to-homelessness-california-must-consider-them/

    The programs which she supports require sobriety first. And probably the government cannot subsidize things like that. So those programs are only for those who want to live by a set of rules.

    But as such, there is no Psychiatric Policing or Internment Camp dimension to them. They probably don’t house that many of the homeless, and they probably don’t cost that much either. That is just the way it goes.

    Gavin is on a power and ego trip. And he is completely reckless in what he is trying to do, having no sense of the consequences, and it was exactly like this in his COVID response.

    Joshua

  55. SB1338, still says
    “06/02/22 Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HEALTH.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Recent News:
    Gimme Shelter Pod Casts, but now new episodes
    https://soundcloud.com/matt-levin-4

    California’s mental health ‘Warm Line’ faces uncertain future
    https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/california-s-mental-health-warm-line-faces-uncertain-future/article_8f6eac6e-e1ee-11ec-82cd-f7fd49d335d5.html

    Mental Health Awareness: Here’s a list of resources in NorCal
    https://www.kcra.com/article/mental-health-resources-northern-california-counties/39863911

    Probably the election has frozen things up for a while.

    Joshua

  56. CA SB 1338
    Still Says “06/02/22 Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HEALTH.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    6/14 Health Committee Agenda, SB 1338 is not on it.
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/sites/ahea.assembly.ca.gov/files/June%2014%202022%20Agenda.pdf

    Here, Judiciary Committee for June 21
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Bicyclists Riding to Promote Mental Health System and Recovery
    https://abc30.com/tour-de-recovery-cyclists-mental-health-travel-600-miles-california/11938954/

    Here is a 24min audio from 2018, Most Violence is not Caused by Mental Illness.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/08/podcasts/the-daily/most-violence-is-not-caused-by-mental-illness-from-the-archive.html

    Joshua

  57. Still Says, “06/02/22 Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HEALTH.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Judiciary Committee
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Slated for June 21

    Health Committee
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    looking out to June 28th, still not on schedule.

    Recent News:
    an endorsement of care courts, its really just a move towards containment of the poor and unhoused.

    In hand now
    https://www.amazon.com/San-Fransicko-Progressives-Ruin-Cities/dp/0063093626

    A bigger book than I expected, but it seems to be the same idea. And Gavin Newsom, with the spine of a jellyfish, he goes along with it.

    Joshua

  58. So SB1338 status remains the same. Set for State Assembly Juidicary Commitee June 21st.

    But they have changed it so that this is a special order of business set to go first, at 10:30am

    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Recent News and Commentary:
    LA Progressive
    Unhoused Deserve Permanent Housing, with Voluntary, Dignified Care
    Why we vehemently oppose the Governor Newsom’s “CARE Court” proposal — and so should you.
    EVE GARROW AND KATH ROGERS16 HOURS AGO

    https://www.laprogressive.com/political-issues/unhoused-deserve-permanent-housing

    Excellent Article!

    Joshua

  59. The ACLU argument make a lot of sense. It is rather like the David Smail argument. Not remembering his exact words I try to explain it myself, that what looks like mental illness is just the results of a compromise social and civil stanidng.

    So their example of the guy unhoused and in his motorhome is subject to stress.

    He has been taught to see this as Bipolar Disorder.

    Joshua

  60. Continuing:

    He has been taught to see this as Bipolar Disorder. But there is no medical or moral remedy needed. Instead what is important is to see how this social status degradation came to be. His response to that delegitimation is completely rational.

    And so the worst will be courts and involuntary mental health procedures. The best is stable housing and whatever voluntary services are needed.

    People who try to live in motor vehicles are a great risk. They are not that reliable, and they are subject to all kinds of laws. So most of the time people cannot keep them working and compliant. Most of the time their up keep is beyond the resources of most people, without being able to park them lawfully off of the street at some times, and having reserve funds for towing and all. So all of this creates great stress.

    And then being unhoused always creates social delegitimation and this is the kind of extreme stress which David Smail is referring too. I think in their letter the ACLU has picked up on this very well.

    From my vantage point I can say that the authorities always try to keep the homeless drugged, and even more so the women. It is not coercive, unless they get taken in on a psychiatric hold. Most of the time it is a sell job. Chemical mood alterants bought on the street are bad for you, but the ones you get through the doctor’s prescription pad are good for you and you owe it to society to keep taking them regularly.

    The same kind of social delegitimation which creates the illusion of mental illness happens when the poor have to deal with social service agencies and be put through ritual humiliations, like making so many employment applications per week, and going through demeaning case worker interviews.

    And then I would say that I don’t think people need voluntary mental health services or psychotherapy. But these people believe that they need these things, so then in effect they do need them, or they believe they need them. So until the come to see otherwise, they really do need them.

    And of Michael Shellenberger
    https://www.amazon.com/San-Fransicko-Progressives-Ruin-Cities/dp/0063093626

    This is a stupid book. Everything wrong is because of Benjamin Spock. Well a lot of people do believe things like that. But it is not everyone.

    Problem now is that Gavin is reinforcing these Republican views just so he can lever off of them.

    Joshua

  61. So looking at the CA 6/7 Primary results, Gavin came out the highest, followed the leading Republican challenger, Brian Dahle. Dahle is a credible candidate, but he has no chance.

    Michael Shellenberger got 4%, and not in run off. So ballot wise he is not a factor. So Gavin is pretty much guaranteed to win. I have never said that it would be possible to stop him from being re-elected, or that that was ever my objective.

    Even though I was infuriated day after day by Gavin and his COVID response, I stayed silent in the recall because the Governor will still have many appointments to make, and Gavin does make good appointments because he knows how to follow orders. I would not want his seat to go to a Republican, and recall elections draw a different kind of voter than do regular elections.

    What I want is for Gavin to resign, as there will be another recall campaign if he does not.

    Lt. Governor Eleni Kounalakis (D incumbent and a Newsom appointee) is clearly going to win the election, and that is just fine with me.

    So SB 1338 status remains the same.

    Set to go as a Special Order of Business in the Assembly Judiciary Committee at 10:30am June 21.
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Recent News:
    Human Rights Watch’s Opposition to CARE Court (SB 1338)
    Letter to California State Assembly Judiciary Committee
    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/06/14/human-rights-watchs-opposition-care-court-sb-1338

    a pro-care courts opinion
    The real solution to homelessness is the CARE Court proposal: Acquanetta Warren
    https://www.pasadenastarnews.com/2022/06/12/the-real-solution-to-homelessness-is-the-care-court-proposal-acquanetta-warren/

    I strongly disagree with Michael Shellenberger’s book, but it still makes for fascinating reading. It gets back into the history, like Gavin’s Care Not Cash initiative, making it so the homeless could no longer receive the full GA allotment.

    And it gets back to Dan White’s assassination of Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk. And Shellenberger ties it to a progressive take over, which is not how I have ever seen it.

    I can see now that the homeless are the biggest issue in CA’s politics, and a lot of that is because of the COVID response and economic crash, unhousing a lot more people. The real danger in COVID was in the hysteria and superstitious fear that was being released. And Gavin was saying that he was going to do “targeted testing into marginalized population groups.” That COVID hysteria would be used against marginalized groups was always the greatest risk. In 2020 that did not happen. But it is happening now in targeting those who got hit the worst in the COVID economic crash, the poorest of the poor, the homeless. And again, Gavin is being part of the problem!

    And Shellenberger’s main thing is to make it into a mental health issue. And it is groups like the ACLU and Human Rights Watch which are the most adamantly against this. And then Gavin is really trying to carry out Shellenberger’s plan, though just presenting it in a softer way.

    There is a huge amount of public support for this idea of mental health, and for involuntary treatment, and against the homeless.

    Joshua

  62. The NGO’s try to provide housing, but they know they can only house but a few. So they only accept those that seriously want to play by their rules, and that means clean and sober.

    But Gavin, with public coffers and a big boost from CA progressive income tax and the rich doing well with COVID, he says he can house everyone. But this is why his plan centers around mental health, and coercive mental health.

    Joshua

  63. So SB1338 still slated for 10:30 am June 21, State Assembly Judiciary Committee
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Recent News:
    6/16
    The Lookout: Five Bills Addressing Homelessness Moving Through California’s Legislature
    https://sacobserver.com/2022/06/the-lookout-five-bills-addressing-homelessness-moving-through-californias-legislature/

    Del Norte Supervisors: State’s Proposed CARE Court Mental Health Framework Onerous for Rural Communities
    https://wildrivers.lostcoastoutpost.com/2022/jun/15/del-norte-supervisors-states-proposed-care-court-m/

    June 14
    Human Rights Watch’s Opposition to CARE Court (SB 1338)
    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/06/14/human-rights-watchs-opposition-care-court-sb-1338

    Joshua

  64. So SB1338 still slated for 10:30 am June 21, State Assembly Judiciary Committee
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Recent News:
    The Democrats’ New Spokesman in the Culture Wars
    The left desperately needs someone to stand up to Republicans’ rights rollback. Is Gavin Newsom up to the task?

    Michael Shellenberger’s book is just completely wrong. But it still makes for interesting reading. He says that Thomas Insel is Gavin Newsom’s Mental Health Advisor.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_R._Insel
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/us/thomas-insel-book.html
    https://www.thomasinselmd.com/about

    ” In 2017 he co-founded Mindstrong Health, a Silicon Valley start-up building tools for people with serious mental illness. ”

    https://mindstrong.com/

    303 Bryant Street
    Mountain View, CA 94041

    How it works:
    https://mindstrong.com/how-it-works/

    Yes this does sound pretty scary. And it does sound like this what Gavin has been listening to.

    California may require labels on pot products to warn of mental health risks
    https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2022/06/17/1105494283/california-pot-warning-labels

    So thinking about how best to succinctly express this:

    NGO’s will try to house people, but they have no illusion that they could ever house everyone. So they only offer it to those who really do want to live by their rules, which means staying clean and sober. And there is no mental health component.

    Gavin, on the other hand, is eyeing the windfall tax revenues from the COVID upwards wealth siphon. So his approach is not just housing, it is internment, and this is why it is built first and foremost around courts and mental health. Trump had talked about internment camps, but Gavin is the one who actually believes that he can do it.

    We all want to see that everyone is always housed, and we need a strong public housing offering to contain private real estate gentrification. But before we can get there, broad based public understanding will have to build.

    And people have to understand how the mental health system is what enforces the dictates of capitalism, and how people are tracked into it by the family.

    Joshua

  65. Now it says something different:

    “06/16/22 From committee with author’s amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.”

    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings
    Special Order of Business 10:30am 6/21/2022

    As they have amended it, if it passes it will have to go back to the State Senate.

    This has been changed quite a bit, but not sure about what they changed this last time:
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billVersionsCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338&cversion=20210SB133895AMD

    Even the first line is ridiculous:


    Thousands of Californians are suffering from untreated schizophrenia spectrum and psychotic disorders, leading to risks to their health and safety and increased homelessness, incarceration, hospitalization, conservatorship, and premature death. These individuals, families, and communities deserve a path to care and wellness.

    Recent News and Commentary:

    a pro care courts opinion:
    https://wildrivers.lostcoastoutpost.com/2022/jun/17/sen-mcguire-endorses-care-court-mental-health-fram/

    Joshua

  66. So SB 1338 should be in the Assembly Judiciary Committee now!
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Still says
    06/16/22 From committee with author’s amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    Recent News:
    We have somethings Gavin has signed 6/20, and one of them pertains to ~mental health~
    https://tdpelmedia.com/governor-newsom-signs-legislation-6-20-22

    AB 2288 by Assemblymember Steven Choi (R-Irvine) – Advance health care directives: mental health treatment.

    LAProgressive, opposition to Care Courts
    https://www.laprogressive.com/homelessness/why-we-oppose-care-court

    June 27th Webinar
    https://aclu.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_R3tv75j9Tp26iXjojaojPQ

    $518.5 million in funding will add treatment beds for more than 1,000 people at a time in California
    https://tdpelmedia.com/518-5-million-in-funding-will-add-treatment-beds-for-more-than-1000-people-at-a-time-in-california

    MENDO AND HUMBOLDT COUNTIES GRANTED MILLIONS FOR HOUSING AND SERVICES SLATED FOR PEOPLE EXPERIENCING SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESS AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE
    https://kymkemp.com/2022/06/21/mendo-and-humboldt-counties-granted-millions-for-housing-and-services-slated-for-people-experiencing-severe-mental-illness-and-substance-abuse/

    So we don’t yet know what happened with SB1338 today in the Judiciary Committee.

    Here, we have a live video feed. It looks like they are talking about SB-1338, and Umberg, bill author and committee chair is speaking.
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/437-video

    Joshua

  67. Its actually Assembly Member Matt Hanley and some others who are talking, including this CA Health and Human Services Dr. Mark Ghaly, basically speaking for Gavin.

    What they are taking about is entire unconstitutional and illegal.

    Joshua

  68. So these are the members of the CA Assembly Judiciary Committee
    https://ajud.assembly.ca.gov/membersstaff

    I pulled the video back to the start
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/437-video

    One of the people who talked is Matt Hanley, he lives in the S.F. Tenderloin.

    Another who is doing a lot of talking is Ash Kalra, and I like what he is saying. He had been a public defender.
    https://a27.asmdc.org/

    State Senator Umberg is the author if the bill and so he is there, masked, in this assembly committee, he represents Orange County
    https://sd34.senate.ca.gov/

    Eloise Gomez Reyes, Assembly Majority Leader, is also talking and she is getting critical of it.
    https://a47.asmdc.org/

    Laurie Davies, also getting critical.
    https://ad73.asmrc.org/
    https://www.daviesforca.com/
    She looks like a Republican, she is a Republican
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurie_Davies_(politician)

    She is calling for a Pilot Program, which means that she opposed the big program presently on the table!

    Joshua

  69. With the beard and the mustache, Committee Chair Matt Stone. He is raising issues about these referals coming from families. 1:21 pm
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/437-video

    maybe the video ran out, or maybe it continues here?
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/437-video

    I mean really, that’s the way it is now. Families pawn the designated scapegoat off on the mental health system. Always been like that.

    Either that or they send them to the homeless shelter or to the street. This is what Chair Matt Stone was getting at, then the video cut off.

    Higher Education committee to start at 1:30pm

    Joshua

  70. I mean really, everyone who is homeless has family of some sort somewhere. And where did the idea that they are mentally ill start, or that they are hyperactive and should be on Ritalin, or that they are just wrong in trying to develop and apply their abilities?

    In a Taco Bell a woman who worked their expressed concern about her son, living on the street, ~mentally ill~, did the police arrest him?

    I said no, they just had a talk with him. I told here their is no such thing as mental illness. She wouldn’t go for that. Mental Illness has long been built into the family mythology.

    Joshua

  71. So now it says. And this is the first time it has gotten even a single No vote.

    “06/21/22 From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HEALTH. (Ayes 9. Noes 1.) (June 21). Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    So now it is going to the health committee

    Health Committee
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/

    Does not list on 6/28 hearing list.

    Recent News

    Gavin’s Office
    https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/06/21/governor-newsoms-care-court-proposal-moves-forward/

    6/22
    Groups Are Uniting to Oppose Landmark California Mental Health Legislation
    https://eurweb.com/2022/06/22/groups-are-uniting-to-oppose-landmark-california-mental-health-legislation/

    *Senate Bill (SB) 1338, also known as the CARE Court Program, is attracting growing resistance as it makes its way through the legislative process. Some legal advocacy and civil rights groups say the law would negatively Blacks and other minorities.

    Opponents of the legislation say, SB 1338 dangerously expands judicial power and empowers the criminal justice system to commit people to mental health treatment that is sub-par – and often against their will. There is also the potential for misdiagnosis, they warn.

    Gavin on 3/3/22
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u24waZcEWI

    Laura’s Law
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura%27s_Law#:~:text=Laura's%20Law%20is%20a%20California,behavior%20towards%20self%20or%20others.

    Disability Rights California (DRC) is also voicing its opposition to SB 1338.

    “CARE Court is antithetical to recovery principles, which are based on self-determination and self-direction,” read the DRC’s opposition letter. “The CARE Court proposal is based on the stigma and stereotypes of people living with mental health disabilities and experiencing homelessness.”

    “The right framework allows people with disabilities to retain autonomy over their own lives by providing them with meaningful and reliable access to affordable, accessible, integrated housing combined with voluntary service,” read the letter.

    The HRW expressed concern about how the program might impact personal rights.

    “In fact, the bill creates a new pathway for government officials and family members to place people under state control and take away their autonomy and liberty,” HRW warns.

    “We are leaning into conservatorships this year,” the governor said. “What’s happening on the streets and sidewalks in our state is unacceptable. I don’t want to see any more people die on the streets and call that compassion.”


    Nearly a quarter of California’s estimated 161,000 unhoused residents have a severe mental illness. They pinball among jails, emergency rooms, temporary psychiatric holds and the streets until they’re arrested for a minor crime and brought before a judge who can order them into a long-term treatment plan.

    https://www.elpasoinc.com/ca-governors-mental-health-court-plan-advances-amid-worries/article_63e3b088-29dc-53e3-95d4-bedc609db87d.html


    Newsom said his proposal allows family members, emergency dispatchers and others to refer the person for help, and preferably before the person commits a crime. He has said it’s not compassionate to let distressed people deteriorate on the streets. The goal is to get the person to voluntarily accept services and participate in their treatment, he said.

    But the legislation could result in forced treatment, which alarms civil liberties advocates. It does not guarantee housing or provide dedicated funding, and comes at a time when psychologists and other behavioral health specialists are in high demand. Critics of the legislation also say that forced treatment will fail.


    Newsom said his proposal allows family members, emergency dispatchers and others to refer the person for help, and preferably before the person commits a crime. He has said it’s not compassionate to let distressed people deteriorate on the streets. The goal is to get the person to voluntarily accept services and participate in their treatment, he said.

    But the legislation could result in forced treatment, which alarms civil liberties advocates. It does not guarantee housing or provide dedicated funding, and comes at a time when psychologists and other behavioral health specialists are in high demand. Critics of the legislation also say that forced treatment will fail.

    “In no way should there be a forced situation where you’re shoving needles into people or forcing them to take medication, that’s where you get into people who resent it and regret it and they go down a spiral of self-medication or any other number of issues,” said Eric Harris, public policy director at Disability Rights California, which opposes the bill.

    Assemblymember Ash Kalra, a Democrat from San Jose, voted against the proposal on Tuesday, agreeing with critics who say judicial courts are a scary place for unhoused people and that more money should go to the organizations already doing the hard, intensive and slow-moving work of convincing people to accept services.

    A legislative analysis provided to the Judiciary committee raised serious concerns with the proposal.

    It strongly recommended that people not be ordered into the court program until housing and services can be guaranteed and that counties not implement the program until the infrastructure is in place. Counties should not be sanctioned or fined by the state until it has resources in place and funding for voluntary, community-based programs should not be reduced to support the new program, according to the analysis.

    Okay, so this was the No vote, Ash Kalra, former Public Defender and former San Jose City Council. This is the first Democratic Opposition to Gavin and Care Courts.

    https://kdhnews.com/news/politics/ca-governors-mental-health-court-plan-advances-amid-worries/article_57b190af-7bb0-5036-950e-c1fb92ffdf48.html

    Joshua

  72. Here is the CA State Assembly Media Archives
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media-archive

    So we have
    06/21/2022 Assembly Judiciary Committee

    5 hours 12 min long
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/assembly-judiciary-committee-20220621/video

    So it looks like it is just like youtube, I can share a video link starting at a time.

    Okay so this is the beginning of SB 1338, Umberg and Mark Ghaly
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/assembly-judiciary-committee-20220621/video?time%5Bassembly-judiciary-committee-20220621%5D=8757.995603

    And Senator Thomas Umberg says he has family members there, or they are listening. Meaning family members of the afflicted of course.

    Umberg said that there is no involuntary care and that police will not arrest people who do not show up in court. I would though take this with a huge grain of salt.

    Hey, advanced industrial and information technology continues to squeeze down the jobs market. So now, we are taking those that have been forced out and putting them into the mental health system.

    And if you don’t find this scary, its just a few years ago that it was found that kids were getting psych meds in the foster care system.

    https://extras.mercurynews.com/druggedkids/

    And it was Gavin Newsom and Mark Ghaly who brought us COVID hysteria and mandatory needling for school children.

    This anti-care courts witness is pretty snappy, directing her comments to Umberg. She refutes Umberg’s statement that it is not involuntary treatment.

    Joshua

  73. I missed the name of the first witness. But the second is by telephone, Kim Peterson, attorney with Disability Rights California. She refutes Umberg’s statement that this is voluntary.

    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/assembly-judiciary-committee-20220621/video?time%5Bassembly-judiciary-committee-20220621%5D=10039.480329

    https://www.disabilityrightsca.org/latest-news/disability-rights-california-advocates-urge-assembly-judiciary-committee-to-vote-no-on

    Joshua

  74. This Richard Bloom is the author of the Assembly version of the bill. Someone who is completely pro-Mental Health, and an idiot.
    https://a50.asmdc.org/

    This BRIAN MAIENSCHEIN is a Democrat, but before 2019 he was a Republican, and he represents the San Diego area.
    Assemblymember, District 77 who will speak later is a real piece of work.

    Joshua

  75. The bill’s author, Umberg, and Gavin’s representative, Mark Ghaly, don’t even seem to know how the bill works. Seems that it puts people into conservatorship if they don’t cooperate with the court.

    All of this is in complete violation of due process and completely unconstitutional.

    3:41 in video

    Joshua

  76. Listening to them talk, it seems like there are a lot of Committee Members who want to oppose this, at least as it now stands. But only Kalra did vote against it, and he said that he would.

    Seems like there is some external pressure on them.

    Joshua

  77. So to make this player work, seems like the best way is to download the player and the video by clicking on this link to the start of the video:
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/assembly-judiciary-committee-20220621/video

    Then click on the link to get to the place you want, like this is where the Ash Kalra questions start:
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/assembly-judiciary-committee-20220621/video?time%5Bassembly-judiciary-committee-20220621%5D=12779.718974

    Kalra is the only one who voted against this, but listening to them it seems like many of hte Assemblymembers would have wanted to vote no. There must be some kind of external pressure, like the mental health system itself.

    It does seem like even the author, Thomas Umberg, and Gavin’s spokes person, Mark Ghaly, do not know what this bill really does.

    It does seem like the real intent is to get them into housing, voluntarily or not, and that that housing means psychiatric supervision. And if they don’t cooperate, they don’t get cited for illegal camping, they get put into conservatorship.

    Joshua

  78. So to make this player work, seems like the best way is to download the player and the video by clicking on this link to the start of the video, and then press play on it:
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/assembly-judiciary-committee-20220621/video

    Then you’ve just go to move it forward:
    4:22
    Brian Maienschein is really a piece of work. Republican until 2019, then a Democrat. Talks about having case workers to “make sure people take their medications”.

    What this really seems to be about is just criminalizing homelessness. They just don’t want to call it that, so they call it Mental Health.

    So once they get someone into this Care Court, then it is like they are on probation and they get housing, but it is Psychiatric Policing. Only by staying in that housing can they “Graduate from Care Court”.

    Any one unhoused will be suspected of “Extreme Mental Illness” and likely to end up in the Care Court, and on psychiatric medications.

    Joshua

  79. So, it still says:
    “06/21/22 From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HEALTH. (Ayes 9. Noes 1.) (June 21). Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.”
    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billHistoryClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB1338

    CA Assembly Health Committee
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/

    Now SB1338 is on as a 3pm Special Order of Business for Tues June 28.
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Recent News:
    California Governor’s CARE Court Proposal Moves Forward
    https://www.stl.news/california-governors-care-court-proposal-moves-forward/527333/

    Groups Uniting to Oppose Landmark California Mental Health Legislation
    Los Angeles Sentinel
    https://lasentinel.net/groups-uniting-to-oppose-landmark-california-mental-health-legislation.html


    “With broad support from California’s state Senate, CARE Court is one step closer to becoming a reality in California,” said Gov. Gavin Newsom, “I am also grateful to have the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Downtown Association, and 21 local chambers of commerce join our ever-expanding CARE Court coalition, which includes a diverse group of supporters focused on tackling the challenge of severe mental illness that too often leaves individuals on our streets without hope.”


    Disability Rights California (DRC) is also voicing its opposition to SB 1338.

    “CARE Court is antithetical to recovery principles, which are based on self-determination and self-direction,” read the DRC’s opposition letter. “The CARE Court proposal is based on the stigma and stereotypes of people living with mental health disabilities and experiencing homelessness.”

    DRC proposes an alternative solution to the problems CARE Court is attempting to address.

    “The right framework allows people with disabilities to retain autonomy over their own lives by providing them with meaningful and reliable access to affordable, accessible, integrated housing combined with voluntary service,” read the letter.

    The HRW expressed concern about how the program might impact personal rights.

    “In fact, the bill creates a new pathway for government officials and family members to place people under state control and take away their autonomy and liberty,” HRW warns.

    About a month before Umberg and Eggman introduced SB 1338, Gov. Newsom foreshadowed the bill’s arrival in his January budget proposal.

    “We are leaning into conservatorships this year,” the governor said. “What’s happening on the streets and sidewalks in our state is unacceptable. I don’t want to see any more people die on the streets and call that compassion.”

    California governor’s mental health court plan advances amid worries, KCRA
    https://www.kcra.com/article/ca-governors-mental-health-court-plan-advances/40369801#


    Assemblymember Ash Kalra, a Democrat from San Jose, voted against the proposal on Tuesday, agreeing with critics who say judicial courts are a scary place for unhoused people and that more money should go to the organizations already doing the hard, intensive and slow-moving work of convincing people to accept services.

    A legislative analysis provided to the Judiciary committee raised serious concerns with the proposal.

    Joshua

  80. Now SB1338 is on as a 3pm Special Order of Business for Tues June 28.
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Recent News:
    Human Rights Watch’s Opposition to CARE Court (SB 1338) as amended June 16, 2022
    Set for Hearing Before the CA Assembly Health Committee on June 28, 2022

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/06/24/opposition-care-court-sb-1338-amended-june-16-2022

    Groups Are Uniting to Oppose Landmark California Mental Health Legislation

    https://sacobserver.com/2022/06/groups-are-uniting-to-oppose-landmark-california-mental-health-legislation/

    It’s ironic that with over 200 years of advancing industrial technology and so much money having been put into weaponry, that at this time when we have now the ability to convert that technology and to take care of every single person better than even royalty had lived in past centuries, and where everyone could have a life of comparative leisure, that we still allow free floating real estate prices to keep the noses of most fixed to the grindstone, and that we have now come so see a large portion of the population as completely expendable and suitable for internment and psychiatric drugging.

    Mark Ghaly and Tom Umberg are presenting SB1338 before committees. But they are not being straight about what it does or how much power it gives to its courts and to others who can refer someone to the court. The homeless are already a target, and this just makes it that much worse. Ghaly and Umberg seem to want people to trust them, but there is no basis for this trust when they continually try to avoid admitting what this legislation would do. Trying to turn poverty and homelessness into mental illness is nothing new. This is why many in need of shelters and transitional housing will decline them when they are available. They recognize that they can’t put themselves into positions where they could become targets for Social Services. Ghaly and Umberg have no credibility and their deceptive role in this is shameless.

    Joshua

  81. Still SB1338 is on as a 3pm Special Order of Business for Tues June 28.
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    June 24, 2022 11:00AM EDT
    Opposition to CARE Court (SB 1338) as Amended June 16, 2022
    Set for Hearing Before the CA Assembly Health Committee on June 28, 2022

    https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/06/24/opposition-care-court-sb-1338-amended-june-16-2022

    Human Rights Watch has carefully reviewed SB 1338,[1] the amendments to SB 1338, and the proposed framework for the Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Court created by CalHHS,[2] and must respectfully voice our strong opposition. CARE Court promotes a system of involuntary, coerced treatment, enforced by an expanded judicial infrastructure, that will, in practice, simply remove unhoused people with perceived mental health conditions from the public eye without effectively addressing those mental health conditions and without meeting the urgent need for housing. We urge you to reject this bill and instead to take a more holistic, rights-respecting approach to address the lack of resources for autonomy-affirming treatment options and affordable housing.

    CARE Court proponents claim it will increase up-stream diversion from the criminal legal and conservatorship systems by allowing a wide range of actors to refer people with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders to the jurisdiction of the courts without an arrest or hospitalization. In fact, the bill creates a new pathway for government officials and family members to place people under state control and take away their autonomy and liberty.[3] It applies generally to those the bill describes as having a “schizophrenia spectrum or other psychotic disorder” and specifically targets unhoused people.[4] It seems aimed at facilitating removing unhoused people from public view without actually providing housing and services that will help to resolve homelessness. Given the racial demographics of California’s homeless population,[5] and the historic over-diagnosing of Black and Latino people with schizophrenia,[6] this plan is likely to place many, disproportionately Black and brown, people under state control.

    CARE Court is Coerced Treatment

    Proponents of the plan describe CARE Court in misleading ways as “preserving self-determination” and “self-sufficiency,” and “empower[ing].”[7] But CARE Court creates a state-imposed system of coerced, involuntary treatment. The proposed legislation authorizes judges to order a person to submit to treatment under a CARE plan.[8] That treatment may include an order to take a given medication, including anti-psychotic medications, housing, and other enumerated services.[9] Housing must be provided through a designated list of existing program that includes interim housing or shelter options that may be unacceptable to an individual and unsuited to their unique needs.[10] The CARE Court proposal does not provide additional housing and does not envision enforcement of long-term prioritization of housing for its graduates.

    A person who fails to obey the court ordered treatment plan may be referred to conservatorship, which would potentially strip that person of their legal capacity and personal autonomy, subjecting them to forcible medical treatment and medication, loss of personal liberty, and removal of power to make decisions over the conduct of their own lives.[11] Indeed, the court may use failure to comply with their court-ordered treatment as “a presumption at that hearing that the respondent needs additional intervention beyond the supports and services provided by the CARE plan” paving the way for detention and conservatorship.[12] In practical effect, the mandatory care plans are simply pathways to the even stricter system of control through conservatorship.

    This approach not only robs individuals of dignity and autonomy but is also coercive and likely ineffective.[13] Studies of coercive mental health treatment have generally not shown positive outcomes.[14] Evidence does not support the conclusion that involuntary outpatient treatment is more effective than intensive voluntary outpatient treatment and, indeed, shows that involuntary, coercive treatment is harmful.[15]

    Coerced Treatment Violates Human Rights

    Under international human rights law, all people have the right to “the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.”[16] Free and informed consent, including the right to refuse treatment, is a core element of that right to health.[17] Having a “substitute” decision-maker, including a judge, or even a “supporter,” make orders for health care can deny a person with disabilities their right to legal capacity and infringe on their personal autonomy.[18]

    The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities establishes the obligation to “holistically examine all areas of law to ensure that the right of persons with disabilities to legal capacity is not restricted on an unequal basis with others. Historically, persons with disabilities have been denied their right to legal capacity in many areas in a discriminatory manner under substitute decision-making regimes such as guardianship, conservatorship and mental health laws that permit forced treatment.”[19] The US has signed but not yet ratified this treaty, which means it is obligated to refrain from establishing policies and legislation that will undermine the object and purpose of the treaty,[20] like creating provisions that mandate long-term substitute decision-making schemes like conservatorship or court-ordered treatment plans.

    The World Health Organization has developed a new model that harmonizes mental health services and practices with international human rights law and has criticized practices promoting involuntary mental health treatments as leading to violence and abuse, rather than recovery, which should be the core basis of mental health services.[21] Recovery means different things for different people but one of its key elements is having control over one´s own mental health treatment, including the possibility of refusing treatment.

    To comport with human rights, treatment should be based on the will and preferences of the person concerned. Housing or disability status does not rob a person of their right to legal capacity or their personal autonomy. Expansive measures for imposing mental health treatment like the process envisioned by the CARE Court plan infringe on it and discriminate on the basis of disability. As discussed below they also run the risk of being abused by self-interested actors. This coerced process leading to “treatment” undermines any healing aim of the proposal.

    CARE Court Denies Due Process

    The CARE Court proposal authorizes family members, first responders, including police officers or outreach workers, the public guardian, service providers, conservators, and the director of the county behavioral health agency, to initiate the process of imposing involuntary treatment by filing a petition with the court.[22] These expansive categories of people with the power to embroil another person in court processes and potential loss of autonomy, many of whom lack any expertise in recognition and treatment of mental health conditions, reveals the extreme danger of abuse inherent in this proposal. For example, interpersonal conflicts between family members could result in abusive parents, children, spouses, and siblings using the referral process to expose their relatives to court hearings and potential coerced treatment, housing, and medication.

    Law enforcement and outreach workers would have a new tool to threaten unhoused people with referral to the court to pressure them to move from a given area. These state actors could funnel those who disobeyed their commands into the CARE Court process and potentially under the control of courts. Given the long history of law enforcement using its authority to drive unhoused people from public spaces, a practice that re-traumatizes those people and does nothing to solve homelessness, it is dangerous to provide them with additional powers to do so.[23]

    The legislation does not set meaningful standards to guide judicial discretion and does not delineate procedures for those decisions.[24] It establishes a contradictory and unworkable procedure that allows certain people diagnosed with schizophrenia or other psychotic disorders to be ordered into treatment if, among other criteria, a judge believes that they are unlikely to survive safely in the community without supervision, or that they are at risk of relapse or deterioration into grave disability or serious harm. [25] These criteria are extremely subjective and speculative and subject to bias.

    The court commences the process of engagement if a petition merely asserts facts supporting eligibility and attaches documentation of either contact or attempted contact with a behavioral health professional or of prior intensive treatment.[26] If the court finds the person meets or “likely meets the criteria,” then the court orders a hearing, which may be conducted in the person’s absence.[27] At the hearing, if the court examines the “prima facie” evidence presented by the petitioner and finds “reason to believe the facts stated in the petition appear to be true,” the person is then required to enter into negotiations with the county behavioral health agency to come up with a purportedly voluntary treatment plan.[28] The role of the behavioral health agency poses a great potential for conflicts of interest, as they will presumably be funded to carry out the Care Plans that result from their negotiations and their evaluations.

    However, failure to agree to that supposedly voluntary plan results in a court-ordered evaluation by that same behavioral health agency, which can be used to impose a mandatory, court-ordered course of treatment if the court finds the person meets the criteria following a hearing.[29] Once ordered, if a person does not complete the CARE program, they may be “involuntarily reappointed” to the program for an additional year.[30]

    This process is entirely coercive, despite procedures that claim to be voluntary. Welfare and Institutions Code section 5801(b)(5), as amended by SB 1338, makes this coercion clear: “The client should be fully informed and volunteer for all treatment provided, unless… the client is under a court order for CARE pursuant to Part 8 (commencing with Section 5970) and, prior to the court-ordered CARE plan, the client has been offered an opportunity to enter into a CARE agreement on a voluntary basis and has declined to do so.”[31]

    The CARE Court plan threatens to create a separate legal track for people perceived to have mental health conditions, without adequate process, negatively implicating basic rights.[32] Even with stronger judicial procedures, this program would remain objectionable because it expands the ability of the state to coerce people into involuntary treatment.

    CARE Court will harm Black, brown, and Unhoused people

    The CARE Court directly targets unhoused people to be placed under court-ordered treatment, thus denying their rights and self-determination. Governor Newsom, in pitching this plan, called it a response to seeing homeless encampments throughout the state of California.[33] CARE Court will empower police and homeless outreach workers to refer people to the courts and allow judges to order them into treatment against their will, including medication plans. CARE Court does not increase access to permanent supportive housing or mental health care and instead relies on existing programs and service providers that already struggle to meet the needs of the unhoused.[34]

    Due to a long history of racial discrimination in housing, employment, access to health care, policing and the criminal legal system, Black and brown people have much higher rates of homelessness than their overall share of the population.[35] The CARE Court plan in no way addresses the conditions that have led to these high rates of homelessness in Black and brown communities. Instead, it proposes a system of state control over individuals that will compound the harms of homelessness.

    Further, much research shows that mental health professionals diagnose Black and Latino populations at much higher rates than they do white people.[36] One meta-analysis of over 50 separate studies found that Black people are diagnosed with schizophrenia at a rate nearly 2.5 times greater than white people.[37] A 2014 review of empirical literature on the subject found that Black people were diagnosed with psychotic disorders three to four times more frequently than white people.[38] This review found large disparities for Latino people as well. CARE Court may place a disproportionate number of Black and Latino people under involuntary court control.

    CARE Court Does Not Increase Access to Mental Health Care

    The CARE plan would establish a new judicial infrastructure focused on identifying people with mental health conditions and placing them under state control for up to 24 months. While touted as an unprecedented investment in support and treatment for people with mental health conditions, in reality, the program provides no new funding for behavioral health care, instead re-directing money already in the budget for treatment to programs required by CARE Court.[39] According to the DHHS presentation on the proposal, the only new money allocated for the program will go to the courts themselves to administer this system of control.[40]

    The court-ordered plans include housing, but not necessarily permanent supportive housing.[41] The proposal seems to anticipate allowing shelter and interim housing to suffice if available, without recognizing the vast shortage of affordable housing, especially supportive housing, throughout most of California.[42] To the extent the proposal relies on state investment in housing already in existence, it will prioritize availability of that housing for people under this program, meaning others in need would have reduced access to that housing.

    California Should Invest in Voluntary Treatment and Supportive Services

    CARE Court shifts the blame for homelessness onto individuals and their vulnerabilities, rather than recognizing and addressing the root causes of homelessness such as poverty, affordable housing shortages, barriers to access to voluntary mental health care, and racial discrimination. CARE Courts are designed to force unhoused people with mental health conditions into coerced treatment that will not comprehensively and compassionately address their needs.

    Californians lack adequate access to supportive mental health care and treatment.[43] However, this program does not increase that access. Instead, it depends on money already earmarked for behavioral health initiatives and layers harmful and expensive court involvement onto an already inadequate system. Similarly, the “Care plans” mandated by the CARE Courts do not address the shortage of housing.

    Investing in involuntary treatment ties up resources that could otherwise be invested in voluntary treatment and the services necessary to make that treatment effective.[44] California should provide well-resourced holistic community-based voluntary options and remove barriers to evidence-based treatment to support people with mental health conditions who might be facing other forms of social exclusion. Such options should be coupled with investment in other social supports and especially housing, not tied to court-supervision.

    Rather than co-opting the language used by movements supporting housing and disability rights and cynically parading the trauma of family members let down by the state mental health system, as proponents of CARE Courts have done, we instead ask that you reject the CARE Court proposal entirely and direct resources towards making voluntary treatment and other necessary services accessible to all who need it.

    Sincerely,

    Olivia Ensign John Raphling
    Senior Advocate, US Program Senior Researcher, US Program
    Human Rights Watch Human Rights Watch

    ******

    Mark Ghaly and Tom Umberg are lying before these committees!

    Joshua

  82. March 4th 2022

    Under the plan, which requires approval by the Legislature, all counties would have to set up a mental health branch in civil court and provide comprehensive and community-based treatment to those suffering from debilitating psychosis. People need not be homeless to be evaluated by a court.

    https://krcrtv.com/news/local/cas-governor-wants-mental-health-courts-for-homeless-people

    Setting precedents for for forced treatments is extremely dangerous, especially as our economic system expels some people and when this precedent is targeting people considered a nuisance.

    Joshua

  83. Still SB1338 is on as a 3pm Special Order of Business for Tues June 28.
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Recent News
    California’s Fight Against Homelessness Has Turned Desperate and Dangerous
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/27/opinion/california-homeless-mental-illness.html

    ^This is interesting but I only partially agree. I think this current push to medicalize homelessness is partly because of public pressure and frustration, but this has happened in CA before. I think it is also just because of how Gavin Newsom thinks, Medical Police State, Internment Camp, Psychiatric Hospital. And we saw this in his COVID response. I think it is probably because of the people he surrounds himself with. Worthy of high suspicion being Mark Ghaly and Thomas Insel.

    How brother of a 9/11 firefighter is helping house West L.A. homeless veterans
    https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-06-26/brother-9-11-firefighter-help-homeless-veterans-los-angeles

    Oakland, Livermore Among California Cities Receiving Millions to Combat Family Homelessness
    https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/oakland-livermore-among-california-cities-receiving-millions-to-combat-family-homelessness/2929265/

    Mathews: Homelessness is California’s most durable hobby horse
    Residents rank homelessness as our state’s biggest problem. But it’s not too big to be solved
    https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/06/25/mathews-homelessness-is-californias-hobby-horse/

    Crews pick up trash at Chico homeless camps
    https://www.actionnewsnow.com/news/local/crews-pick-up-trash-at-chico-homeless-camps/article_719b904a-f34a-11ec-a1c4-3b6602d5c949.html

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10942849/City-Berkeley-removed-75-tons-trash-human-waste-homeless-camps-9-months.html
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10942849/City-Berkeley-removed-75-tons-trash-human-waste-homeless-camps-9-months.html

    How California Emboldens Criminal Elements Within the Homeless | Robert Pequeno
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/how-california-emboldens-criminal-elements-within-the-homeless-robert-pequeno_4545537.html

    In My Humble Opinion one of the things which is driving this contentiousness about homelessness in CA is this idea that there is free housing available, but the homeless will not take it. And so they then try to make it into a mental health issue.

    Well I don’t know that whe real status on this are. I doubt there is that much such housing really available, and some people will take it.

    But I think there is another problem, many unhoused persons already know that such housing is already set up to work like a psychiatric internment camp, and that they place themselves at risk by talking to the authorities.

    And then with this Tiny House idea, that violates building codes. Bathrooms too small, bathroom door open onto kitchens. Recreational Vehicles can be like that, but permanent buildings cannot, and for good reason. So people know that if they let themselves be shoved into that, it is internment. They are being made into a public spectacle and object of pity.

    And then I hear increasingly of stories of police in some cities harassing the homeless by trying to get biographical information out of them. “How long have you been homeless? Don’t you have relatives around here?”

    This kind of info has nothing to do with any present situation which police could have a reasonable interest in finding out about. They are just trying to build a biography, and that will always be for building a mental health case and for internment.

    So I think many know that they must stay away from police, social workers, and anything related to this Housing First idea.

    So like tents on sidewalks, riverways, or anyplace else, are always much safer. What will really solve the problem is just to first of all admit that by advanced industrial and information technology we have spawned a large underclass that has had to learn to live on the margins. Until we instead go to Universal Basic Income and a Strong Public Housing Offering, and fire from public service anyone trying to medicalize this, there will be no improvement.

    Joshua

  84. Still SB1338 is on as a 3pm Special Order of Business for Tues June 28.
    https://ahea.assembly.ca.gov/hearings

    Should have video feed at 3pm.

    Groups Unite to Oppose Landmark California Mental Health Legislation
    https://www.postnewsgroup.com/groups-unite-to-oppose-landmark-california-mental-health-legislation/

    Opponents of the legislation say SB 1338 dangerously expands judicial power and empowers the criminal justice system to commit people to mental health treatment that is sub-par – and often against their will. There is also the potential for misdiagnosis, they warn.

    “CARE Court promotes a system of involuntary, coerced treatment, enforced by an expanded judicial infrastructure, that will, in practice, simply remove unhoused people with perceived mental health conditions from the public eye without effectively addressing those mental health conditions and without meeting the urgent need for housing,” read the Human Rights Watch’s (HRW) opposition letter.

    “We urge you to reject this bill and instead to take a more holistic, rights-respecting approach to address the lack of resources for autonomy-affirming treatment options and affordable housing,” the letter said.

    “Given the racial demographics of California’s homeless population, and the historic over-diagnosing of Black and Latino people with schizophrenia, this plan is likely to place many, disproportionately Black and Brown, people under state control,” HRW’s letter continued.

    Some members of the California Association of Mental Health Peer Run Organizations share HRW’s opinion, claiming that the program would “disproportionately affect people of color by imposing another unnecessary court process on an already overloaded and biased system.”

    “CARE Court is antithetical to recovery principles, which are based on self-determination and self-direction,” read the DRC’s opposition letter. “The CARE Court proposal is based on the stigma and stereotypes of people living with mental health disabilities and experiencing homelessness.”

    “In fact, the bill creates a new pathway for government officials and family members to place people under state control and take away their autonomy and liberty,” HRW warns.

    About a month before Umberg and Eggman introduced SB 1338, Gov. Newsom foreshadowed the bill’s arrival in his January budget proposal.

    “We are leaning into conservatorships this year,” the governor said. “What’s happening on the streets and sidewalks in our state is unacceptable. I don’t want to see any more people die on the streets and call that compassion.”


    But homelessness is also incredibly useful for anyone who wants to complain about California. It allows us to say anything and everything we want about our state.

    Especially right now. Politicians, journalists, authors, professors, and social media trolls will tell you that California’s homelessness shows the utter failure of, well, take your pick: Democrats, Republicans, new progressive policies, old conservative policies, police, prosecutors, judges, the health system, the housing market, the drug war, rent control, Prop 13, developers, NIMBYs, socialism, capitalism.

    The critics may think they are making novel arguments, but making homelessness a hobbyhorse is one of California’s most durable traditions, at least as old as the state itself.

    https://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2022/06/28/stop-using-homelessness-to-hate-on-california/ideas/connecting-california/


    ichael Shellenberger, a progressive turned right-wing darling. Shellenberger used homelessness and public drug use to argue—in his book San Fransicko: Why Progressives Ruin Cities and a campaign for governor—that Democrats had caused nothing less than “the breakdown of civilization” on the West Coast.

    “It was Democrats, not Republicans, who played the primary role in creating the dominant neoliberal model of government contracting to fragmented and often unaccountable non-profit service providers that have proven financially, structurally and legally incapable of addressing the crisis,” Shellenberger wrote in San Fransicko.

    Joshua

    Special Session of Jan 6th Committee, live now!
    https://www.democracynow.org/live/watch_live_surprise_hearing_of_the


  85. Even as it is now, many who are experiencing homelessness know that they have to stay away from what sheter and transitional housing space is available, lest Social Services be given a chance to construct a biography on them and then this be used to support a mental health case agaisnt them.

    In municipalities across California now, there are more and more accounts of the unhoused being targetted for police harrassment. Officers are asking them personal things, things which have no possible relation to anything presently at hand which the officer could be concerned about. Officers will ask things like, “How long have you been homeless?” or “Don’t you have relatives around here?” These officers are trying to build a biography on the party, as that is the beginnings of making a mental health case against them. Not all of the unhoused necessarily know right now how important it is to draw a privacy line with police. And not all police take well to someone who does that.

    We all want to see that everyone is always housed, and we need a strong public housing offering to contain private real estate gentrification. But before we can get there, broad based public understanding will have to built, so that we are ready for deeper changes in the presumptions upon which our economic system is predicated. Only when we have these changes in understanding can we have universal housing, instead of pscychaitric internment and forced drugging.

    And people have to understand how the mental health system is what enforces the dictates of capitalism, and how people are tracked into it by the family.

    Joshua

  86. Should be video feed for CA Assembly Health Committee
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/1100-video/video

    SB 1338 is slated for 3pm, but they already seem to be in session and they seem to be talking about SB 1014

    Anecdotally this seems like a more relaxed committee meeting than the other State Legislature stuff I have watched.

    But, now I see that Mark Ghaly sitting in the audience.

    They seem to have made some sort of schedule change over this SB1014. But I find any record of this change.

    Joshua

  87. Okay, so now they are talking about Care Courts SB1338
    https://www.assembly.ca.gov/media/1100-video/video

    And they have got the same liars as before, Tom Umberg and Mark Ghaly. And it looks like they’ve also got Eggman there today.

    Umberg is talking about this from the perspective of the family. And we know that the idea that someone is mentally ill usually starts within the family.

    Sounds like Umberg has a family member they have fed into the mental health system.

    So Umber explaining the recent amendments:

    July 1 2023 for the first cohort of counties. July 1 2024 for the remaining counties. Used to be the accused would get a Public Defender. Now they are to get Legal Aide.
    ( so in my observation then this is a wretched piece of legislation, but they have pushed the start date out. )

    So it sounds like it is Eggman who talks after Eggman.

    Yeah, there is some kind of a jump cut in the video, even though they say it is live. They jump from Eggman to Ghaly, then to this guy is the homeless coordinator for West Sacramento. And it is this social worker who pushes the hardest on this idea of “Severe Mental Illness”.

    Witnesses are on now making an intense attack against the legislation and its spokes persons!

    Joshua

  88. This Chad Mayes, talks about a family member who was “schizophrenic”, and so this is why the world need coercive treatment. Everything was fine until he stopped taking his meds. So Mayes talks about a balance between civil liberties and a job which has to be done.

    Wendy Carrillo,

    Joshua

  89. Chad Mayes is a Republican. He thinks it the right balance, when the ACLU and the Ella Bakker Center are voicing the strongest objection which they can.

    Wendy Carrillo, grew up in Los Angeles, read a 1987 LA Times article. The mental health load and the encampments continue to grow. She still seems to support the bill. Seems to object to Reagan closing the mental hospitals.

    Chair Jim Wood still seems to support this.

    It is as Human Rights Watch says, it is just about removing some people from public view.

    Jim Wood wants to accelerate the implementation. Not piecemeal.

    This is like Gavin’s Army of 10,000 Contact Tracers and Targeted Testing Into Marginalized Population Groups, but shown naked as it really was intended from before COVID. This was the original idea, the reason he selected Mark Ghaly.

    Eggman says that people might be able to “come home”, because of “medication and care”.

    Jim Wood talks about 5150’s.

    So this passed 9 to 0.

    There were a few Assemblymembers who were not present to vote. There was also some kind of disturbance, I think those opposed to Care Courts.

    So now it goes to Appropriations. No one has voted against this except Ash Kalra in Judiciary.

    So many people go along with this Mental Health, Drugs, Social Workers, Courts, Conservatorship, and people being pressed to give up biographies.

    Need to fight this on the ground!

    Joshua

  90. This is unbelievable, they don’t talk about Universal Basic Income or Public Housing, but the people running California are committed to Social Workers, Psychiatrists and Drugging and Psychotherapists, a Mental Hygiene State.

    The ACLU, the Ella Baker Center and a long list of civil and disability rights groups giving an impassioned objection to this, but the people running California do not care. They are just tired of the encampments. And they are tired of dealing with people that are products of the mental health system. So the solution then is to expand the mental health system and create special courts to enforce it.

    Gavin and Mark Ghaly’s Care Courts is not law but it is close. The only hope now is that it will prove to be unenforceable and will be blocked by higher courts. But how many people will be fed psychiatric neurotoxins before that happens.?

    Joshua

LEAVE A REPLY