Kendra's Law Stops the Cycle

 

 

By U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici and Mayor Martin Chávez, Kendra's Law Advocates

  

It is unfortunate that it sometimes takes a tragedy before sufficient attention is paid to a serious subject, and so it has been on the question of a modern Kendra's Law.

   

In Albuquerque's case, it has been more than one tragedy. It has been multiple situations that underscore an ongoing inability to help those who are in the grip of a mental illness so severe that their disease creates dangers to themselves and those around them.

   

The persistent need for some form of authority to render assistance to those suffering has been punctuated time and again by tragedies, such as the 2003 encounter of Duc Minh Pham and police Sgt. Carol Oleksak on Central Ave. SE, the death of state Sen. Joe Mercer before that, or the more recent rampage of John Hyde.

   

These tragedies were all sad epilogues to the unnoticed suffering of seriously mentally ill people and the anguish of their families and loved ones who were helpless to do anything but wait for the danger to become "imminent."

   

Opponents argue that there aren't enough government resources to provide the types of service people would need.

   

More public resources for services are certainly a legitimate issue, and one we both believe in. But it is an issue quite apart from whether one has the authority to act, when someone is in the grips of severe mental illness, before it's too late.

  

The current catch-and-release cycle of our courts and psychiatric system is expensive. Pham was in and out of jail more than 50 times and in a psychiatric unit over a dozen. Without an intermediate way to remand him into less expensive, but more consistent services, he was simply released each time because he was not competent to stand trial.

   

If we could avoid this costly catch-and-release cycle, we would save the system money, not add to its burden.

   

Critics also say you cannot remand someone into services that do not exist. But it does not make sense to say nobody can be helped because we may not be able to pay for everyone's need in the same way. We have to understand that mental health treatments are not one-size-fits-all. Having to tailor care should not preclude us from having the authority to try to help address the individual needs of severely ill persons who could hurt themselves or others.

   

It is conceivable that by saving money by stopping the revolving door of incarceration and care, we could help more of the presently uninsured mentally ill with the public resources that are consequently freed up.

   

Opponents of Kendra's Law also contend that it would further "stigmatize" those suffering from mental illness. But we contend that it is just the opposite.

   

We believe that as the stigma surrounding mental illness is only reinforced when the public finds itself shocked once again by the violent acts of a severely mentally ill person who should have received the intervention and care needed to prevent a tragedy. Forty-two other states already recognize that it is unfair to the public and to these troubled souls to not have in place a process— like Kendra's law— for offering treatment where it is obviously needed.

   

The truth is that remarkable advances in mental health treatments can help tear down the stigma and discrimination against those with mental illnesses. The ongoing revolution in medication means better results and fewer side effects. Coupled with newer practices that are recovery-focused and patient-directed, people can better understand that there is help for those who suffer from even the most debilitating mental illnesses.

   

It is simply unfair to ask the public to continue suffering the consequences and subsidizing the costs associated with the status quo. This is a formula that fosters risk and possible tragedy— tragedy that only perpetuates further stigma. Fixing this gap in the law will go a long way toward a more enlightened public assessment of the situation.

   

The lack of a Kendra's Law has allowed terrible situations to get worse before anything can be done to help the severely mentally ill who are in harm's way. Today, we have an opportunity to stop the cycle that ultimately leaves some of the most troubled individuals without care and remanded to the streets. While it would have been better for the Legislature to enact Kendra's Law last February, we believe it is better to get something started now in Albuquerque rather than to wait another year and hope that the Senate will give the measure a floor vote.

   

Albuquerque, after all, has pioneered street-level services for those suffering from addiction and mental illness, such as Crisis Residential Services, Assertive Community Treatment and Extended Stay Detox. The city has police officers specially trained to recognize and communicate effectively with those who suffer from mental illness. We have social workers to provide follow up care.

   

What the city and state lack is a way to intervene when someone suffering from severe mental illness is going from bad to worse. Let's not wait any longer to remedy this.

 

More from New Mexico