General Resources / Legal Resources / Medical
Resources / Briefing Papers / State Activity
Hospital Closures / Preventable
Tragedies / Press Room / Search
Our Site / Home
Richmond Times Dispatch
August 3, 2004
Reprinted with permission of the author. All rights reserved.
By John Snook
Editor, Times-Dispatch:The story of Walter Kaminski's decline, his repeated threats against neighbors, and his ultimate act of pain - attempted homicide and completed suicide - is an all too common example of the problems posed by Virginia's archaic mental health laws ["Man Hopes to Regain What Bullets Stole: Independence"].
Everyone agreed Kaminski was deteriorating and needed treatment. His family knew he had stopped taking medications for his mental illness and was suffering from delusions. Unfortunately, because of Virginia's overly strict commitment standard, no one could do anything as he spiraled down into an unfathomable psychosis. Virginia's outdated law requires someone to be "imminently dangerous" before a court can intervene and order treatment.
This forces families to stand by and watch their loved one deteriorate. This also consigns families to a hellish gamble: They must pinpoint the moment when the person they love is "imminently dangerous," and hope he has not yet harmed himself or someone else. In Kaminski's case, as in far too many incidents throughout Virginia, the result of this ridiculous gamble was tragedy.
At least 40 states have moved away from an overly strict imminent-dangerousness standard. They recognize the havoc it wreaks on the severely mentally ill and on our society. As we watch tragedy after tragedy sweep through Virginia, one question looms: How long will Virginia have to wait?
John D. Snook,
Legislative & Policy Counsel, Treatment Advocacy Center, Arlington