Review of AB 1421-25 by Tom Barresi

When I first viewed the 5 bills, being offered by the veteran, Assemblywoman Helen Thomson, (namely, AB 1421-22-23-24 and 25), on March 21, I jumped for joy! In fact, I wrote Assemblywoman Thomson, and the entire State Assembly, congratulating all, for accomplishing their good work, for us, the mentally ill, of California. 

Now, with the bitter taste of AB 1800 still on our tongues, many of us are being led to believe, that the new bevy of legislative proposals, (particularly AB 1421), coming from this Lawmaker, might indeed "smack" of injustice, and unconstitutionality; when in fact, the opposite is true! Having been incarcerated at least 8 times in California; the one truism I could always count on, was that never…..under any circumstance…..would I ever experience the Constitutional right of "due process", while being committed into a mental hospital. From 1987-92, it did not exist. Mrs. Thomson goes completely out-of-her way, in crafting a law, (AB 1421), which adheres to the patient's Constitutional rights in every imaginable situation : From our right to a lawyer, to our right to a witness, to the sacred right of "Due Process"; all the pertinent Amendments are worked, and utilized, in our behalf, during the commitment procedure. 

The notable organization: The California Network of Mental Health Clients-In their news alert of April 10th, have listed their main objections to AB 1421. I'd like to address them, here, in turn: Called, "The Threat Continues", our writer, goes on to accuse the bill, of promoting "forced treatment", as an answer to the lack of services in certain communities. He/She goes on to say that the threat to our rights, and recovery could indeed "entangle us all". Components disagreed with, are: 

1) The bill targets people wherever they are. We should have no objection here, as this is the purpose of all bills; especially bills in the "demonstration" mode. 

2) The bill focuses commitment criteria on future "deterioration" of patient. With as many as 50% of our population facing mental illness in the next 25 years; methods of diagnosis will surely change. The methods proposed by Assemblywoman Thomson are Constitutional, and preclude the "civil rights" standards of the last 30 years. 

3) The bill permits family and friends to file petitions for an order of commitment. As these people already do commit us; now they will become legally responsible for our "due process", and subject to suit and damages. 

4) Failure to appear at a hearing by a homeless person is not a unique event; but I could not in good faith, exclaim that the hapless, homeless people are "being targeted", when under AB 1421, their Constitutional rights are honored too. 

5) The bill will allow an examination of subject even if the subject has refused to be examined. It is your Constitutional right to refuse to be examined; but in doing so you tax your "due process" to the point where, although no harm will befall you, you relinquish certain rights; such as being examined when "you" want to be, as oppossed to when you should. 

6) Noncompliance of court order can initiate a 72 hour hold. As in our example #5, we can't scream foul to " our civil rights and guarantee to liberty", if we are not following the dictates of "due process". For it is in legally, mannered compliance, that our rights as mental patients flourish. 

7) Involuntary Outpatient Commitment is up to 6 months. The greatest benefit of "due process" is that it flatly prevents you, a mental patient from "suffering any form of deprivation", at any time. As 6 months might appear to be a form of personal freedom, depravation, a quick talk to your legal advocate , and you are out ,in no time! 

8) A voluntary negotiated settlement, in which the person waives his rights.  For 8 months I have been fighting the "ultimate clone" of this component to AB 1421……called Public Law 106-515 or "Mental Health Courts". Whenever you waive your rights, especially in the world of mental health, you are giving everyone a free pass, to do with you, as they will. 

It is my firm conviction, that Assemblywoman Thomson (in all 6 of her bills), has the legal rights of the California mental patient at heart, and is introducing something I have truly never seen before…. our right to "Due Process", as displayed in the California, mental health machinery. 

Opinion by 
Tom Barresi 
1459 East Lassen Ave. 32 
Chico,Ca. 95973

Click here for Tom's comments on Forced Hospitalization

Click here for NAMI Position

Click here for CNMHC Position

Click here for latest status on AB 1421  (it has been postponed until next year's session).

You can also get the latest status by searching for 1421 on the California Assembly website.

Opinions expressed in this web site do not necessarily reflect the views of NAMI Santa Cruz County, NAMI California or any affiliated organizations.  We attempt to present a balanced perspective on issues by presenting multiple viewpoints.

Copyright 2005 National Alliance for the Mentally Ill Santa Cruz County, All Rights Reserved.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (©) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml  If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.