|
Minutes of
the November 13, 2007
by Linda
Byrne
MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:
Jen Honig, Co-Chair, Mental
Health Legal Advisor’s Committee (MHLAC)
Wendy Alexander, Disability
Law Center (DLC)
Bill Allen, Disability Policy
Consortium
Linda Byrne, DLC
Ralph Calderaro, Disabled
Persons Protection Department
Sandra Carter, MHLAC
Colleen Flanagan, Easter Seals
Kevin Hall, CCHR
Evelyn Kaufman, M-Power, CFAR
Amy Marcus, MHLAC
Jessica Schambach, MHLAC
Introductions,
Reports & Announcements:
 Co-Chair,
Jen Honig, called the meeting to order at 10:20.m.
and welcomed all to today’s meeting. She informed members
that Stan would not be able to co-chair today as he was at the
First Circuit for a mandatory settlement conference for the
Ricci case. Introductions were made, and the
following announcements were made:
Evelyn
Kaufman
informed members that a hearing will take place on 11/15/07
at Worcester State Hospital to discuss three Department of
Mental Health (DMH) proposed regulations regarding patient
rights for individuals with mental health issues in
emergency rooms.
The first
regulation would allow the DMH to authorize people under
Section 12 orders to be sent to the emergency room on the
way to the mental health hospital. DMH patients often wait a
lengthy amount of time while in a psychiatric crisis and
would be subject to unnecessary medical tests (with
excessive force if necessary).
The second
regulation would allow DMH to use restraints while
transporting patients from ERs to psychiatric facilities and
from facilities to medical appointments, court, etc.
The third
regulation would allow DMH employees to act as hearing
officers in DMH eligibility appeal hearings. This is unfair
and is a conflict of interest.
If you’re
interested in providing testimony to oppose the proposed
regulations, please call Cathy Levin (617-623-0807).
Jen
Honig
spoke of the H. 1871, the Mental Health Parity Bill, and H.
3534, An Act to Further Define Adverse Determination. Susan
Fendell, an attorney with MHLAC, requested that CLRD
consider supporting these two pieces of state legislation.
H.1871 would require that insurers cover treatment for all
mental health and substance abuse services. And H.3534
would redirect the burden of proof of medical necessity from
the clinician to the providers.
These
bills were heard by the Joint Committee on Mental Health and
Substance Abuse on October 1st. An e-mail with
the above information, along with the bills, were sent to
CLRD members. They were asked to review the information on
the bills and vote as to whether CLRD should designate
support for either or both bills. Were CLRD to vote to
support either of the bills, it would take such steps as
submitting letters of support to the Legislature. Voting on
this was closed on 10/29/08. Eleven votes came in, and the
voting response was: 9 in favor and 2 against. Jen stated
that she has written a letter of support for one bill [H.
3534].
In
addition, Jen also brought up the DUA Compliance
issue that DLC’s Attorney Tom Murphy had asked that CLRD
members vote on via e-mail. Results and further
information may be discussed at the next meeting.
Jen
also spoke
of Poly Cobb’s anti-aversive petition. Poly was to have
presented today, but for reasons unknown could not be here.
This will be redistributed to members.
CLRD’S Presentation: Youth In The Juvenile Justice System
Jen
Honig presented on
MHLAC’s project representing youth in the juvenile justice
system. Just for Youth: Advocating for Youth
was recently released by MHLAC. This book identifies
various rights of a child who goes through the DYS system in
Massachusetts as well as the DYS system. It can be found
at:
http://www.mass.gov/mhlac/Justforyouthfinal.pdf .
Jen gave an
overview of current concerns identified by juvenile justice
advocates, both nationally and in Massachusetts. She
discussed issues regarding the disproportionate number of
DYS youth of color, the lack attorney access (once they are
incarcerated and classified), the lack of appropriate and
individualized mental health assessment and treatment, and
the lack of adequate education (both regular learning and
special education) for youth under DYS. Twenty years ago,
Massachusetts was touted as a model state because it moved
kids out of large settings and into the residential
program. Sadly, Massachusetts does not fall into this
category at this time. Currently, Missouri is considered a
model state for providing services for youth in the juvenile
justice system.
Jen
provided a brief outline of the services delivered to kids
in the DYS system in Massachusetts and the rights of youth
under DYS. She explained the various steps a child goes
through; starting with their arrest, alternative lock-up,
pre-arraignment detention, the court process involved,
post-arraignment detention, commitment length, placement (in
secure treatment facility, residential program, and/or
community program), supervision level assessment (8 levels,
with level #8 as the most restrictive), education provided,
and grant of conditional liberty (similar to parole) and
hopefully ending with a child’s return to their home in the
community. DYS has the authority to extend the commitment
of a youth who has turned 18 years old. DYS usually
terminates their relationship at this time, but an
“extension of commitment” can be applied to a youth whom DYS
believes poses a danger to the public. DYS can apply to the
court for approval to extend the child’s commitment until
they are 21 years old. The time a youth has served in a
mental health facility receiving treatment is generally
not counted toward their time in DYS.
MHLAC
provides direct representation of youth with mental health
and emotional problems in both the community and in
institutional settings and advocates for basic rights and
appropriate services. When it became apparent that the
number of DYS youth with mental health disabilities was
increasing, MHLAC became more interested in working with the
DYS population. Jen noted that the National Center for
Mental Health and Juvenile Justices research suggests that
youth in the juvenile justice system shows that 60 - 70%
have a diagnosable mental disorder and that 20% have a
serious mental disorder. Jen stated that statistics
regarding the percentage of kids with mental health
fluctuates greatly.
Kevin
Hall added that 54%
of kids in DYS are DSS clients. Kevin noted that many of
those kids can be labeled with mental health issues and are
then placed on antidepressant medications. He added that
these medications have been known to double the suicide rate
among certain age groups.
Jennifer
noted that MHLAC also became interested in helping DYS youth
because there was a lack of representation once these kids
are committed to DYS. CPCS counsel is appointed to
represent them in court and if committed to DYS at their
staffing meeting (a sentencing proceeding which determines
their location and length of commitment). But, there is no
formal representation after that point by a defense
attorney. Often, these kids are not legally represented if
any legal issue arises once they’re committed either in a
facility or in the community.
MHLAC
represents post-dispositional, incarcerated DYS youth in
civil matters. They also assist them when they return to
the community. Jen stated that MHLAC’s focus is on
education, placement, rights, restraint, medication
treatment options, mental health assessment and services,
and transition to the community issues. Once a kid gets
back into the community, their concerns continue. Often
their education has suffered. They have missed out on
current subject learning and, for youth entitled to special
education services, educational services which were listed
on their IEP’s.
Jen
addressed a question regarding MCAS. She noted that it is
difficult to get MCAS scores that are aggregated for DYS
youth, but here is one case where DYS does have aggregate
data. [After the presentation, Jen found this information:
the number of FYS youth in residential placements that took
the grade 10 MCAS tests for the first time in spring of 2005
continues to rise. The percentage of youth who passed the
grade 10 English test increased to 51% in 2005 from 47% in
2004. The percentage of youth who passed the grade 10 Math
test increased to 38% in 2005 from 28% in 2004.]
Jen added
that she has seen that DYS tries to bring in parents to make
certain decisions as parents retain legal custody for
DYS-committed youth, but there are some areas in which DYS
has decision-making authority, either legally or
practically. One difficulty is that youth may have several
DYS case workers as they move through the DYS system.
Parents and kids must learn to relate to different people as
this occurs.
Jen
commented that often it is difficult to access DYS materials
on the Internet, such as regulations governing DYS.
[However, after the presentation, Jen found that DYS has now
posted their policies on their website at:
www.mass.gov/dys (there is a link to “Policies” on the
right-hand side).]
Ralph
Calderaro asked Jen
what plans MHLAC has when it determines the results of their
project. Jen responded that they would hope for more
grants, which will in turn provide more legal representation
to represent DYS youth. Ralph suggested taking the results
to the Commissioner and the Secretary of EOHHS to enforce
communication issues between the Commonwealth’s departments
or agencies.
The
meeting ended at 12:00 p.m.
[Please
Note: CLRD’s next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, January
29, 2008 at Skadden, Arps at One Beacon Street, in Boston.] |