·         Referred to Virginia Tech shooting and questioned "what might have happened if Seung-Hui Sho, who had a history of mental illness, was placed into treatment."

·         Referenced the law SB 226 is modeled after, New York's Kendra's Law, and compared the statistics with "three years prior to [client's in AOT] treatment: 74% fewer participants experienced homelessness, 77% fewer experienced hospitalization, and 83% fewer were arrested."

·         Stated "Studies have confirmed that those suffering from mental illness are often reluctant to seek help on their own, or refuse to acknowledge their illness.

Estelle Richmond

·        Stated “Pennsylvania’s law [Mental Health Procedures Act] is not working well.  By that I mean that it is not helping people get the treatment and services they need in times of crisis.”

·         Stated additional multi-disciplinary case management team services as well as supported housing were needed and that OMHSAS is in the process of adding more.

·         Sited waiting for the taskforce on the MacArthur Study, the Network on Mandated Community Treatment, http://www.macarthur.virginia.edu/researchnetwork.html  which will be completed by the end of 2008 before considering making any changes to our treatment laws.   

Family Panel:  (Jeanette Castello, Robert Gerard, Mary Gauker and John Gauker, and Dorothy Tengler)

·         Four family members of loved ones with a severe mental illness and lack of insight into the need for treatment gave their personal account of the difficulties of obtaining timely treatment under our current treatment law of being required to wait for “clear and present danger to self and others” time and time again.

Joe Rogers

·         Did not believe in involuntary commitment laws such as SB 226 but felt resources should be spent on “enhanced community-based services and supports, such as employment, housing and case management programs”

·         Supported the use of peer-to-peer services and advanced directives

·         Concerned that if SB 226 passed, it could "divert resources away from those mental health consumers already receiving care"*

Debbie Plotnick

·         Felt that no one should be court-ordered into treatment

·         Stated that AOT criminalized mental illness*

(*two senators strongly disagreed with this statement)

John Snook, Esq.

·         Stated, "[a]ccording to the National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors, Pennsylvania is ranked second nationally in per capita mental health spending."

·         Stated, "Pennsylvania's policy has been to focus services solely on voluntary care; individuals who fail to participate are too often dropped from the rolls until they pop up again in an emergency room or after being 302'd."

·         Stated AOT "laws are carefully crafted to affect only the most severely ill - that small portion that cycles in and out of jails, hospitals, and the streets because they cannot voluntarily maintain their treatment in the community." 

Consumer Panel (Mary Kohut and Anne Alter)

·         Felt that everyone with a mental illness should choose their own treatment

·         Did not think that court ordered treatment should be allowed

Carol Horowitz, Esq.

·         Felt that the use of advanced directives should be used, not AOT

·         Stated "the real problem is not individuals' refusal of mental health services, but, rather, their inability to secure such services."

·         Questioned constitutionality* of new commitment standards in SB 226

      (*constitutionality of AOT laws has been upheld in any state where it has been questioned before). 

Tanya Feliz

·         Described success of AOT under Kendra’s Law in New York as a team leader on an assertive community treatment ACT team by relating a success story of a young man in that program

·         Stated that a small number of clients need mandated treatment long enough to recognize that they had an illness. 

·         Stated, “It [AOT] works because in the (temporary) mandating of treatment, clients are able to experience an existence when their symptoms do not consume a major portion of their day, thus increasing the likelihood of educational, vocational, and social connections – things that are important to all of us and things that normalize our lives.” 

G. Michael Green, Esq.

·         Supported the need for AOT by describing the possible consequences of untreated mental illness as shown in the case of the Rafferty family whose son with a long history of mental illness killed his parents and then committed suicide.

·         Stated the felt "the most important aspect of Senate Bill 226 is that the Assisted Outpatient Treatment Plan becomes the subject of a Court Order.

·         Stated that this bill "provides for the balancing of the patient's individual rights with the community's right to public safety."

 Amy Kroll

·         Described a program in Allegheny County for individuals who have a mental illness and are released from prison that provides supportive services, including help finding housing and employment

William Leopold

·         Described Montgomery County Emergency Services, a crisis program that includes 73-bed hospital

·         They "believe that involuntary outpatient commitment is, at times, necessary to engage consumers into receiving proper and necessary treatment."

·         Felt that we should use the outpatient commitment treatment requirement from current law, Mental Health Procedures Act

 Jamie Buchenauer

·         Thought social workers should be more involved with decisions made for treatment

·         Concerned that adequate funding is available and that AOT doesn't cause other people who receive voluntary services to be denied services

Kenneth Certa, M.D.

·         Psychiatrist who works in emergency room at hospital in Philadelphia who did not think that either AOT laws or advanced directives are helpful for those with mental illness