Focusing on Care of Mentally Ill

California is about to get tough on involuntary commitment for the mentally ill. It’s about time too.

But before any legal reform, county mental health officials want to hear from you. Two public forums on the subject are next week in Anaheim and Orange.

TV gives us a skewered picture on involuntary commitment. Money-grubbing relatives want a rich uncle sent to a sanitarium because he’s a little eccentric. The court commits him over his vigorous protests, while relatives divide the spoils.

But here’s the stark reality, says Maria Marquez, interim deputy director for the county’s adult mental health services:

“The mentally ill are the homeless on the street, or someone pilfering at a fast-food store. By law, we can’t keep them long enough to treat them, so they’re back out on the street. They usually just wind up at the jail.”

So we’re filling our jails with the mentally ill--maybe as much as 20%, state experts say--because alternatives are so limited. In other cases, family members are frustrated that they simply can’t get help they need for a loved one.

Assembly-woman Helen Thompson (D-Davis) is leading a campaign to do something about it.

“Mental health in this state is chronically underfunded, and that needs to change,” Thompson said. “But we need to change the laws too, to make it easier to treat these people.”

Information gathered at the forums, sponsored by the county Health Care Agency, will be sent to the state, and could be included in Thompson’s bill. Here are the two:

* Monday, Dec. 6, 6-9:30 p.m., Servite High School theater, 1952 W. La Palma Ave., Anaheim.

* Tuesday, Dec. 7, 8:30 a.m.-noon, AMC 30 at the Block, Building E, 20 City Drive, Orange.

Among the experts speaking will be Howard Black, local chapter president of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. But Black says public input is critical too.

“We need to know what family members have to say,” said Black, whose son is mentally ill. “Living with someone mentally ill affects their lives too.”

Another side, of course, may be heard from: Does involuntary commitment violate someone’s constitutional rights? Some in the mental health field strongly caution about that, Thompson said.

“What we need to do is strike a balance to accommodate both sides,” she said.

But here’s the biggest problem: County officials can treat most people with symptoms of mental illness for only up to 72 hours without consent. And even in that time, they can’t force the patient to take medication. Without court order, the patient must be released unless volunteering for further treatment. But too often, Black says, these people don’t have the capacity to determine whether they need more treatment, or medication.

A three-year state task force Black supports recommends easing these restrictions. It also wants to make the law more amenable to follow-up treatments. Another of its recommendation would make it easier to commit those whose pasts indicate they might be violent.

The county isn’t taking any position; it’s just gathering facts. But it wouldn’t be going to this trouble if its experts didn’t see change as important.

“California’s laws on involuntary commitment are the most complex in the country,” said Maria Marquez, who by title is interim deputy director for adult mental health services. “Reform is needed. But what kind?”

Readers can reach Hicks by calling (714) 564-1049 or e-mail to jerry.hicks@latimes.com