New federal mental health bill passes

In rare bipartisan success, Congress passes major mental health bill - CSMonitor.com


Is this bill good for "consumers" or created out of fears of the violent mentally ill, to provide more forced treatment? Any informed thoughts?

from my understanding the bill that got past congress and hasnt been signed by the president yet is a .....research and funding..... act that will affect how the american food and drug association reviews and approves drugs that treat mental and physical health problems and hopefully makes the drugs more affordable and accessible to consumers (example drug companies and research companies will no longer be approved to charge 600 bucks for one epi pin and consumers will be able to be assured whats in that epi pen is what it says it is,)

from my understanding the act isnt about forcing consumers to take their medications.

Senate Approves 21st Century Cures Act, Sending It to President Barack Obama's Desk | US News

Unless they "may be refusing to follow their doctor's orders"

or

"...for those with serious illness who won’t voluntarily comply..."

?

One of the people quoted in favor of this bill is "John Snook, executive director of the Treatment Advocacy Center."

I have never heard of John Snook. I have heard of the "Treatment Advocacy Center" -- a brainchild, I think, of E. Fuller Torrey.

From what I have read by, and heard about Torrey, I don't see him as a really balanced person -- even though he is a psychiatrist.

No proofs here of what this bill is or will be interpreted as -- just some suspicions on my part. I think psychiatrists, and large groups of people even, can "go off the rails". I don't discount the possibility.

(By going off the rails, I mean more precisely, they can be driven by emotions of whose nature they are almost entirely unaware. I have seen it in myself, and therefore can study it. Doing things whose basic sources are unknown to one can lead down paths preventing success for oneself and sometimes disaster for others.)

President Obama to sign bill:

Obama vows to sign this sweeping mental health bill Congress passed | PBS NewsHour

NAMI is applauding this bill, so I think it must be a good thing.

My one reservation is the statement:
"• Directs states to only fund evidence-based mental health initiatives with a proven track record;"
As it implies that therapists and clients will be under the direction of the state regarding the types of treatment available to them. I need more details about this.

This sounds pretty scary to me. What if the "evidence -based" initiatives don't work in my case. Then it's all my fault again? Can't be the initiative, because it's "evidence - based.". Based on whom?

NAMI may be great for people with "severe and persistent" mental illness but has had nothing for, and no interest in, my situation -- could be called"moderate and chronic."

what that means is for example NY has a law against using conversion therapy (using brainwashing and other harmful therapies to make a non heterosexual person not be a lesbian) so a mental health agency cant use the governments money to try and make me not be a lesbian.

Mental health agencies in the USA get their money for their business from community donations, federal and state grants/ state and federal funds, scholarships, fundraising and also from their clients.

an easy way to understand this is percentages like when you went to school the school got federal and state money so much per child enrolled.

its sort of like that. some mental health agencies have a name for this state and federal money that comes into their agency like "flex funds"

a metal health agency can not ask the state or federal government for fex funds to start a program with their agency that is called conversion therapy here in NY because NY has a law that says its illegal for a treatment provider in NY to use conversion therapy (this is a mental health treatment where gays and lesbians used to be put through a brainwashing program to make them become "normal" "straight"

in other words it has nothing to do with keeping a patient or client from getting therapy. its that the government can not give the mental health agency money for illegal practices.

if a mental health agency applies for flex funds and they treat using medication, CBT, DBT and so on ... the therapy techniques and medications must be legal in that state. thats all it means. those therapy techniques with a bad reputation/ illegal, has caused deaths or harm are usually the ones that have laws against practicing them in the states

That's not true. I have been involved with NAMI for many years and many, many people who attend NAMI support groups are high functioning youth or adults who deal with moderate, chronic mental illness.

just a bit of info ...in general.... yes NAMI has groups for all types of mental disorders and various severities. that said some locations the Nami support groups are limited. this is because they dont have the funds nor the attendance level that will allow them to run multi leveled support groups open to all. unfortunately many NAMI locations have had to run their groups based on prioritizing rather than having something for everyone.

example one place I know of only runs their "in our own voice" group and the rest of the function of that branch is to help people with short term therapy and referrals, another nami that I know of only runs their groups for their most severely challenged members of the community.

my point there are many NAMI branches that are not the open door policy agency. they have to cater to what the community needs are based on what funds they have available. and unfortunately that means prioritizing and sending others else where.

This bill is also supposed to help train doctors how to spot eating disorders early. It is supposed to allow more coverage for those sick with eating disorders. Too many people have died because insurance companies and doctors failed them. This is considered the most historic law to pass for helping those who suffer from eating disorders. I am very excited about it, because I am one of those people who had to fight with insurance to get the treatment that I needed to help me toward my recovery.

Thank you for the information, amandalouise. I didn't know that NAMI services vary so much. Where I live, there are a number of NAMI groups and services. The NAMI's here are very proactive.

I agree about NAMI, they have been a good support for me in the past. I am moderate and chronic.

I think this is bad because some of the meds are bad. Some providers will prescribe these horrible meds and patients don't want to take them. The bill should include to say that they will not make patients take horrible medicines with horrible side effects. Some people are just scared of the mentally ill because of the stigma. Plus NAMI is bad because they stalk the mentally ill making their symptoms worse.

Hi joshuas-mommy, What do you mean NAMI stalks the mentally ill? Do they keep trying to get you involved?

They were stalking me and it made me very paranoid. They would follow me around at my college. I also called NAMI about how the jail put me on terrible psychotropic meds and they never called me back.

I'm sorry you were afraid. It sounds like maybe you were experiencing some paranoia, though.

I don't like NAMI.

I'm so sorry that no one called you back. That sucks. I hate when I call a place for help and they don't call me back. It's irresponsible.

As a high risk, severe client the thought of being court ordered to comply with treatment I may not agree with sucks. It offends me that in my time of need I wont have control over my own life.

This sounds like bad news to me... especially the bit about treatment compliance. I know a lot of people (myself included) have had difficulties with medication and I'm concerned that forcing people to comply with treatment is not only a breach of basic rights, it could result in a lot of mistreated individuals. For example, about a year ago my only option of a psychiatrist put me on a medication that made me very sick and increasingly depressed. Because I had no way to get a second opinion, I had to deal with her negligence for several months. I've very certain that there will be a lot more people with similar experiences if this bill is implemented. There is just no way to ensure that people will be on the right medication or have competent providers.

this law makes me very glad my therapist is not also my psychiatrist and that I got away from a mental health professionals that can prescribe meds. Honestly, I probably won't ever get a pdoc again with this law. This I believe is just another law acting on the stigma of mental illness.

I think that's a delimna for people with MI not taking their meds Those for this bill ie TAC and National Alliance for the Seriously Mentally ill contend MI people don't take their meds because of lack of insight of being MI. They don't take in consideration many MH consumers don't take meds because of the intolerable side effects. National Alliance etc is a Facebook group run by DJ Jaffe He is an associate of E. Fuller Torrey. Speaking of Torrey I knew a consumer who thought of him as E. Full of Himself Torrey. Love that!!!

Or that they don't actually work that well.

I remember the days when Jaffe was quoted as advising parents to stage scenes to make it appear that their mentally ill children were more violent than they actually were. Of course this was supposed to get those children into "treatment" and therefore it was justified.