TRENTON — An Assembly committee today dissected — and at times bitterly debated — the governor’s decision to hold off on a law that would let families intervene to require that mentally ill relatives seek treatment. Amid the bickering, the mother of an 11-year-old Marlton boy killed by a paranoid schizophrenic who had refused treatment expressed her anger and...
Gov. Chris Christie's administration says the state would have needed to divert money from other mental health services programs to support a law that would allow families to seek involuntary commitment of the mentally ill to outpatient treatment.TRENTON — An Assembly committee today dissected — and at times bitterly debated — the governor’s decision to hold off on a law that would let families intervene to require that mentally ill relatives seek treatment.
Amid the bickering, the mother of an 11-year-old Marlton boy killed by a paranoid schizophrenic who had refused treatment expressed her anger and frustration.
The delay, Carol Katsnelson told the committee, “means our son’s life and death are not important to Gov. Christie, or at least, not important enough to do anything about it."
After Gregory Katsnelson’s October 2002 slaying, his parents campaigned six years to see the legislation pass.
The law, which passed in August 2009, would let families seek court orders requiring outpatient treatment for mentally ill relatives.
But Human Services Commissioner Jennifer Velez six weeks ago announced the law would be indefinitely delayed because it had been approved without any money to expand community treatment programs, and existing ones are swamped.
But Assembly Human Services Committee Chairwoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle (D-Bergen) said she would not allow Gov. Chris Christie to just “disregard the law."
“I think it’s the obligation of this administration to find ways to address funding situations like this, and to not ignore issues until a more convenient time," Huttle said.
Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose (R-Sussex) responded by threatening to leave the hearing over what she perceived as a “witch hunt."
“I’m a little disturbed to hear you directly criticize the governor,” McHose said. “This was a dollars and cents decision."
The law would require people suffering from a serious mental illness but who have refused treatment to be evaluated by a licensed counselor. The counselor would advise a judge whether the person “in the foreseeable future” is a risk to himself or others and needs in-patient care, or whether outpatient care would suffice. If a person ordered to attend outpatient counseling does not comply, a judge can order an evaluation for commitment to a hospital.
Deputy Human Services Commissioner Kevin Martone said that as the bill came before the Legislature, he said it would cost at least $10 million to expand treatment programs.
“Absent additional resources, the department would be forced to cut vital services to existing consumers in order to fund’’ the involuntary outpatient commitment law, he said.
Counties also would have to absorb millions of dollars in court costs at the same time they lost state funding, said Karen Kubert, director of Warren County Human Services.
Martha Silva of Guttenberg testified she was eager to see the law implemented because her son’s mental illness makes him violent.
“He’s been twice in jail because there is no IOC to help me out,’’ Silva said of involuntary outpatient commitment.
At the conclusion of the 21⁄2-hour hearing, Huttle issued a statement saying she “planned to continue this dialogue and consider our options as we work towards finding out how and when this law can be implemented.”
Previous coverage:
• N.J. will delay enforcement of controversial law for involuntary outpatient commitment
• N.J. indefinitely delays new mental health law for involuntary outpatient commitment
• Gov. Corzine gives N.J. families greater say on outpatient therapies for mentally ill relatives
• Assembly panel approves bill forcing treatment of mentally ill