|
|
Info about Fair Housing in Maryland - including housing discrimination, hate crimes, affordable housing, disabilities, segregation, mortgage lending, & others. http://www.gbchrb.org. 443.347.3701.
|
|
On April 3, 2024, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, together with the American Psychiatric Association, National Alliance on Mental Illness, National Association for Rural Mental Health, and National Association of Social Workers, filed an amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief in the U.S. Supreme Court case Johnson v Grants Pass addressing the impact of efforts to criminalize homelessness on people with mental health disabilities and refuting arguments that such efforts are necessary to combat homelessness. As the brief – authored by the Bazelon Center and the law firm Kellogg Hansen – explains, there are alternatives. Community-based housing and mental health services are far more effective than criminal enforcement in addressing homelessness and supporting people with mental disabilities.
Johnson v. Grants Pass is the most important case regarding homelessness in decades. It will address whether laws that criminalize sleeping in public with basic protections such as a blanket – when no safe and accessible shelter options are available – violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
The five organizations argued that housing is one of the most basic and powerful social determinants of health, particularly for individuals with mental health disabilities. Though most people experiencing homelessness do not have a mental health condition and homelessness is more frequently triggered by economic factors such as job loss or debt, individuals with mental disabilities are disproportionately represented among the homeless population and so are disproportionately harmed by policies that criminalize nonviolent conduct associated with being homeless, such as sleeping outside with a blanket.
To date, over 1,000 organizations and public leaders have submitted around 40 amicus briefs opposing the criminalization of homelessness. They all submit that community-based services are more humane, more effective, and less expensive than incarceration or hospitalization. By employing these community-based interventions, governments can address homelessness and housing insecurity without resorting to criminal enforcement.
On June 22, 1999, the Supreme Court found in Olmstead v. L.C. (Lois Curtis) that the segregation and unnecessary institutionalization of people with disabilities is discrimination in violation of federal law prohibited by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The Court recognized the right of people with disabilities to be treated as equal members of the society, to live and work in their communities, and receive services in the most integrated setting, which is almost always outside of an institution. The Olmstead decision resulted from the bravery and steadfast advocacy of Lois Curtis and her co-plaintiff Elaine Wilson. Curtis and Wilson, who had mental and intellectual disabilities, were approved to get services in the community and wanted to live in the community but were forced to remain in a state-run Georgia psychiatric unit because of a lack of community-based services. The Court held that unjustified segregation, which “perpetuates unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life,” is a form of discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Court recognized that “confinement in an institution severely diminishes the everyday life activities of individuals, including family relations, social contacts, work options, economic independence, educational advancement, and cultural enrichment.”
There still remains much to be done. Currently over 268,980 people with intellectual and developmental disabilities live in congregate, institutional settings or are on waitlists for services and residential programs, and thousands of people with mental health disabilities are involuntarily detained annually. People with disabilities who live in other types of institutions - e.g., prisons, long-term care hospitals, residential treatment facilities, and the 1.2 million adults living in nursing homes - are often under-counted and not included in these numbers. Many marginalized communities, including Black, Brown, and LGBTQI+ disabled people, are disparately impacted by the harms of institutionalization.
The Bazelon Center also hosted an anniversary event that brought together leaders from the federal government, the disability rights and disability justice movements, grassroots advocates and youth with lived expertise to reflect on accomplishments, lessons learned and the future of legal advocacy to achieve full community integration for youth with disabilities. The event celebrated the lives and legacies of plaintiffs Lois Curtis and Elaine Wilson and all who fight to live outside of institutions and to live full lives in their communities. We appreciate all those who joined us for our virtual panel to mark a quarter century of fighting to achieve the promise of Olmstead – dignity, autonomy and full inclusion for people with disabilities in all aspects of life.
As part of our efforts to achieve the promise of Olmstead, we continued our advocacy to end the practice of sending police to mental health emergencies, when medical professionals would be sent to other health emergencies, like a heart attack. A police response is the wrong response and too often leads to arrest, incarceration and even death, especially for Black people experiencing a mental health crisis. This week, we filed an amicus brief in federal court arguing that the District of Columbia must send a health response, not police, to people experiencing a mental health crisis. Failure to do so is discrimination in violation of federal law.
Much work remains. We appreciate your help to continue our legal, policy and public advocacy.
|
|
|
At the Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law’s June 22, 2023 event celebrating the 24th anniversary of the decision in Olmstead v. L.C. (Lois Curtis), it was announced that New York’s Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Congressman Daniel Goldman (D-NY-10) have proposed the “Strengthening Medicaid for Serious Mental Illness Act.” Read the press release here.
The Act would provide desperately needed mental health support to the 14 million adults in the U.S. living with a serious mental illness (SMI), such as schizophrenia, bipolar illness, and major depressive disorder. Too many individuals living with SMI are stuck in a devastating cycle moving between hospitals, jails, and housing instability due to lack of access to community-based treatment. In 2021, over 1/3 of individuals with SMI did not receive any form of mental health treatment. In New York City, a number of subway deaths have highlighted the need for access to intense and immediate mental health support. This bill creates a new package of services under Medicaid targeted specifically to individuals living with SMI, sets a national standard for SMI care, and incentivizes states to provide intensive community-based services to treat SMI.
The Bazelon Center helped shape this legislation and strongly supports the “Strengthening Medicaid for Serious Mental Illness Act,” a critical improvement to the Medicaid program. It also has been endorsed by the National Health Law Program. The legislation, introduced on the 24th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Olmstead v. L.C. (Lois Curtis), will incentivize states to provide a robust array of intensive community-based services for adults with mental health disabilities. These services - including Assertive Community Treatment (ACT), housing-related services, supported employment, peer support services, and mobile crisis services - have been proven to help individuals with disabilities live successfully in their own homes and communities. The services help people avoid unnecessary institutionalization in hospitals and other facilities, which under Olmstead constitutes disability-based discrimination. This bill will help states comply with their legal obligations and save taxpayer dollars that would otherwise pay for expensive institutional care.
These services – including housing-related services, supported employment, peer support services, ACT, and mobile crisis services–have been proven to help individuals with disabilities live successfully in their own homes and communities and avoid unnecessary institutionalization in hospitals and other facilities, which under Olmstead v. L.C. constitutes disability-based discrimination.
Specifically, the Strengthening Medicaid for Serious Mental Illness Act would:
1. Create a new waiver program granting Medicaid authority to provide states with an option to offer a package of services targeted specifically to individuals with SMI. The package would include:
2. Require states to adhere to certain standards, like tracking disparities in treatment, to ensure services are delivered with care to all in need.
3. Create a tiered Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) increase to incentivize states to provide intensive community-based services to individuals with SMI. This means that states could receive an increase up to 25% in funds allocated by the federal government for their Medicaid programs.
*****
June 2023 Monthly Briefing, Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, 2023.
Read the June 22, 2023 Press Release.
Read the June 22, 2023 NHeLP release.
April 28th Bazelon Center Zoom Event
|
|
|
|
|