California has asked the Supreme Court not to review the state’s new CARE Court program, partially because it says all treatments through the program are voluntary.
The Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment Court program is a new treatment program in California designed to give treatment and housing to people diagnosed with schizophrenia. The program allows people to petition for the court-ordered treatment of a family member, client or other specified relationship.
The law was opposed by multiple civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Western Center on Law and Poverty and Disability Rights California. The groups argue that the law forces people into treatment, and will take away a person’s rights to choose their own treatment.
DRC filed a petition with the California Supreme Court Jan. 26, asking the court to halt the program before it begins. It is scheduled to debut in Riverside County, along with six other counties, Oct. 1.
If the state gets its way, the Supreme Court will deny the petition and not review the program. Otherwise, the court could hold a hearing on the program, and decide then whether to prohibit it from beginning.
DRC took issue with the five court hearings brought by the CARE Court program in the first two months, the sharing of medical information and criteria for placement in the program.
“Beginning October 1, 2023, thousands of unhoused Californians with mental illness will be threatened with court orders, forced into involuntary treatment and swept off the streets, not because they are a danger to themselves or others, but because a judge has speculated they are ‘likely’ to become so in the future,” DRC’s petition said.
DRC argued that the program could involuntarily force people into housing and treatment programs, even though it will not force medication, citing Section 5801(b)(5): “The client should be fully informed and volunteer for all treatment provided, unless…the client is under a court order for CARE (Court)…and, prior to the court-ordered CARE plan, the client has been offered an opportunity to enter into a CARE agreement on a voluntary basis and has declined to do so.”
Not so, argued the state. In their response to DRC’s petition, the state argued that DRC misinterpreted the law, and that the entire treatment is voluntary.
“CARE Court participants cannot be forced to participate,” the brief says, quoting the bill’s author, Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana). Instead, the act requires health providers and county services to participate by providing treatment and housing, the state said.
If a person does not follow the court-ordered CARE Plan, they will only be terminated from the program, with no other negative consequences, the state argued. A person’s failure to comply with a medication order is explicitly not to be given any penalty, the brief said.
Read the DRC’s petition here.
Read the state’s response here.
Read Follow Our Courts’ prior coverage:
- CARE Court would establish plan for untreated schizophrenia spectrum, bill drafts show
- CARE Court bill passes California Senate
- Riverside County to start CARE Court program a year ahead of most counties
- CARE Court plan open for public comment
- Disability group files to axe CARE Court, arguing constitutional violations
