California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1976

Introduced
1/22/20  
Introduced
1/22/20  
Refer
2/6/20  
Refer
2/6/20  
Report Pass
5/4/20  
Report Pass
5/4/20  
Refer
5/5/20  
Refer
5/5/20  
Report Pass
5/19/20  
Report Pass
5/19/20  
Refer
5/19/20  
Report Pass
6/2/20  
Report Pass
6/2/20  
Engrossed
6/10/20  
Engrossed
6/10/20  
Refer
6/11/20  
Refer
6/11/20  
Refer
7/1/20  
Refer
7/1/20  
Report Pass
8/4/20  
Report Pass
8/4/20  
Refer
8/5/20  
Refer
8/5/20  
Refer
8/13/20  
Refer
8/13/20  
Report Pass
8/20/20  
Report Pass
8/20/20  
Enrolled
8/30/20  
Enrolled
8/30/20  
Chaptered
9/25/20  
Chaptered
9/25/20  

Caption

Mental health services: assisted outpatient treatment.

Impact

This bill is expected to affect California's mental health statutes significantly, particularly accommodating individuals needing mental health support who may not seek it voluntarily. By requiring counties to implement these mental health programs, the legislation aims to increase the number of individuals receiving help before they reach a crisis point. The introduction of provisions that enable judges to request petitions for assisted outpatient treatment adds a layer of judicial oversight that wasn't present in the past, potentially increasing treatment compliance among residents that could benefit from such interventions.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1976, introduced by Eggman, aims to enhance access to mental health services through assisted outpatient treatment by mandating that counties provide specific programs unless they opt out through a formal resolution. It also extends the provisions of Laura's Law indefinitely, which previously had an expiration date. The bill emphasizes the need for counties to ensure they do not reduce existing voluntary mental health programs for adults and children amid the implementation of these new mandatory programs. This requirement is a significant shift from the previous law that allowed counties to elect participation based on their discretion.

Sentiment

The sentiment around AB 1976 appears to be cautiously optimistic, with supporters arguing that it provides necessary structure and support for mentally ill individuals by ensuring they receive timely assistance. However, there are concerns from some stakeholders about the increased responsibilities placed on counties and whether they will have the proper resources to comply with these mandates. Advocates for mental health reform see this as a critical step forward, although there is a recognition of the challenges that come with its implementation.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding AB 1976 include the potential overreach in mandating counties to establish programs and concerns that some counties may struggle with the financial and logistical demands of such initiatives. While the bill aims to create a more proactive health care response for mental health, there are worries that inadequate funding or staff shortages could compromise the effectiveness of these programs. The requirement for counties to provide evidence to opt-out of these mandates could also lead to disputes over the criteria used to justify such decisions.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2119

Mental health.

CA SB1338

Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Court Program.

CA AB2352

Mental health and psychiatric advance directives.

CA AB2830

The Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Court Program.

CA AB2995

Public health: alcohol and drug programs.

CA SB1238

Health facilities.