Michigan House Bill HB4412

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/1/25
• Refer: 5/1/25

Caption

Mental health: hospitalization; person requiring treatment; revise, and modify certain procedures for treatment. Amends secs. 401, 427, 430, 461, 468, 472a & 475 of 1974 PA 258 (MCL 330.1401 et seq.).

Impact

One significant change under HB4412 is the introduction of stricter protocols for court-ordered treatments. The bill allows courts to modify treatment orders without a hearing if a patient is found non-compliant, which could expedite necessary interventions to ensure safety. This legislative change aims to enhance the efficacy of mental health support and treatment compliance while ensuring that supervision remains a key component of the treatment process. Consequently, community mental health services will play a vital role in executing and monitoring court-ordered treatments.

Summary

House Bill 4412 amends the 1974 PA 258, known as the Mental Health Code, focusing on the procedures for involuntary treatment of individuals diagnosed with mental illnesses. The proposed amendments include clarifying the criteria for identifying a 'person requiring treatment', which encompasses individuals likely to cause harm to themselves or others due to mental illness, those unable to meet basic physical needs, and those unwilling to seek voluntary treatment. These criteria aim to streamline the process by which individuals can be assessed and treated for their mental health needs.

Contention

Points of contention surrounding HB4412 may arise over issues of individual rights versus public safety. Critics may argue that expanding the authority of courts to modify treatment orders without hearings raises concerns about patients' rights and the potential for abuse of power. Advocates of the bill, however, posit that these measures are necessary for addressing immediate health risks posed by individuals who do not comply with treatment. The balance between ensuring that mental health treatment is both effective and respectful of individuals' rights remains a pivotal debate in the discourse around this legislation.