Relating to the payment of costs incurred by the involuntary commitment of persons with mental illness.
Impact
The amended law specifies that counties are liable for the costs of hearings until a patient is discharged from mental health services. However, specific provisions are made for inpatient mental health facilities that have contracts with the state to provide behavioral health services. These facilities will have their costs covered if they meet established conditions, such as serving individuals from low-income families who lack other payment options. This change could potentially ease the financial burden on counties, especially those facing budget constraints while managing mental health services.
Summary
SB938 addresses the financial responsibilities relating to the involuntary commitment of individuals with mental illness in Texas. It amends current laws surrounding who pays for the costs associated with emergency detention hearings and other related legal proceedings. Under the new provisions, costs incurred during such hearings will be the responsibility of the respective counties that initiate the emergency procedures or accept applications for court-ordered mental health services. This bill aims to ensure clarity and fairness in the financial obligations of state and county entities involved in mental health care.
Sentiment
The sentiment around SB938 appears generally supportive, especially among mental health advocates and service providers who see a need for more structured financial responsibility in mental health proceedings. By explicitly defining who pays for various costs, the bill aims to create a more equitable system that ensures patients receive necessary care without undue financial distress on local government entities. However, concerns may arise regarding the long-term sustainability of funding for county services and whether the changes might inadvertently set up barriers for certain groups seeking mental health assistance.
Contention
One notable point of contention may center around the clause indicating that inpatient facilities are liable for costs of patients not covered under the bill’s other provisions. This could lead to disputes over billing and the financial impact on private facilities that might be forced to seek reimbursement directly from patients. While the focus remains on protecting vulnerable populations, the financial implications for both counties and mental health facilities could prompt discussions on fairness and accessibility in mental health care.
Relating to procedures applicable to the emergency detention of a person with mental illness at a mental health facility, including the detention, transportation, and transfer of the person and to certain best practices for courts with jurisdiction over emergency mental health matters.