Results for: Civil Commitment

In Oregon, people with severe mental illness often go untreated until they commit a crime due to high standards for involuntary care. A family’s experience highlights the stark contrast between Oregon’s approach and the more proactive treatment available in New York, where their son received the medication and care he needed.
Oregon’s imminent danger requirement and limited civil beds leave many untreated and at risk of violence. While New York’s more accessible treatment facilities and mental health courts prioritize helping individuals like their son restore their mental competency.
The family believes Oregon’s system sets people up for failure and calls for improved involuntary treatment options and secure mental healthcare beds to prevent preventable tragedies.

In Oregon, the path to mandated treatment for severe mental illness has shifted from civil commitment to the criminal justice system. This has led to a decline in civil commitments and an increase in the proportion of beds occupied by criminal patients in state psychiatric hospitals. As a result, long-term mental health care is often only available to those who have committed a serious crime, leaving those with acute mental illness cycling in and out of ill-equipped community-based options. Advocates argue that this system waits for individuals to commit a crime before providing treatment, and that care should not be predicated on the idea that there must be a victim.