Target Zero to Thrive This April

DBSA targets raising expectations for mental health treatment.

A month-long social media campaign, Target Zero to Thrive, challenges mental health care professionals, researchers, and individuals living with or affected by mood disorders to raise treatment goals to complete remission—to zero symptoms.

Of course the first priority for treatment is ensuring a person living with depression or bipolar disorder is out of crisis. However, too often the end goal established for successful long‐term care is for the person to maintain a stable mood. Better, or even stable, is not always well. Every person deserves the opportunity to not just survive but thrive, and to do that we need to ensure true wellness is the end‐goal for mental health treatment.

Consider this, successful treatment for cancer proceeds with the goal of removing every cancerous cell—to achieve complete remission. Why then, do we consider treatment for depression or bipolar disorder to be successful when symptoms persist, even if the person is considered to be stable?

The cost of settling for reduced symptoms is simply too great. It is, in fact, a matter of life and death—for when symptoms persist, individuals who have mood disorders are:

• at significantly greater risk of relapse(1)
• more likely to experience significant functional impairment, making the day‐to‐day demands of job and family challenging, and too often, debilitating. (2)
• more likely to have life‐threatening co‐occurring conditions, such as heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes—a huge factor in why individuals with mental health conditions die, on average, 25 years younger than those without mental health conditions (3)
• at a higher risk to die by suicide (4)

DBSA President Allen Doederlein shares, “Living with a mood disorder can damage hope and lower expectations; so a person may not expect or think they deserve a full life. We, as peers, clinicians, researchers, and family, need to help them expect and achieve more—by raising the bar for treatment. Targeting zero symptoms may seem like a formidable goal, but there are over 21 million reasons and Americans living with depression or bipolar disorder to make it a goal worth pursuing!”

(1) Am J Psychiatry. 2000 Sep;157(9):1501-4.
Does incomplete recovery from first lifetime major depressive episode herald a chronic course of illness?
Judd LL1, Paulus MJ, Schettler PJ, Akiskal HS, Endicott J, Leon AC, Maser JD, Mueller T, Solomon DA, Keller MB.

(2) J Clin Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;68(8):1237-45.
Mood symptoms, functional impairment, and disability in people with bipolar disorder: specific effects of mania and depression.
Simon GE1, Bauer MS, Ludman EJ, Operskalski BH, Unützer J.

(3) Bipolar Disord. 2004 Oct;6(5):368-73.
Burden of general medical conditions among individuals with bipolar disorder.
Kilbourne AM1, Cornelius JR, Han X, Pincus HA, Shad M, Salloum I, Conigliaro J, Haas GL.

(4) Psychiatr Serv. 2013 Dec 1;64(12):1195-202. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201200587.
Does response on the PHQ-9 Depression Questionnaire predict subsequent suicide attempt or suicide death?
Simon GE, Rutter CM, Peterson D, Oliver M, Whiteside U, Operskalski B, Ludman EJ.

Larry Drain, Legislative Liaison for DBSA Tennessee, offers this blog with its many references that provides points for and against the Murphy bill. Please take time to self educate. Larry gives us a good start.

[Children's Mental Health Network

The Morning Zen]

Congressman Tim Murphy introduces controversial Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act of 2013

2 Comments | Posted December 15, 2013

On Friday, one day before the anniversary of the Newtown school shooting tragedy and on the same day of yet another tragic shooting at a school in Colorado, Congressman Tim Murphy introduced the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act of 2013, a bill that would effectively rewrite how the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) operates and significantly narrow the focus of the types of mental health services and supports it helps promote through its grant programs. While the bill is at this point just a proposal, it is an important read for Network faithful as it sheds a light on the thinking of many individuals across the country about how to improve mental health services in America. Unfortunately, with the continued tragedies occurring at schools across the nation the tendency to equate guns and violence with mental illness leads to recommended solutions in this bill that are narrow in focus and could potentially set back the advances in the field of mental health 20 to 30 years.

What makes writing this Morning Zen piece difficult for me is that I have the utmost respect for Congressman Murphy. A child psychologist by training, co-author of two books ("The Angry Child: Regaining Control When Your Child Is Out of Control" and "Overcoming Passive-Aggression), it is obvious that Congressman Murphy cares deeply about improving mental health services. For that he is to be applauded. But what is in this proposed bill for the most part is either mystifying or antithetical to what the research tells us works best for young people with emotional challenges and their families. In fairness, at the end of this post I have included links to position statements on the proposed bill from national organizations and thought leaders both for and against the bill. As always, we pride ourselves on providing as many perspectives as possible so that our educated readers can make up their own minds and respond to their elected officials accordingly.

The response from mental health advocates and provider groups both for and against the bill was swift. As is the general approach of the Children's Mental Health Network we took the weekend to read and digest the 135-page bill before making our comments. The list is long so grab a cup of coffee for this one.

The proposed bill is complex in that mixed in with proposals that are administratively bureaucratic, relying on reference resources that in some cases are twenty years old and frankly dismissive of anything outside of the realm of narrowly defined evidence based practice, are some excellent proposals such as continuing funding for the Garrett Lee Smith and National Child Traumatic Stress initiatives.

However, overwhelmingly the recommended changes in the bill set the advances made in knowledge about what works for youth with mental health challenges and their families back a good twenty to thirty years.

Clouding the picture of how to interpret this proposed bill was the timing of its release – on the eve of the anniversary of the Newtown tragedy and on the day of yet another shooting at a school in Colorado, where emotions were already running high and the popular press was flooded with news stories about guns, violence and mental illness. Even though research shows that those with a mental illness are significantly more likely to be a victim of violence than a perpetrator of violence, discussions in Congress about what to do tend to fall too easily into the guns + violence = mental illness equation.

Note: Be sure to read Lisa Lambert's Morning Zen post for a parent’s reflection on the anniversary of the Newtown tragedy.

Okay, with all of this in mind as a backdrop for what is in the proposed bill, let’s take a walk through some of the highlights. The 135 page document is one I encourage you to read to get your own sense of its merits and drawbacks. In this post I will focus on some of the key areas that are important to highlight. Page numbers of the bill are cited so that you can read the full text in the copy of the proposed bill that you can download here.

Additional layers of bureaucracy added while diminishing the decision-making role of key SAMHSA personnel (Page 4)
The position of Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders would be created. This individual would directly supervise the Administrator of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Reading through the responsibilities that this individual would have left me perplexed, as the duties described appear to already be in place under the responsibility of the Administrator.

National Mental Health Policy Laboratory (page 7)
The proposed bill calls for the creation of a National Mental Health Policy Laboratory (NMHPL) headed by a Director. The purpose of this Director position would be to:

• (A) Identify and implement policy changes and other trends likely to have the most significant impact on mental health services and monitor their impact in accordance with the principles outlined in National Advisory Mental Health Council’s 2006 report entitled ‘The Road Ahead: Research Partnerships To Transform Services’;
• (B) Collect information from grantees under programs established or amended by the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act of 2013 and under other mental health programs under this Act, including grantees that are federally qualified community behavioral health clinics certified under section 201 of the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act of 2013 and States receiving funds under a block grant under part B of title XIX of this Act; and
• (C) Evaluate and disseminate to such grantees evidence-based practices and services delivery models using the best available science shown to reduce program expenditures while enhancing the quality of care furnished to individuals by other such grantees."

The description of the NMHPL goes on to say that "In selecting evidence-based practices and services delivery models for evaluation and dissemination under paragraph (2)(C), the Director of the NMHPL 

• (A) Shall give preference to models that improve the coordination, quality, and efficiency of health care services furnished to individuals with serious mental illness; and
• (B) May include clinical protocols and practices used in the Recovery After Initial Schizophrenia Episode (RAISE) project and the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS) of the National Institute of Mental Health.

On page 10 the language continues with "In carrying out the duties under this section, the Director of the NMHPL shall consult with representatives of the National Institute of Mental Health on organization, hiring decisions, and operations, initially and on an ongoing basis; (B) other appropriate Federal agencies; and (C) clinical and analytical experts with expertise in medicine, psychiatric and clinical psychological care, and health care management.

The Children’s Mental Health Network is troubled that there is no mention of youth and family involvement in such a consulting pool, especially with the impressive track record achieved by SAMHSA in cultivating a family-driven, youth guided approach through its system of care grants and cooperative agreements over the past 20+ years.

Interagency Serious Mental Illness Coordinating Committee (page 14)
Yet another bureaucratic layer is added to the decision-making process with the recommendation to establish an Interagency Serious Mental Illness Coordinating Committee to "assist the Assistant Secretary in carrying out the Assistant Secretary's duties.

The responsibilities of this Committee include:

• (1) Develop and annually update a summary of advances in serious mental illness research related to causes, prevention, treatment, early screening, diagnosis or rule out, intervention, and access to services and supports for individuals with serious mental illness;
• (2) Monitor Federal activities with respect to serious mental illness;
• (3) Make recommendations to the Assistant Secretary regarding any appropriate changes to such activities, including recommendations to the Director of NIH with respect to the strategic plan developed under paragraph (5);
• (4) Make recommendations to the Assistant Secretary regarding public participation in decisions relating to serious mental illness;
• (5) Develop and annually update a strategic plan for the conduct of, and support for, serious mental illness research, including proposed budgetary requirements; and
• (6) Submit to the Congress such strategic plan and any updates to such plan.

There is a long list of required members for this committee (page 15), including the Director of NIH, the Attorney General of the United States; the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and more. Members of the Committee serve 4-year terms and would be required to meet a minimum of two times per year. In addition, the Committee “may establish subcommittees and convene workshops and conferences "to enable the subcommittees to carry out their duties."

And finally, with regard to administrative duties, on page 70 it is noted that the administration of block grants would be removed from the Director of the Center for Mental Health Services and shifted to the Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders. Gonna be one busy Assistant Secretary if this proposal goes through!

I can't help but think that if this plan were to come to fruition there would be bureaucratic gridlock. Two new significant leadership positions assuming key duties of currently existing high ranking officials within SAMHSA and a large Committee with sub-committees to "assist the Assistant Secretary in carrying out the Assistant Secretary's duties" (Page 14). In my mind, this is a huge duplication of duties already ascribed to the SAMHSA Administrator, the Director of the Center for Mental Health Services and others within SAMHSA.

Let's move away from administrative duties to some of the new grant programs proposed, specifically the Assisted Outpatient Treatment Program. The proposed bill calls for up to 50 grants each year for a 4-year pilot program to focus on assisted outpatient treatment programs (Page 19). Each grant would be eligible for one million dollars per year for four years - $15,000,000 per year would be authorized totaling $60,000,000 over the four-year period.

Assisted outpatient treatment is a controversial topic, with some saying it is the best option for an adult with a mental illness who "lacks capacity to fully understand or lacks judgment to make informed decisions regarding his or her need for treatment, care, or supervision." Others, including the Children's Mental Health Network, see this as a potentially dangerous road to travel in that it could have wide-ranging impact on those who might be swept up unnecessarily. You can review both sides of the argument regarding Assisted Outpatient Treatment at the end of this post.

Number of seriously mentally ill who are imprisoned (page 63)
Section 405 focuses on reports of the number of seriously mentally ill who are imprisoned. An important topic for sure, the intent is to "calculate the number and type of crimes committed by persons with serious mental illness each year, and detail strategies or ideas for preventing crimes by those individuals with serious mental illness from occurring… For purposes of this section, the Attorney General, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary of Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders shall determine an appropriate definition of ‘‘serious mental illness’’ based on theHealth Care Reform for Americans with Severe Mental Illnesses: Report’’ of the National Advisory Mental Health Council, American Journal of Psychiatry 1993; 150:1447–1465. The link is provided though you will need to pay the journal for the download. We can only hope that this document, written 20 years ago, reflects the evolution of thinking about mental health challenges since then. Of greater concern is the proposed process for decision-making about defining "serious mental illness." Should this just be left to the Assistant Secretary and the Attorney General? This is much too vague for our liking.

Reducing the stigma of serious mental illness (page 79)
It is hard to even comment on this section when the entire document is stigma-laden, focusing primarily on a narrow subset of those individuals with a diagnosis of serious mental illness when describing what needs to happen within a federal agency charged with looking at the full spectrum of behavioral health issues. However, Network faithful should read it and decide for themselves.

Title XI-SAMHSA Reauthorization and Reforms (page 99)
Mentioned earlier is the fact that the Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders would be in charge of SAMHSA. One of the more fascinating recommendations is that "At least 30 days before awarding a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract, the Administrator shall give written notice of the award to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate.’’ This suggests adding yet another layer of review, more opportunity for delay and added bureaucracy. Though not specified, one could assume that a member of either Committee could block a grant award.

In addition, it would be required that "Before awarding a grant, cooperative agreement, or contract, the Secretary shall provide a list of the members of the peer review group responsible for reviewing the award to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate." This is yet another opportunity for delay and bureaucratic red tape.

Transfer of all functions and responsibilities of the Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality to the National Mental Health Policy Laboratory (page 102)
This section discusses the transfer of "all functions and responsibilities of the Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality to the National Mental Health Policy Laboratory. Why would one do this? In addition, in this section responsibilities currently assigned to the Administrator are reassigned to the Assistant Secretary. I am beginning to wonder what is left for the Administrator to do?

Establish a clearinghouse of evidence-based practices  (page 106)
In this section there is mention of the establishment of "a clearinghouse of evidence-based practices, which has first been reviewed and approved by a panel of psychiatrists and clinical psychologists, for mental health information to assure the widespread dissemination of such information to States, political subdivisions, educational agencies and institutions, treatment and prevention service providers, and the general public, including information concerning the practical application of research supported by the National Institute of Mental Health that is applicable to improving the delivery of services..."

Unfortunately there is no mention of consumers, families or youth involved in this review.

Limitations on Authority (page 133)
The section on Limitations on Authority includes some questionable items. For example, in this section it is stated that in order for SAMHSA to host or sponsor a conference they "must give at least 90 days of prior notification to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and Committee on Appropriations of the Senate." Again, this seems like yet another unnecessary layer of bureaucracy.

No financial assistance to any program without evidence-based practices (page 133)
Continuing on page 133 is the directive that the Administrator of SAMHSA "shall not provide any financial assistance for any program relating to mental health or substance use diagnosis or treatment, unless such diagnosis and treatment relies on evidence-based practices."

If you have made it this far in this lengthy post you know that this leads back to the question "What is an evidence-based practice and who is involved in deciding that?" From reading the full text of the proposed bill the decision makers are definitely skewed toward the medical community with a strong focus on a narrow slice of the overall population of individuals needing mental health services.

Elimination of unauthorized SAMHSA programs without explicit statutory authorization (page 134)
Saving one of the more controversial items for last (at least as based on the tenor of emails sent to the Network over the weekend) is the section on the elimination of unauthorized SAMHSA programs without explicit statutory authorization. The language is clear that no new programs are to be created that are not explicitly authorized or required by statute and that "by the end of fiscal year 2014, any program or project of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration that is not explicitly authorized or required by statute shall be terminated."

The proposed bill goes on to say "The Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders shall seek to enter into an arrangement with the Institute of Medicine under which the Institute (or, if the Institute declines to enter into such arrangement, another appropriate entity) agrees to submit a report to the Congress not later than July 31, 2014, identifying each program, project, or activity to be terminated under subsection (a).

So, there you have it. Quite a bit to chew on and I cut this post down significantly. Please take the time to read the proposed bill. Whether it gains traction in the House or not it is important to remember that this proposed bill reflects the thinking of many. If you are concerned about this, as we are, then you might want to consider an education campaign.

Next week we will share our collaborative efforts with Maryland-based mental health providers, adult and youth representatives with experience receiving mental health services, and family advocates and other agency representatives to put together a site visit for Senate and House Appropriations Committee staff to not only show them what a coordinated system of care approach looks like in the effective provision of services and supports for young adults with mental health challenges, but also to provide them the opportunity for one on one dialogue with youth and adults who utilize mental health  services, families and the amazingly dedicated professionals who work side by side with them. We began organizing this effort for Senate Appropriations staff as a result of our inquiry into the Healthy Transitions Initiative in August of this year. Senate Appropriations Committee staff have agreed to come and we will be extending an invitation to House Appropriations Committee staff this week. I will give you full details in the Morning Zen post this coming Friday.

What is so important about our education campaign is that it is not focused on one grant or particular service. We are not bringing staffers to a visit to ask for money. We are bringing staffers to a visit to let them experience firsthand the importance of a comprehensive approach to meeting (in this case) the needs of young adults with mental health challenges. Sounds like a systems of care approach to me!

And finally, here is a sampling of different individual and organizational analyses and reactions to the proposed bill, both pro and con. Remember, an educated voice is a powerful voice.

For the proposed bill

• How Should We Help the Seriously Mentally Ill?
• NAMI NY State Position Statement  
• NAPHS Applauds Rep. Tim Murphy for Introduction of Comprehensive Mental Health Reform Legislation

Against the proposed bill

• National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery press release jointly issued with the National Disability Rights Network and the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law
• Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC)1 Myths and Facts
• Mental Health America statement

Time to do your homework folks!

Scott Bryant-Comstock
President & CEO
Children’s Mental Health Network

Submitted by Jennifer Dochod, Legislative Liasion for DBSA Tennessee. The brief summary by Mr. Murphy's office highlights the points in the proposed Bill he drafted.

                     Tim Murphy

                U.S. Congressman

    for the 18th District of Pennsylvania

Short Summary of The Helping Families In Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R. 3717)

Ensuring Psychiatric Care for Those in Need of Help the Most Rep. Tim Murphy, PhD

Mental illness does not discriminate based on age, class or ethnicity. It affects all segments of society. More than 11 million Americans have severe schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depression yet millions are going without treatment as families struggle to find care for loved ones.

To understand why so many go without treatment, the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations launched a top-to-bottom review of the country’s mental health system beginning in January 2013. The investigation revealed that the approach by the federal government to mental health is a chaotic patchwork of antiquated programs and ineffective policies across numerous agencies.

Not only is this frustrating for families in need of medical care, but when left untreated, those with mental illness often end up in the criminal justice system or on the streets. The mentally ill are no more violent than anyone else, and in fact are more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators, but individuals with untreated serious mental illness are at an increased risk of violent behavior. Tragically, undertreated mental illness has been linked to homicides, assaults, and suicides.

The Helping Families In Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R. 3717) fixes the nation’s broken mental health system by focusing programs and resources on psychiatric care for patients and families most in need of services. The legislation:

EMPOWERS PARENTS AND CAREGIVERS

What the investigation found:

Physicians are often unwilling to share or receive information with loved ones about an individual who has a serious mental illness and is experiencing a psychotic break because of complicated federal rules on communicating with immediate family members and caregivers. This scenario is especially problematic for parents of young adults with mental illness because psychosis begins to manifest between ages 14 and 25.

Clarifies Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy rule and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act so physicians and mental health professionals can provide crucial information to parents and caregivers about a loved one who is in an acute mental health crisis to protect their health, safety, and well-being.

2332 Rayburn House Office Building | Washington, DC 20515
Murphy.House.Gov | (202) 225-2301 | (202) 225-1844 | @RepTimMurphy | Facebook.com/RepTimMurphy

The Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R. 3717), Rep. Tim Murphy 2

FIXES THE SHORTAGE OF INPATIENT PSYCHIATRIC BEDS

What the investigation found:

There is a severe lack of inpatient and outpatient treatment options. Seventy years ago, the country had 600,000 inpatient psychiatric beds for a country half the size. Today, there are only 40,000 beds.

What the legislation does:

Increases access to acute care psychiatric beds for the most critical patients by making two narrowly tailored exceptions to the Institutions for Mental Disease (IMD) exclusion under Medicaid. The IMD exclusion is what originally caused the shortage of psychiatric beds.

ALTERNATIVES TO INSTITUTIONALIZATION

What the investigation found:

Approximately forty percent of individuals with schizophrenia do not recognize they have a mental illness, making it exceedingly difficult for them to follow through on a treatment regimen.
What the legislation does:
Promotes alternatives to long-term inpatient care such as court-ordered ‘Assisted Outpatient Treatment,’ which has been proven to save money for state and local governments by reducing the rates of imprisonment, homelessness, substance abuse, and costly emergency room visits by the chronically mentally ill.

REACHING UNDESERVED AND RURAL POPULATIONS

What the investigation found:

The delay between a first episode of psychosis and the onset of treatment averages 110 weeks. Early diagnosis and medical intervention improves outcomes dramatically, but there is only one child psychiatrist for every 7,000 children with a mental illness or behavioral disorder.

What the legislation does:

Modeled on a successful state project in Massachusetts, the bill advances tele-psychiatry to link pediatricians and primary care physicians with psychiatrists and psychologists in areas where patients do not have access to mental health professionals.

DRIVING EVIDENCE-BASED CARE

What the investigation found:

The federal government spends $125 billion annually on mental health, but there is little interagency coordination on programs, nor does the federal government collect data on how mental health dollars are spent or whether those dollars are resulting in positive health outcomes.

What the legislation does:

Creates Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders within the Department of Health and Human Services to coordinate federal government programs and ensure that recipients of the community mental health services block grant apply evidence-based models of care developed by the National Institute of Mental Health. The Assistant Secretary will ensure federal programs are optimized for patient care rather than bureaucracy.

The Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R. 3717), Rep. Tim Murphy 3

What the investigation found:

STABILIZING PATIENTS BEYOND THE ER

Access to physician-prescribed medication is vital for vulnerable individuals in avoid acute mental health crisis. Current policies that permit only “one drug” per therapeutic class policy ignore the clinical needs of individuals with mental illness who rely on vital, non-interchangeable prescription drug therapies.

What the legislation does:

Protects certain classes of drugs commonly used to treat mental illness so physicians have prescribe the right medication for those on Medicare and Medicaid similar to the protected classes for persons with epilepsy and cancer.

ADVANCES CRITICAL MEDICAL RESEARCH

What the investigation found:

The National Institute of Mental Health measures public health outcomes to develop medical models of care. For example, the Recovery After Initial Schizophrenia Episode (RAISE) project shows earlier intervention with treatment for a person at risk of developing full-blown schizophrenia allows patients to lead functional lives. The NIMH also excels at basic medical research, but lacks the financial resources.

What the legislation does:

Authorizes the BRAIN research initiative at the National Institute of Mental Health and encourages the agency to undertake additional research projects on serious mental illness and self- or other-directed violence.

HIGH QUALITY COMMUNITY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES

What the investigation found:

Community Mental Health Centers receiving funds from the federal government receive lower reimbursements federal insurance programs than comparable care facilities.

What the legislation does:

Applies rigorous quality standards for a new class of Federally Qualified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (FQCBHC), requiring them to provide a range of mental health and primary care services.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REFORMS

What the investigation found:

Between twenty and fifty percent of the incarnated system inmates have a mental illness. Mental health courts have provided a cost-effective and responsible alternative to incarcerating the mentally ill.

What the legislation does:

So patients are treated in healthcare system and not warehoused in the criminal justice system, the bill reauthorizes mental health courts and requires the Department of Justice to collect more data on interactions between the police and the mentally ill. The bill also authorizes Byrne Justice Assistance Grants (JAG) to be used for mental health training of law enforcement and corrections officers.

The Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R. 3717), Rep. Tim Murphy 4

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AWARENESS FOR CHILDREN AND TEENS

What the investigation found:

Despite increased medical and scientific research into the nature and source of serious mental illness, a mental illness stigma persists.

What the legislation does:

The Department of Education, working with mental health stakeholders, will undertake a national campaign aimed at reducing the stigma of severe mental illness in schools. The bill also reauthorizes the Garrett Lee Smith suicide prevention program.

INTEGRATES PRIMARY AND BEHAVIORAL CARE

What the investigation found:

Low-income individuals with serious mental illness and addiction disorders have high incidences of cancer, heart disease, diabetes and asthma. Untreated depression increases the risk of chronic diseases, and can double the cost of healthcare for health disease and diabetes. Integrating mental healthcare providers into electronic medical records systems will result in better coordinated care for patients as well as cost savings.

What the legislation does:

Extends the health information technology incentive program to mental health providers so they can communicate and work with primary care clinicians.

INCREASES PHYSICIAN VOLUNTEERISM

What the investigation found:

Health centers and mental health clinics are experiencing a staff shortage. Clinicians and healthcare professionals can volunteer at federal free clinics, but federal legal barriers and the high cost of medical malpractice insurance prevent them from doing so at community health centers and mental health clinics.

What the legislation does:

Eliminates federal legal barriers under the Federal Tort Claims Act preventing physician volunteerism at community mental health clinics and federally-qualified health centers.

REFORMS THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE & MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

What the investigation found:

Unauthorized in the last decade, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration has lacked mission focus. Grant programs are not evidence-based or guided by the best available medical science.

What the legislation does:

Emphasizes evidence-based treatments, sunsets unauthorized programs, and strengthens congressional oversight of all federal behavioral health grants.

Murphy stuck????

by Larry Drain

GOP Newtown bill hits impasse | TheHill
http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/mental-health/204125-gops-newtown-bill-hits-impasse-in-house#.U1g8L-DtN98.facebook
【from Next Browser】

It sounds based on reports like these that the Murphy Bill is not going to pass as written.  Things change I know, but it looks that way.  There is I understand a democratic bill being written by Rep.  Barber.  Things dont seem to look really great.  The really interesting thing is that it might not matter rather or not the Torrey crowd thinks they have made a great case.  It may only matter whether or not they find common ground with people up to now they have shown no interest in finding common ground with.  Rhettoric that they are so good with may not be their friend.  Winning the battle may cause them to lose the war.

The next few weeks, next few months may be interesting.  Common ground.... what a weird approach to American politics.

hopeworkscommunity | April 23, 2014

On my mind: Fighting stigma, building communitiy

By Bob Carolla

BP magazine

When I am speaking to groups, I often introduce myself by saying I have bipolar disorder and am a lawyer and that the latter carries the greater stigma. It’s a sure-fire laugh line. There’s also a grain of truth in it.

Fifty years ago, stigma surrounded bipolar disorder, which was considered “manic depressive insanity.” Sadly, today, it still touches mental illness, as well as HIV/AIDs, race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status. It’s important to remember we are not alone. We are part of a broader movement focused on changing popular culture.

The good news is that the way the public views bipolar disorder is changing, and for the better. We can see progress, when bipolar themes are woven into television shows like House and Broadway musicals like Next to Normal offering a good dose of humor. Next to Normal is controversial (its messages don’t necessarily frame bipolar as a medical illness or encourage treatment), but at least it has people talking about bipolar—and laughing, but not at our expense.

Today, the Internet is a leading source of health information (and misinformation) and has “democratized” mental illness. “Direct to consumer” (DTC) advertisements of medications on television and in print also have had an impact, informing people about an illness, symptoms and the potential side effects of drugs. Because of commercial marketing, some critics argue that bipolar is being over-diagnosed and is merely a “diagnosis du jour.” Frankly, I hate that term. It trivializes a life-threatening illness and represents one kind of stigma. Is there a cancer du jour?

Today, bipolar may come up in conversations at neighborhood barbecues as parents discuss their teenagers’ travails. High school students may think the diagnosis is no big deal, so long as it’s treated and symptoms don’t become “too bizarre.”

At my 25th college reunion, several classmates and I inevitably asked each other: “Who do you work for?” Few people know what NAMI stands for, so I usually have to answer using all eleven syllables of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, not ever knowing for sure how people will react to the “mental illness” part. It gets even more awkward if they ask, “How did you end up doing that?” Sometimes I cop out and answer that there’s a history of depression in my family.

At my reunion, I was more forthcoming. I simply stated, “I have bipolar disorder.”

“My brother does too,” one classmate chimed in.

“Hey, shake,” said another, extending his hand. “So do I.”

“Me too,” admitted a third.

Disclosure is liberating. By no longer internalizing stigma wrapped in a sense of shame, we gain self-confidence that can hasten recovery.

However, it’s still a hard, cold world out there. We have to be realistic and selective, particularly when it comes to employment.

For some reason, people in early stages of recovery who have been unemployed for a while often have a strong desire to disclose to prospective employers; their disclosure is probably an assertion of integrity in order to overcome stigma. “Keeping a secret” somehow feels “sneaky.” We want to purge feelings of shame and receive validation. Frankly, we should all get medals, but my advice is this: don’t look for them in job interviews. The workplace is also not the place to go for talk therapy. It’s not a good idea to reveal a history of bipolar to co-workers during lunch break. For reintegration, my advice to peers is to focus on establishing a record of valued performance during the first six to 12 months in a new job. Ask for accommodations only if needed.

Expansion of peer support is important because openness does empower recovery. In that regard, bp Magazine is an important vehicle for our movement. The magazine strengthens our community.

Staying connected, raising public awareness, and watching out for each other are all part of the fight against stigma. We’ve made progress, but let’s see where we are five years from now.

-----
Bob Carolla is director of media relations for the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) and oversees its StigmaBusters program. He is a member of bp’ s editorial panel.

That's how many Tennesseans were kept out of poverty by Social Security Income each year, on average, from 2010 to 2012. Of those, over 372,000 were 65 or older. Nationally, Social Security kept more than 22 million people out of poverty; over 15 million were 65-plus, according to an AARP Public Policy Institute report. Go to aarp.org/bulletin for more information.

ERICKA NICOLE GILLARD, 32, Transaction Specialist-Symcor Corporation, of Memphis, died March 28, 2014. 


Visitation from 8 a.m. until 9:55 a.m., Saturday, April 5, at Princeton Avenue Baptist Church, 468 Scott St., with Service to follow at 10 a.m. Burial in Forest Hill Cemetery, East. She leaves her mother, Carol Ann Gillard; father, John Quincy Gillard; sisters, Mary Gillard, Teresa Gillard Dunn, Shondra Gillard Harwell, and Theresa Gillard Dillard; one brother, John Quincy Gillard, Jr., and grandmother, Bernice Gillard. 

The power of two


Your partner can become a pillar of strength when you work together as a couple
By Barbara Boughton, BP Spring 2013



There’s no doubt that the nature of your relationship with a “significant other” has a major effect on managing bipolar. Research now shows that having a supportive partner may be just as important as medication and psychotherapy in preventing relapse, according to Sagar Parikh, MD, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto.

Likewise, the stress of high-conflict relationships or the emotions that accompany breakup and divorce can sometimes exacerbate symptoms of the disorder, Parikh says.

So what can you do to make your partner an ally in recovery?

The first step, says Parikh, is education—for both of you.

The more that both partners know about symptoms, treatments, and coping strategies, the more they can work together to address common challenges. Reading and online research, workshops presented by mental health organizations, discussions with mental health practitioners, and peer support groups are all good ways to get informed.

A partner or spouse who is up to speed on what it takes to live with bipolar will find it easier to understand when you ask for support.

The next step is learning to discuss matters relating to your illness openly and honestly.

For one thing, being able to share what’s going on in your life and your head provides your partner with a context for any irritability, sadness or high spirits you exhibit. For another, it gives you both a touchstone for recognizing early signs of a mood shift.

Elizabeth and her husband, Rory, who have been married since August 2012, have a conversation at least once a week about any symptoms Elizabeth might be experiencing.

“Regular communication is really important,” says Elizabeth, 32, of British Columbia. “We talk about what I’m feeling and things that he notices about me. Sometimes, it’s hard for me to see the forest for the trees, especially if I’m not feeling well.”

Rory’s feedback provides her with a reality check, Elizabeth says.

“Last year I had a manic episode and Rory realized something was wrong when I told him: ‘I want to go on a 5K run.’ I’m a pretty sedentary person, so for me that’s out of character. It gave Rory a clue that I might be experiencing mania,” she recalls.

In most intimate relationships, it’s important to make significant others aware of red flags, according to David Miklowitz, PhD, a professor of psychiatry and director of the Child and Adolescent Mood Disorders Program at the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at the University of California–Los Angeles.

“People with bipolar disorder can make a list of symptoms and behaviors that they know indicate early signs of a manic or depressive episode. The partners can then refer back to these lists in order to spot early symptoms,” Miklowitz says.

comfort levelWith education and experience, partners often become adept at spotting subtle signs, Miklowitz notes—sometimes before the person with bipolar does. 

“Then the question becomes: If your partner spots early signs of mania or depression, what do you want them to do with that information?” Miklowitz says. 

“Do you want them to call your doctor? Do you want them to go in with you for a therapy session, or encourage you to take your medicines? Some people like that kind of active support from their partners, and some do not.”

In some cases, Miklowitz says, intervention from a spouse can be seen as “too parental or too controlling.”

The bottom line is this: In order to tell your partner how to be helpful, you first need to know what kind of help you want. That’s highly individual, so every couple will find a different fit. After a disturbing interaction with a friend or boss, one person may simply want to vent while another seeks advice on how to resolve the situation.

Bill, 67, has never looked for a lot of hands-on involvement from his wife, Telle. The couple lives in California, and has been married for 20 years. 
 
“The main way that Telle has supported me is through her acceptance of me—and that’s been very important to me and our relationship. She knows that I can stand on my own two feet, and she doesn’t judge me,” says Bill, a retired refrigeration pipe fitter.

What Bill appreciates are Telle’s understanding and compassion for his symptoms, her trust that he is working to get the best treatment he can, and her emotional support when he’s had to be hospitalized.

Still, Telle has occasionally taken an active role in Bill’s care. In May 2012, Bill became delusional while being assessed at a hospital for a blood clot in his lung. Telle spoke to his psychiatrist, who arranged for Bill to be admitted for psychiatric intervention. 

If your partner does take an active role, Miklowitz says, it’s important to understand that the person will probably make mistakes.

“It’s crucial to give your partner some leeway, especially in the beginning of a relationship, when they’re just getting to know you and the effects of your illness. They’re not trying to control you. They’re just trying to help, and they don’t always know how to best do that,” he says.

talking pointsOnce you are clear in your own mind about what role you’d like your partner to take, Miklowitz notes, it’s crucial to be direct in expressing your wishes—and also to listen to what your partner has to say.

Miklowitz recommends asking “clarifying questions” to make sure you understand your partner’s point of view. To doublecheck that you’re interpreting correctly, practice repeating back what the other person said—a technique known as reflective listening or mirroring.

Nancy Poirier, MPs, a clinical psychologist at the Douglas University Institute for Mental Health in Montreal, stresses the need to express your wants and feelings with compassion.

With mirroring, for example, first reflect your partner’s viewpoint, then express understanding and empathy to validate how the other person feels.

In addition, she says, “both partners should be careful to use ‘I statements’ rather than blaming the other person in talking about the bipolar disorder. The important thing is for both partners to feel understood.”

As far as practical approaches, Poirier recommends developing a relapse prevention plan that details early warning signs of a mood shift and how to respond. The Elizabeth and Rory’s plan includes a list of people whom Rory should call to get Elizabeth treatment and/or medication, as well as the name and contact information for the hospital where she’d like to be treated.

As a further step, Poirier notes, you and your partner can write a contract about what each of you will do when warning signs appear. A document you signed when well may be more effective against denial when you’re ill than a partner’s reminders.

There are other small but helpful ways partners can counter symptoms, she says. During a manic phase, reduce stimulation by decreasing light and loud music in the household, and keep credit and cash cards inaccessible. During a depressive phase, let more light into the house, encourage exercise, and gently urge completion of at least one pleasant activity each day.

On a day-to-day basis, agree on a system that keeps encouragement from feeling like nagging. Again, this will vary from couple to couple. Some might be comfortable with a daily check-in about medication compliance, for example, while others will prefer a more emotionally neutral chart system that both partners can refer to.

Couple’s therapy can be an effective way to develop strategies for coping with the disorder together, Miklowitz says.

“The counseling should help the couple solve problems that arise around the symptoms of bipolar disorder, and learn to communicate effectively about them,” he says.

In addressing specific issues, Miklowitz adds, it helps to realize that you may not get everything you want.

“You have to be willing to compromise,” he says. “You have to start with the assumption that everyone—you and your partner—are doing their best.”

“Doing your best” might involve taking as much responsibility as you can for your recovery and well-being, Poirier points out. For your partner, that might mean cutting you a little slack for symptomatic behavior.

Elizabeth says that when she succumbs to what she calls her “ooh, shiny!” syndrome, Rory usually accepts the impulsive action as part of her illness.

When she bought several hundred dollars’ worth of tea towels, she recalls, Rory commented that they were now stocked up for a few years. When she took their cat to the vet and came home with an extra kitten, Rory “accepted the kitten with open arms,” she reports—and they now have a rule that they only go to the vet’s together.

“He isn’t a pushover,” she says, “he just knows that in the spring, I pull a few whoppers and that is OK.”

In fact, she says, Rory took the news of her diagnosis better than she did. They were dating at the time, Elizabeth says, and Rory made it a point to find books that would be helpful.

“He never judged me for having bipolar,” she adds. “I’m very lucky to have found Rory.” 

-------
Barbara Boughton, a freelance health and medical writer, writes for Reader’s Digest, Medscape.com and other outlets. She lives in the San Francisco Bay area. 



Learning when a hug can helpWhen Heather and Ken first met in fall 2002, Heather certainly wasn’t in the mood for romance. She was experiencing serious depression and “very resistant to dating,” but Ken waited patiently.

“When we did start dating, I was very forthright about having bipolar disorder, and he was very understanding,” recalls Heather, 44.

Now Heather’s relationship with her husband is a rock that steadies her when symptoms crop up. In Heather’s case, that’s often behaviors that signal depression—not getting out of bed, failing to eat healthy foods, and crying a lot.

After nine years of marriage, Ken has come to understand what his wife needs when she is ill. And Heather made it a priority to communicate to her husband about what kind of support she finds the most helpful.

“Sometimes it’s just the simple things that are important,” Heather says. “A hug from Ken can be very grounding when I’m having a difficult time. He also knows when to give me space, such as when I get irritable, angry, and when I lash out.”

Perhaps more importantly, Ken and Heather have an agreement that they’ll promptly address any worrisome symptoms.

Heather admits she’s not always receptive when Ken spots signs of depression or hypomania, such as being quick to anger or spending too much on online shopping, yet she will usually agree to call her doctor.

“Couples therapy has also helped us,” she says. “We’ve learned not to blame each other when we discuss sensitive issues such as my bipolar disorder, and to respectively express our feelings. Sometimes that may mean taking a break or even going to different rooms when a discussion becomes too heated.”

She adds, “What has been most important is for both of us to realize that I’m more than the identified patient in our relationship. I’m Heather, a wife who is more than her illness, and who needs and wants hope and love from her partner.”



In sickness and in healthDan and Dolores have weathered 43 years of marriage—and Dan’s bipolar swings. 

Dan, now 73, was accurately diagnosed in his late 20s. He and Dolores were contemplating marriage, and she accepted the news along with the man.

“He was a real charmer and had a wonderful sense of humor,” Dolores remembers.

Dan was in a stable period when they met, but shortly after the wedding he slipped into depression. For the next decade, he cycled from months of mania marked by reckless spending and anger, to months of immobilizing depression, to stretches of stability that might last half a year. He went through a series of jobs, never keeping one for long.

“I was ill and non-productive and she was the provider and caretaker,” Dan says.

Dolores held down several part-time jobs, taking their two children to work with her because they couldn’t afford child care. The couple went through two bankruptcies.

“It was painful and it was devastating, but I didn’t leave because I don’t believe in divorce,” says Dolores, 75. “But even in the most difficult moments, Dan’s sense of humor would come shining through.”

They held on until Dan found the treatment he needed at Washington University. An equally important turning point was their decision to start a peer support group in 1980, which became one of the founding chapters of what is now the national Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance (DBSA).

The work not only helped his wife become more educated about the disorder, Dan says, but through running meetings “she gained many skills in talking with me in a very helpful and therapeutic way.”

“We learned how to communicate even around tough topics—and not blame the other person,” Dolores adds.

Dolores admits to “mixed feelings” about their marriage over the years, but says that their life improved as their ability to address Dan’s health got better.

“He has changed in a really positive way over the years,” she says. “And our communication strategies just got better and better. We feel so blessed now.” 


Another definition of partnerPeople who are single may find a family member who becomes a partner in recovery. For Jackie that’s her dad, Larry.

“We’ve become an amazing team at managing my bipolar I,” explains the 25-year-old. “We even have a special binder that we keep on the coffee table that has copies of the most important papers about my illness and how we should handle things.”

The binder includes a list of her medications and what they’re for, contact information for her doctors, steps to take in various crisis situations, even copies of some of her homework from psychotherapy.

Jackie has found the skills she’s learning in dialectical behavior therapy especially helpful in managing her symptoms. When she comes home from group, she shares new information with her father. Also really helpful, she says, is “both of us reading everything we can get our hands on about bipolar. We test out new techniques for managing things to see what works best for us.”

For example, Jackie now keeps track of when (or whether) she’s taken her medications on a dry-erase board that hangs on the fridge. The chart not only reminds her to take the meds, but also keeps her father in the loop without having to bug her.

Jackie, who was diagnosed at 14, has seen a huge change since her father started educating himself. When she’s in a mood shift, they’re able to talk through what may have triggered it and how to get her back in balance. When her dad learned that people with mental illnesses sometimes use cigarettes to cope with stress, he stopped insisting she quit smoking. Instead, he encourages her to cut back.

“Before he started reading he didn’t understand nearly as well as he does now, which really goes without saying,” she reflects. “We fought a lot more and he really didn’t ‘get’ me. Now we fight less and he’s much more compassionate to what I’m enduring.”

READ MOREBuy a copy of the SPRING 2013 issue. Have a PRINT edition mailed to you OR read the full issue NOW by purchasing the DIGITAL edition.

Subscribe to bp Magazine (Print and Digital Subscriptions available.)

April 24. 
More on our speaker series
by hopeworkscommunity
       We recently announced the beginning of our speaker series in Blount County sponsored by Maryville Nami.  Our first speaker on March 20 will be Sita Diehl National Director of State Advocacy for Nami national.  I am very excited today to announce our second speaker today.  On April 24 Doug Varney Commissioner for Dept of Mental Health and Substance Abuse will be coming to speak in Maryville.  Tentatively his topic will be the scourge of drug abuse, particularly prescription drugs and meth, their relationship to mental health issues and efforts by the state to address these issues.  It should be a great and informative evening.  Please do all you can to spread the word about both of these presentations.