Your current web browser is outdated. For best viewing experience, please consider upgrading to the latest version.

Donation - Other Level

Please use the quantity box to donate any amount you wish. Sign Up to Donate

Contact

Send a question or comment using the form below. This message may be routed through support staff.

Email Article

Password Reset Request

Register


Add a topic or expert to your feed.

Following

Follow Experts & Topics

Stay on top of our work by selecting topics and experts of interest.

Experts
Topics
Project
On The Ground
ERROR
Main Error Mesage Here
More detailed message would go here to provide context for the user and how to proceed
ERROR
Main Error Mesage Here
More detailed message would go here to provide context for the user and how to proceed

Manhattan Institute

search
Close Nav
Share this press_release on Close

New Report: New York State Should Make Kendra’s Law Permanent

press release

New Report: New York State Should Make Kendra’s Law Permanent

April 27, 2017
Health PolicyOther

Assisted outpatient treatment plays an effective and crucial role in aid to the seriously mentally ill

NEW YORK, NY — This June, a critical element of New York’s mental-health-care system, Kendra’s Law, is set to expire. The law addresses untreated serious mental illness by providing court-ordered treatment to those stable enough to live in the community under the supervision of mental-health officials—also called assisted outpatient treatment (AOT). A new Manhattan Institute report by senior fellow Stephen Eide evaluates the law’s role and efficacy and makes the case for why the state should make it permanent.

While the seriously mentally ill compose only 4 percent of New York City’s adult population, they make up 11 percent of its jailed inmates and 25 percent of its adult shelter client population. According to the state Office of Mental Health, Kendra’s Law has reduced rates of incarceration and homelessness among the seriously mentally ill who receive court-ordered treatment by around 70 percent.

In light of these striking results, Eide makes the case that state lawmakers should formally abandon the premise that the program is simply an experiment and make it permanent. He presents three specific reasons:

  1. History demonstrates the need for securing services and resources for the most seriously mentally ill individuals. A strong AOT program not only holds seriously mentally ill individuals accountable for participating in treatment; it holds the mental-health-care system accountable for providing it to them.
  2. Treatment is the most promising form of prevention. Studies showing the reduction in homelessness, hospitalization, and arrest show AOT’s ability to prevent a patient’s deterioration.
  3. Different seriously mentally ill subpopulations require different approaches. AOT is intended for a particularly challenging, niche population that is ill-suited for either an involuntary-inpatient or voluntary-outpatient approach.

Click here to read the full report.

Saved!
Close