| (May Newsletter 2003 - Page 8) There are many questions and discrepancies between what is written in these documents and how things are actually operated. Who is actually responsible for the development of this program? Members were told it is the commissioner of DHS who approves it. [Note: a letter was written to Mr. Harry regarding the above information, however, Mr. Harry has not responded to date.] The “ethics” behind certain professionals, who are no longer with MSOP, were discussed, as well as the abuses they imposed upon residents and family members/loved ones. Why are ex-sex offenders being released from prisons, yet ex-sex offenders who are in treatment facilities remain locked up? There have been many level three offenders who have been released from prison over the past three years. Offenders who have no where to live and have no support system out in society when released will end up feeling defeated and will more than likely commit another crime (not necessarily another sex crime) in order to be re-incarcerated. NCIA statistics state that only 13% of once-caught offenders ever re-offend. That leaves 87% who do not re-offend. Suggestions were given of how community members, who are aware that an ex-sex offender lives in their community, can investigate into the offenders background and talk to reputable authorities in order to learn how to not only protect themselves and their families, but how they can become support persons for the ex-offender. We need to appoint someone on the Council to contact people to speak at our meetings, create an agenda, set up meeting places, etc. The next meeting will be held on Saturday, May 17, at the Anoka County Library in Champlin. Call Mary for directions. Meeting adjourned. Oral Argument Set The oral argument for the Jury Trial Case in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals is to be held Friday, May 16, 2003, at 8:30 a.m. at the Warren E. Burger Federal Building, 316 N. Robert St., St. Paul. The public is welcome to attend this argument. You can find directions to the Federal Building on the web at: www.mnd.uscourts.gov/directions_to_stpaul_courth.htm There is also a directional map to guide you. If you do not have a computer or access to the internet, you may contact Mary Thuringer at (507) 934-9228 or (507) 317-4380 evenings for directions. 2003 Minnesota Mental Health Reform Proposals The Pawlenty Administration’s 2003 mental health reform proposals include expansion of the community-based mental health system, including restructuring of adult mental health residential treatment, and phasing out of adult mental health day treatment. State Operated Services, which includes state regional treatment centers, would blend, as needed, into the community-based system. In their role as local mental health authorities, counties will work in partnership with the DHS Mental Health Division to expand the community-based mental health system. The proposal also allows for a broader array of community mental health services and provides incentives to use non-institutional options ore likely to meet client needs and to be federally reimbursable. Under part of the proposal affecting about 70 residential treatment facilities, some would be converted to facilities where more intensive treatment, short of hospitalization, can be provided. Others would be converted to needed permanent housing. County mental health grants would be reduced, but overall funding would increase because services would be configured so that Medical Assistance funding could be captured when possible. A broader array of services will allow people with mental illness to be more appropriately matched to the services they need, thereby improving care, access and choice while increasing service capacity. Citizens For Reform members wonder if the proposed community-based treatment expansion includes ex-sex offenders who have been illegally incarcerated within the “regional treatment centers”. In the partial above news release, DHS merely stated that it would be the “mentally ill” who would be moved to these community-based homes/facilities. Why would they keep those with “mental disorders”, who are NOT considered to be mentally ill, locked up in secured facilities when they would clearly benefit from treatment within the communities? |
|