If Texas House Bill 2212 were passed, anybody living inTexas could be committed to involuntary psychiatric treatment in their own home.We’ve heard about the violence of staffers forcing drugs into the bodies ofpeople unfortunate enough to be committed to a state facility from manyMindFreedom members and psychiatric survivors. This law would allow those scenesof compulsion and force to leech out from behind the locked doors of psychwards and state hospitals into the outside world —into the private homes ofTexas citizens.

By definition, HB2212 would take people who do not meet thecriteria for “inpatient” commitment and order them into “outpatient” treatment.These people don’t want to be anybody’s “patient,” but the government uses thislanguage to soften the blow of what is really going on here: the forcedchemical manipulation of the minds of law-abiding citizens, a human rightsviolation and a “treatment” that research shows does NOT reduce hospitalreadmission rates or improve clinical/social outcomes.

Anybody in Texas can be targeted, provided a psychiatristcan convince a judge to give the green light to long term home-based forceddrugging after the person is labeled “mentally ill.” Remember, this punitiveaction is being applied to law-abidingcitizens who have done nothing wrong — other than experience a mental oremotional reality that may be dark or extreme, but is certainly not illegal.

HB2212 violates basic human rights

 

The list of basic civil rights this law strips away isastounding:

1. Bodily integrity: Court-orderedoutpatient treatment and drugging takes away the human right to bodilyintegrity. The Texas government is offering no evidence that the bodies orbrains of those being targeted by these laws are biologically diseased, and istaking away the basic human right to determine what chemicals they ingest andwhat medical treatments they pursue based on an unsubstantiated assumption!

Law-abiding citizens deserve the basic human right to see,feel and experience the world as nature intended, even if they are people withprofound personal problems. Being forced to experience the world thoughgovernment drugged eyes is not “help,” rather it is TRAUMATIZING.

2. Security andprivacy in your home: This discriminatory law destroys the basic humanright of any Texan targeted for home-based forced drugging to be secure intheir person and their private home. Texans subjected to this intervention willhave to submit to chemical and therapeutic interventions involuntarily. Theirhomes will no longer be safe places to experience extreme thoughts or emotions.

3. Freedom ofassociation: HB 2212 would forcibly impose a “case manager” on any targetedindividual, to be part of a “treatment team” consisting of mental health systemstaffers. Case managers and other mental health professionals would be enteringthe homes of the Texas citizens targeted for forced outpatient commitment, alsotaking away the right to freedom of association.

This law, if allowed to pass, will force many inTexas to hide from the mental health system and not seek help. It will have achilling effect on help-seeking behavior, and strike fear and terror intopeople who are already dealing with significant traumas and challenges in theirlives. The penalty for becoming mentally distressed should not be to lose theright to own your own body.

The question of violence

 

The supporters of home-based forced drugging laws justifythis violent paternalism by claims that such laws reduce violence. But how can you stop violence by doing violenceto law-abiding people based on psychiatry’s guesswork?

Furthermore, if the government is saying that the peopletargeted are not dangerous enough to be removed from the community, and thoseselected for home-based forced drugging are allowed to remain in their ownhomes, why is “dangerousness” even being used as an argument?

This is scapegoating and demagoguery in the wake of SandyHook and other tragedies, the collective guilt by association imposed on allpeople with psychiatric labels for the crimes of a few individuals.

Creating a biological underclass

 

This law makes certain experiences of reality ILLEGAL. Iteffectively creates a biological underclass, citizens deemed unworthy of eventhe right to live their lives in their own homes with a mind free and clear ofheavy psychiatric drugging.

While the Texas government can’t prove the biologicalunderclass they are creating have anything biologically wrong with their brainsor bodies, the subtext is clear: if the government believes you are “braindiseased,” you lose the right to own your own brain, with no biologicalevidence required.

Survivors of forced drugging often describe the experienceas a profound violation of their consciousness, an unimaginable violation oftheir very humanity. Forcing a “one size fits all,” “drugs fit all” solution onpeople is wrong, and there ARE alternatives. MindFreedommembers have reported using a wide variety of strategies for achieving andmaintaining mental and emotional wellness, and despiteeven the direst of predictions from mental health professionals, they HAVEgotten better!

Throughout all of Texas’ history, the power to drug citizens’bodies in their own homes hasn’t existed —why is it needed now?

Does forced drugging even WORK?

Proponents of this bill cite surveys where some who havebeen forced into this home-based forced drugging purportedly acknowledge later“the positive impact of court order outpatient treatment after completing it.”But consider the duress under which such answers aregiven — it’s common sense that survey respondents would be fearful of criticizing theprogram to staffers of the mental health system who conduct such surveys, lestthey be accused of “lacking insight” and be subjected to even more forced drugging. 

What otherevidence, if any, do we have to the chemical violation of another human being via forced outpatient commitment? As it turns out, not much. 

Various studies of such demonstrate that forced outpatient commitments produce:

• No reduction in violence.[1]
• No reduction in hospitalizations. [2]
• These laws don’t promote future voluntary compliance or goodoutcomes.[3]

The scientific evidence for involuntaryoutpatient commitment’s effectiveness simply doesn’t exist. In fact, researcher and former proponent of forced outpatient commitment Tom Burns recently commented, “the evidence is staring us in the face that CTOs don’t work… I think there should be a moratorium on their use.” 

But more important than the lack of scientific evidence is the ETHICAL issue: the intervention decimates the human rights of thosetargeted.

 

Other survivors of forced drugging speak out

 

Below is a video of a British woman forced onto so called“outpatient commitment.” She details how she feels about the governmentdictating to her what to put into her own body. She later killed herself. From within the bodily prison of her forciblydrugged consciousness, she testifies to the horror of her situation with suchdignity; watch this truly heartbreaking story to see the human face behindthese forced drugging laws.

 

Below is one more video, of a man in Minnesota. This man (unrepresented by legal counsel) caught the bus to court by himself, is stayingon top of his court paperwork, and is years into community based forceddrugging. He admits to a roughdivorce and problems in his life, one incident, half a decade ago, when hebefouled his wife’s workplace, has been used as the pretext to forcepsychiatric drugs on him long-term. Keep in mind when you watch this, that thisman’s brain is being drugged by the government constantly. Does he deserve tobe tranquilized by the government for years on end, denied the right toalternatives, and denied the right to the dignity of choice? 

 

Stop this human rights violation!

Community commitment laws are not about community. In fact,they send a message to those targeted that they are not even welcome in theircommunity unless they are wearing chemical chains. Those targeted might be“free” and walking around society drugged, but the government has made theprison walls their own bodies.

These laws create an environment of fear, oppression andbiological violence against some of society’s most vulnerable people. There canbe no justification for casting a dragnet of forced drugging over entirecommunities just because some people believe this to be a safety net.

YOU CAN HELP prevent this human rights violation frombecoming law by CONTACTING TEXAS STATE LEGISLATORS and telling them why youoppose HB2212. 

Click hereto learn more.