Mental
Health Association in New York State, Inc. |
Friday Fax from Albany
SAVE THE DATE! - MHANYS AWARDS DINNER AND CONFERENCE ON OCTOBER 20-21, 2005: More info available at www.mhanys.org/events.htm#mhanys MEDICARE PART D: Following is an excerpt from a new webpage on MHANYS’ website - http://www.mhanys.org/pubpol/pp_partdintro.htm - which begins to explain the new prescription drug benefit, Medicare Part D, and what it will mean for individuals living with mental health needs.
MHANYS is working with a number of organizations to make this transition to Medicare Part D as seamless as possible, and we hope to broaden the organizations we are working with on this to include not only all appropriate mental health organizations, but any and all organizations representing the people who will come into contact with those encountering this new benefit. As we continue to gather information and get a better understanding of what is to come, we are creating a comprehensive new website on Medicare Part D that we hope we hope individuals will be able to utilize very shortly. In the mean time, in addition to the resources available on NMHA’s website, CMS has a great deal of information on the entire Medicare Modernization Act, including the Part D component, available at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/medicarereform/. Also, the Coalition of Voluntary Mental Health Agencies (CVMHA) has an extensive section on Medicare Part D, including links to pertinent information available at http://www.cvmha.org/medicare_ptd/index.html. Lastly, on August 17th, the New York State Rehabilitation Association (NYSRA) / Rehabilitation Research and Training Institute (RRTI) is hosting a web seminar for administration, management and staff that will provide participants with a working knowledge of the new drug benefit. The “agenda will cover the basics but also push beyond core concepts and include more complicated issues including: (1) understanding the low income subsidy, (2) continuity of care issues, (3) state wrap around: the new developments, (4) co-pays, premiums and deductibles, (5) appeals process. Additional information and registration is available at http://www.rrti.org/seminarPDF/New/Medicare_PartD_Training.pdf or by calling NYSRA at 518-449-2976.
DEADLINE EXTENDED FOR ‘VOLUNTEER OF THE YEAR – PROGRAMS’ AWARD NOMINATIONS: MHANYS has extended the deadline for nominations for the ‘Volunteer of the Year - Prorgrams’ award. This is an excellent opportunity to nominate those dedicated individuals who are absolutely crucial to the success of all Mental Health Associations and to the movement toward recovery. Criteria for eligibility:
Additional information, including nomination forms, are available at http://www.mhanys.org/awards/2005awards_volunteer.pdf. Note – the extension has been granted only for the ‘Volunteer of the Year – Programs’ award, not ‘Volunteer of the Year – Community Service.’ Nominations
should be sumbmitted to:
2006 Paul G. Hearne/AAPD Leadership Award Applications Due Sept. 9th (courtesy of NYAPRS): Calling Emerging Leaders with Disabilities - The 2006 PAUL G. HEARNE/AAPD LEADERSHIP AWARD PROGRAM application is now available!! Up to two people with disabilities, who are emerging as leaders in their respective fields, will each receive cash awards to help them continue their progress as leaders. They will also have an opportunity to meet and network with national disability leaders at the AAPD Leadership Gala in Washington, DC on March 8, 2006. U.S. residents with any type of disability are eligible to apply. To learn more and obtain an application, please visit the AAPD website: www.aapd.com.
In the News: Limits
to mental health care discriminatory. Letter to the Editor In reading the July 4 article "Costly limits for mental health persist," about Michael and his 14-year-old son and their struggle to get access to mental health services, I was surprised to read that the Capital District Physicians' Health Plan provides people who have exhausted the 20-visit limit on outpatient mental health services "case managers and social workers to assist them with alternatives." Representing thousands of family members with loved ones living with mental illness, our experiences are the same as those of the psychologists you interviewed. We never hear about insurers making exceptions to these discriminatory policies. Usually, when either these 20 outpatient visits or the typical 30-day inpatient-visit limit is exhausted, individuals with mental health needs spiral downward until their policies renew at the beginning of the year or they end up in the emergency room or jail or worse. Plain and simple, these policies are discriminatory and coverage for mental health and addiction needs must be treated equally to the coverage provided for other physical health needs. Timothy's Law would fix this and must be enacted. J.
DAVID SEAY
Sons
push for Connie's Law. By Richard Liebson WHITE PLAINS — They are strong, they said, and will go on with their lives because that's what their slain mom would have wanted. And as they move forward, the sons of Concetta Russo-Carriero vowed, they will do everything in their power to give meaning to her death. "We are single-minded in that we want to see a positive result come from this tragedy," Jonathan Russo said a month after his mother was fatally stabbed in the garage adjoining the Galleria mall. "We want to be able to tell her grandchildren someday that she may have saved a life by keeping a Level 3 sex offender away from an innocent person." Jonathan, 28, and his brother, Michael Russo, 23, said they will lobby for the adoption of a state civil-commitment law that would allow violent sexual predators to be confined in mental hospitals after their release from prison. The brothers said their mother might still be alive today if such a law had been on the books. Phillip Grant, a registered Level 3 — or high risk — sex offender who spent 23 years in prison on multiple rape and assault convictions, was arrested a short time after the slaying and has been charged with second-degree murder as a hate crime. Grant told police he was fighting a race war and killed Russo-Carriero because she was white. "That was her worst nightmare," said John Carriero, who married Connie in 1992 after the two met at an informal gathering of widows and widowers. "She was afraid of crime, of something like that happening. She wouldn't watch murder movies or anything like that because they frightened her." "Knowing that fear she had is probably the hardest thing," Michael said. "How terrified she must have been. We try not to dwell on it." Instead, they remember a woman who loved to laugh, cook, travel and be with her family. The reminders are everywhere in her comfortable, tastefully furnished home. John Carriero showed a visitor rooms filled with flowers, family photos and American folk art she'd collected in their travels. "She loved decorating and was constantly rearranging the pictures and little knickknacks," he said. Jonathan said that after their father, John Russo, died of a heart attack in 1989, "our mother raised us with the idea that life is short and that you have to be strong and live each day to its fullest." "She was outgoing and bubbly," Michael said. "She would laugh at things others wouldn't even think were funny. Everyone loves their mom, and everyone thinks their mom is the greatest mom ever, but she really was. She was just a really, really special person. "When she first started dating John (Carriero), we were against it and rebelled against it, but he was such a great guy that we warmed up to him. Mom made us see that their getting married would be good for her and for us. It wasn't easy for her, but that's how she was. She wanted to make sure we were comfortable with it." It was Carriero who first learned of his wife's fate. He got a call from her parents, Ted and Anne Granata, who had heard a news report about a slaying near the mall. "They seemed anxious," he recalled, his voice growing soft. "I knew Connie parked there, but I didn't make the connection right away. I was standing outside, waiting for her to come home, when an unmarked car came driving down the street, very slowly, and stopped in front of our driveway. When two detectives got out and started walking toward me, that's when it hit me. And I just fell apart." Nina Russo, Jonathan's wife, said the tragedy really hit her the next morning, when she spotted her husband standing in the driveway of their home in Peekskill, reading a newspaper story about his mother's death and seeing Phillip Grant's photograph for the first time. "He turned around and showed it to me," she said. "He said, 'Look at the man who killed my mother.' It was horrible." "He just looked like a monster to me," Jonathan said. "When I saw his picture, I knew how terrified my mom must have been." In the days that followed, the brothers said they read every newspaper story and watched every television news report about the slaying. "It's like you get obsessed with it," Jonathan said. "All of the details, about it being a hate crime, about the homeless issue — it all seemed inconsequential. Every day was like, 'what's next?' It was an absolutely horrible event to begin with; whatever else came out afterward couldn't be worse." Michael said the family began receiving calls and visits from a number of public officials two days after his mother's death. "They expressed their condolences, and a few of them mentioned the civil-confinement law," he said. "We didn't know anything about it but, over time, we saw it as an opportunity to make something positive come out of this." The brothers and their stepfather testified last week at a hearing held by state Sen. Jeff Klein at Concordia College in Bronxville, announcing that they would push for the legislation to be adopted and to be dubbed "Connie's Law." The state Senate has passed the bill each of the past five years, while the Assembly has held it up in committee. All three plan to travel to Albany in the fall when, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said, additional hearings would be held. "It always takes something like this to happen before (the government) does something right," Carriero said. Asked how they found the courage to get involved in the legislative fight so soon after their personal tragedy, Jonathan said it comes from their mother. "Her life was beautiful and positive, and her death was tragic," he said. "She taught us that you can't change things that happen; you just have to be strong and keep going. She left us with an unbelievably strong family and good futures. That's her legacy to us. Getting this law passed will be our legacy to her, because that's what she would have done. She would have pushed for it with all of her heart."
Jail
sex offenders forever? Yes. By Jeanine Pirro Consider this not-so-hypothetical case: A man sexually abuses a child. He is caught, convicted and sent to prison. While incarcerated he is offered sex offender treatment. He refuses, believing he has done nothing wrong - he would never hurt a child; he loves children. As a result of his refusal, he is denied parole. He serves his time and is released back into the community. Should he be? Or should there be a mechanism in our law specifically tailored to protect the public from a chronic sex offender? One in which experts, judges and jurors determine whether a sex offender possesses a mental disorder that predisposes him to commit other sexually violent offenses. A process that would result in the commitment of a sexually violent predator to a secure mental health facility instead of his release back into the community. What is the alternative? Monitoring him on the outside? Trust me, it can't be done. No ankle bracelet or monitoring device has ever stopped a sex offender from committing a sex crime. Outpatient treatment? Sorry, but it is naïve to hope that a predator will voluntarily suspend his criminal tendencies to undergo the very treatment he previously refused. No one is claiming that civil commitment is appropriate in all cases. Nationwide, only about one in 60 sex offenders is committed. That's much lower than the percentage of sex offenders released from prison who are likely to repeat their crimes. Nor is anyone assuming that those committed never will be released. About 8% to 9% of those civilly committed for two years or more have been released. If those who remain must remain because no treatment can alleviate the danger they pose, so be it. As the Supreme Court stated in upholding the constitutionality of these statutes: "We have never held that the Constitution prevents a state from civilly detaining those for whom no treatment is available, but who nevertheless pose a danger to others." While we debate, child molesters walk out of prison, free to commit even more serious crimes. Sure, the next time they'll get longer sentences, perhaps even life. But how do we explain it all to their newest victims? Pirro is the Westchester County district attorney.
Jail sex offenders forever? No. By Richard M. Hamill Let's put aside our angry, unrealistic expectations regarding sex offenders and ask what can really make our communities safer. For the record, New York State already has a civil commitment law. Roughly 20% of the inpatients in our state psychiatric facilities are sex offenders deemed too dangerous for release into the community. But a blanket rule covering all offenders undermines the valuable role treatment can play in curbing habitual relapses. We need to provide sex offenders with therapy, as it has been shown to cut recidivism by 40% to 60%. Treatment for juvenile sex offenders also appears to help many children stop their sexually abusive behaviors before they become habits. It would be most beneficial for judges to order evaluations and get the results prior to sentencing or plea bargains. Civil commitment also is not cost-effective. The tab of civil commitment is estimated at about $250,000 per person annually. That represents about $180,000 per bed for the mental health facility, plus the cost of treatment and an annual judicial review - for which the taxpayer pays for the judge, prosecutor, court reporter and defense attorney. If we civilly commit 100 sex offenders per year, in four years taxpayers will have an annual bill of $100 million. At this tremendous cost, we will have removed less than 2% of the 22,000 registered sex offenders from our communities. And the other 98%? Consider this: lifetime probation or parole for high-risk sex offenders. This spring, a study done in Arizona reported that lifetime probation/parole reduced sexual reoffenses over 12 years to less than 2%. This strategy is successful because it provides very close supervision to more dangerous sex offenders. If offenders start to engage in high-risk, preoffense behaviors, they can be removed easily from the community before committing an offense. For these probation violations, they can be sent for treatment, or incarcerated. The incarceration option costs around $35,000 per year. Our tax dollars must be put to good use, spent on improving the investigation, prosecution and supervision of sex offenders. So, let's put our anger aside and work on making our communities safer. Hamill, who holds a doctorate in psychology, is president of the New York State Alliance of Sex Offender Service Providers (CDCSOM.com).
Cut
out the fraud instead of recipients of Medicaid. Op-Ed by Trilby deJung In the 40th year of the Medicaid program, it is fitting to reflect on the importance of the program, as Bob Thompson and Dr. Peter Szilagyi of the Monroe Plan point out in the Speaking Out essay "In reforming Medicaid, take care not to break it" (July 29). It's also a good time to reassess our priorities for improvement. Most voters in a nationwide survey conducted earlier this year through the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington, D.C., said the government should help cover health insurance for those who cannot afford it; that we need Medicaid for children, seniors, people with disabilities and families who lose health insurance. According to the same survey, most voters oppose making Medicaid cuts in order to balance their state's budget. And yet, most of us agree on the need to control costs. The national Medicaid Commission, to which Monroe County Executive Maggie Brooks has been appointed, will wrestle with this difficult question. As the Democrat and Chronicle editorial "Target fraud" (July 22) notes, the evidence of significant Medicaid fraud reported by The New York Times has generated a call for immediate action. The image of Medicaid mills pumping drugs onto the black market, drug companies setting their own prices and dentists billing for procedures never performed generates justifiable outrage. These reports also should give us an immediate sense of direction for reform efforts. In fact, Medicaid fraud gives us the opportunity to bring costs down significantly without cutting services. The Times quotes James Mehmet, the past chief investigator of Medicaid fraud in New York City, as estimating that $18 billion, or 40 percent, of our state Medicaid budget is lost to fraud every year. What stands in our way of recovering this money and putting it to the use for which it was intended? Part of the problem is undoubtedly political. The pharmaceutical industry spends huge amounts of money on political contributions and lobbying. Still, our state lawmakers have shown some willingness to control drug prices. Hopefully that trend will continue. Limited governmental resources pose another barrier. The technology required to rout out fraud may not be overwhelming — remember, the Times found scores of telltale spikes in revenues in only a few hours using a laptop computer and commonly available software. However, protocols would need to be developed on both statewide and local levels, and staff would need to be reallocated. Given government's finite resources, it would be a mistake to be distracted by significantly less promising proposals, such as Brooks' proposal to require able-bodied Medicaid recipients to work. A July 22 Democrat and Chronicle editorial called that proposal "low-hanging fruit." I would urge even closer scrutiny. What looks like an apple may turn out to be a lemon. For example, would the proposed work requirement actually save significant Medicaid dollars? Generally speaking, healthy, able-bodied adults are not big consumers of Medicaid dollars. In fact, if you follow the money, the vast majority of our Medicaid budget is spent on treatments for serious health conditions — coverage for elderly residents of nursing homes, the disabled, children with persistent developmental problems. Compliance with the work rule would involve proof of good-faith efforts to find work and follow-up meetings with workers. Any mistakes would not only deprive deserving recipients of benefits, but also cost the county money in worker time and appeals. In the end, Medicaid recipients unable to document efforts to find employment would join the ranks of the uninsured, already numbering close to 3 million in New York state. They would still get injured and sick, and end up in expensive emergency rooms. So, as we celebrate 40 years of experience with paying for health care for the poor, let's be smart about our priorities. In a world of limited taxpayer resources, we cannot afford a Medicaid program that isn't capable of ensuring that low-income New Yorkers actually receive the health services our dollars pay for. Rather than be distracted by proposals that are likely to cost as much as they save, our elected officials need to make it an unrivaled priority to recover the estimated $18 billion lost annually to Medicaid fraud in New York state. DeJung is a health law attorney at Empire Justice Center and co-chair of the policy committee for Medicaid Matters New York, a statewide coalition of more than 100 consumer advocacy organizations. |