Amended bill allows involuntary commitment of family members

Friday, June 6, 1997 | 5:48 a.m.

AB375, introduced by Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, originally proposed eliminating the use of the commitment process, known as a district attorney petition.

But the bill, as amended, would shorten the wait before a hearing based on a district attorney petition must be held.

A hearing on whether a person will remain committed or released from a mental hospital now must be heard within 14 days of the filing of the family-initiated petition. The bill would shorten that to five days.

All references to insurance coverage, including a mandate that health insurers offer coverage for some mental illnesses, were also deleted from the bill, which should come to the full Assembly for a vote next week.

Giunchigliani said she supports the changes to her bill.

The decision to leave the district attorney commitment process in law was agreed to because of the complicated issues surrounding such proceedings, she said.

"The bill still includes important provisions for patient rights," Giunchigliani said.

The requirement for a commitment hearing in five days mirrors a change made in 1995 to require such court hearings in other types of commitment proceedings, she said.

The question of whether Nevada should continue the use of the district attorney petition, which critics say has been used inappropriately, needs further study, Giunchigliani said.

Critics say the petition has sometimes been used by one spouse against another when they are involved in court proceedings such as divorces or child custody battles.

The tougher standards for committing the mentally ill to hospitalization pushed by Giunchigliani has been opposed by some mental health advocates who say more flexibility is needed.

Her measure conflicted with a Senate bill heard recently supported by some advocates to liberalize the commitment process.

SB395 proposed to add a provision covering the gravely disabled in the commitment law, defined as a people incapable of caring for themselves because of mental illness.

Currently the mentally ill can only be committed if they are a danger to themselves or others.

But lawmakers recommended the gravely disabled proposal for further study - rather than action this legislative session - because of conflicting views by advocates and mental health professionals.