Today, I am incarcerated at San Quentin for a gun-related crime. I serve as the chairman of Arms Down, the first gun offender rehabilitation program of its kind, developed inside prison to address gun violence through accountability, education and healing. I also serve as a program co-lead for Back to the Start, a nonprofit organization that helps incarcerated participants to process their childhood experiences and advocate for upstream solutions to break the cycle of intergenerational trauma and incarceration.

Over years of facilitating these programs, I have found one truth impossible to ignore: Nearly every person I have worked with who committed a gun offense had first experienced firearm-related trauma. Many witnessed shootings as children. Some lost parents, siblings or friends to homicide. Others grew up in neighborhoods where hearing gunfire was normalized, without being old enough to comprehend the danger. Trauma created wounds that, left untreated, began to fester and developed into destructive behaviors and unhealthy coping strategies to survive — strategies that were amplified through pain and tragedy.

I am fully accountable for my actions. These decisions forever changed my life and harmed others. Looking back, I recognize that the untreated trauma I carried contributed to my impulsive decisions. I often wonder how different my path would have been if someone had offered me counseling and support as a youth.

This is why Assembly Bill 2247, the Trauma, Healing and Resilience Investment for Victimized and Exposed Youth Act, known as the Thrive Act, matters.

As part of my amends to victims, I have an obligation to break cycles of gun violence, and that is what AB 2247 would do. This legislation would expand access to trauma recovery and support services for young survivors of gun violence. Specifically, it would provide funding for youth survivors and witnesses of gun violence; they would receive free, timely mental health and counseling services.

Annually, around 44,000 people die because of firearm-related injuries across the United States, up from 35,000 since the 1990s. In Alameda County, gun violence is the leading cause of death for young Black males. Suicide rates by firearm have doubled for Latino youth between 2014 and 2023. On average, every day, seven people between the ages of 1 and 17 die because of firearms.

These are not just numbers. These are people whose deaths leave behind children, siblings and communities shattered by their loss. It’s about time we did more through policy to address this epidemic affecting our state and nation. AB 2247 reaches children before they become statistics, before they become defendants, before another family loses a loved one and before another community experiences another shooting.

Public safety requires prevention, not only punishment. Too often, California responds only after someone has become a victim or an offender. AB 2247 recognizes that there is another path. When children who survive gun violence receive timely trauma care, they can begin to heal rather than to carry unaddressed trauma into adulthood. That is not just victim services — it’s crime prevention.

I have seen the power of that healing firsthand through Arms Down and Back to the Start. I have watched men cry for the first time in decades as they wrote about childhood trauma they had buried. I have participated in healing conversations between people who once believed violence was their only way to communicate. There are ways to interrupt the cycle, and we do not have to wait until more lives are damaged before we act.

Assemblymember Sade Elhawary, author of the Thrive Act, is championing legislation that gets at the root of the problem. This is the kind of support I wish had been available to me as a young person — and to so many of the men I have worked alongside. We cannot change our past, but we can work together to change what happens to the next generation through prevention and healing. If we wait until after more shots are fired, it is too late.

The post Children affected by gun violence need support, or they may continue the cycle appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The complaint, filed with state regulators by the National Union of Healthcare Workers, targets Kaiser’s online e-visit screening tool, which patients use when they believe they’re dealing with anxiety or depression. Patients answer a series of multiple-choice questions, and the system then generates care recommendations and referral pathways “automatically and instantly” based on those answers, according to the filing.

Those recommendations don’t necessarily lead to a session with an in-person therapist. The complaint states that patients may instead be directed toward virtual therapy, health education classes or self-guided wellness apps.

The union represents therapists, social workers and other clinicians employed at Kaiser facilities. The state’s Department of Managed Health Care says this marks the first time a union has filed a grievance against a health plan specifically over the alleged use of algorithms and artificial intelligence in mental health treatment decisions.

Union members say they have seen no proof that licensed mental health professionals review patients’ e-visit answers in real time — or at all — before the tool spits out follow-up care recommendations. At a hearing held last week by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors examining the issue, therapists and social workers testified that automated digital screenings cannot substitute for a trained clinician’s judgment.

“AI and algorithms don’t capture what trained humans can,” said Ilana Marcucci-Morris, a therapist and member of the union’s bargaining committee. She noted that people experiencing depression often downplay their symptoms, meaning a tool relying solely on self-reported answers could miss warning signs of a more serious condition.

Kaiser did not send a representative to last week’s hearing. But in a written statement emailed to CalMatters, the company pushed back on the union’s characterization of its mental health processes.

The e-visit tool “does not use artificial intelligence to diagnose patients, make clinical decisions, or determine medical necessity. Clinical decisions remain the responsibility of licensed health care professionals,” said Kaiser spokesperson Lena Howland. She did not provide additional details about the technology powering the tool.

Howland added that patients can still reach a live person by calling a phone number provided during the e-visit process. “The online assessment tool is an additional pathway to care, not the only one,” she said.

In a blog post published last year, Kaiser described the e-visit tool as increasingly popular, particularly among younger members, and said it’s available for roughly 30 different health concerns. The post stated that patient responses “are reviewed by a health care professional” and that members “receive a response by secure message within 4 hours, and often sooner.”

Union leaders counter that care recommendations often arrive almost instantly after a patient completes the questionnaire — far too quickly, they argue, for any clinician to have actually reviewed the responses.

The union contends Kaiser’s screening practice violates state law, which requires that medical decisions be made by a licensed health care professional and bars “artificial intelligence, algorithms or other software tools” from replacing that judgment.

The Department of Managed Health Care confirmed it received the union’s complaint and is looking into the matter. “Details of ongoing investigations are confidential, pursuant to law and to protect the integrity of the investigation,” the department said in a statement.

A Shift in Mental Health Triage

The complaint arrives amid stalled contract negotiations between the union and Kaiser Northern California, which have dragged on for more than a year without resolution.

Therapists and health workers who spoke at last week’s hearing said a new triage system, which includes the e-visit tool, was rolled out in 2023. Before that, Kaiser relied on specialized triage teams made up of licensed clinicians — professionals trained to pick up on cues like tone of voice — who gathered patient history over the phone, screened for self-harm risk, and offered preliminary diagnoses along with next steps for care.

Now, the union says, much of that case evaluation work has shifted to administrative staff or the digital tool itself. The union filed a separate complaint last year alleging that Kaiser was using call-center representatives, rather than clinicians, to field mental health-related calls.

Marcucci-Morris said she often doesn’t see patients until roughly two weeks after they’ve gone through Kaiser’s new screening system. “The severity and critical nature of the symptoms I’m seeing have increased significantly because the app, the AI, an algorithm or an unlicensed phone operator wrongly determined they could wait 10 days to see me,” she said.

San Francisco Supervisor Chyanne Chen said she called last week’s hearing after hearing concerns from constituents — both Kaiser employees and patients — about the health system’s mental health services. Kaiser provides coverage to roughly a third of San Francisco’s population.

Chen called Kaiser’s absence from the hearing “unacceptable,” saying it left many of her questions unanswered.

“As a San Francisco resident, I’m not against technology,” Chen said. “For me, this is about making sure we’re not compromising the quality of our care and safety.”

Kaiser’s Troubled Mental Health Record

This isn’t the first time Kaiser has skipped a hearing focused on its mental health services. Last year, state lawmakers criticized the health plan after it declined to participate in an informational hearing on its behavioral health programs.

Kaiser’s mental health struggles are well documented. In 2023, the company agreed to pay a $50 million fine and invest $150 million to improve its programs, settling state findings that mental health patients faced serious delays in care. In 2021, California regulators noted a rise in mental health-related complaints, prompting a survey that ultimately led to that settlement. Kaiser currently operates under a corrective action plan and must submit quarterly progress reports to the state.

Back in 2014, state regulators fined Kaiser $4 million over lengthy waits between therapy appointments. Kaiser has largely attributed its past troubles to a shortage of mental health professionals statewide.

The health plan is also facing growing scrutiny over its expanding use of artificial intelligence and digital tools across its broader operations.

Kaiser’s own mental health clinicians have pushed back against transcription tools used to record patient appointments, arguing the company hasn’t disclosed how that data is used or shared. Separately, call-center nurses have raised concerns about Kaiser’s use of AI and software to monitor their calls.

This coverage is supported by the California Health Care Foundation, which works to ensure people have access to the health care they need, when they need it, at a price they can afford.

Original source: CalMatters

The post Union Alleges Kaiser Used Algorithm, Not Doctors, to Evaluate Mental Health Patients appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The National Union of Healthcare Workers filed the complaint with the state Department of Managed Health Care, taking aim at Kaiser’s e-visit screening system used for patients who suspect they may be dealing with anxiety or depression. Under the process, patients fill out a multiple-choice questionnaire, and the system immediately spits out care recommendations, according to the complaint. Those recommendations don’t necessarily mean a session with an in-person therapist — patients may instead be pointed toward virtual therapy, educational classes or self-help apps.

The Department of Managed Health Care, which regulates health plans statewide, said this marks the first time it has received a complaint from a union alleging misuse of algorithms or artificial intelligence in behavioral health services.

Union members say they’ve seen no proof that a licensed clinician reviews patients’ responses before the system generates its recommendations. At a San Francisco Board of Supervisors hearing last week, therapists and social workers testified that automated screenings simply can’t substitute for a trained professional’s judgment.

“Artificial intelligence and algorithms don’t capture what trained humans can,” said Ilana Marcucci-Morris, a therapist who sits on the union’s bargaining committee. She noted that people struggling with depression often downplay their symptoms, meaning a tool that relies purely on self-reported answers could easily overlook a more serious condition.

Kaiser did not send a representative to last week’s hearing. In a written statement to CalMatters, spokesperson Lena Howland disputed the union’s account of how the health system handles behavioral health screening.

The e-visit tool “does not use AI to diagnose patients, make clinical decisions, or determine medical necessity,” Howland said. “Clinical decisions remain with licensed healthcare professionals.” She declined to elaborate on the technology powering the tool.

Howland added that patients can still speak with a live person by calling a phone number provided during the e-visit process, describing the online tool as “an additional path to getting care — not the only path.”

A blog post Kaiser published last year touts the e-visit tool’s growing popularity, particularly among younger patients, noting it covers roughly 30 health concerns. The post states that patient responses “are reviewed by a health care professional” and that members typically get a reply within four hours.

Union representatives dispute that timeline, saying care recommendations often arrive almost instantly after a patient submits the questionnaire — too quickly, they argue, for any clinician to have reviewed the answers.

The union maintains Kaiser’s approach violates a state law requiring that medical decisions be made by licensed healthcare professionals and explicitly prohibiting “artificial intelligence, algorithms, or other software tools” from taking over that role.

The Department of Managed Health Care confirmed it received the complaint and is looking into it, though officials said details of the investigation remain confidential while it’s underway.

A change in how patients are triaged

The complaint arrives amid contract negotiations between the union and Kaiser Northern California that have stretched on for more than a year without resolution.

Workers who testified at last week’s hearing said the current system, including the e-visit tool, was rolled out in 2023. Previously, they said, dedicated triage teams of licensed clinicians took brief patient histories by phone, screened for signs of self-harm, and offered an initial diagnosis along with next steps — all while picking up on cues like tone of voice that a written questionnaire can’t capture.

Now, the union alleges, much of that triage work falls to clerical staff or the automated tool itself. The union filed a separate complaint last year claiming Kaiser was using telephone service representatives, rather than clinicians, to field mental health calls.

Marcucci-Morris said she often doesn’t see patients until roughly two weeks after they’ve been triaged under the new system. “The acuity and critical nature of symptoms I am seeing has increased significantly because the app, AI, an algorithm, or an unlicensed telephone operator incorrectly determined that they could wait 10 days to see me,” she said.

San Francisco Supervisor Chyanne Chen said she called last week’s hearing after hearing concerns from both Kaiser patients and employees in her district. Kaiser serves roughly a third of San Francisco’s population.

Chen called the company’s absence from the hearing “unacceptable,” saying it left many of her questions unanswered. “As a San Franciscan, I’m not against technology,” she said. “For me it’s making sure we’re not shortcutting our quality of care and safety.”

A pattern of scrutiny

This isn’t the first time Kaiser has declined to appear before lawmakers examining its mental health services. Last year, state legislators criticized the company after it skipped an informational hearing on the same topic.

Kaiser’s behavioral health track record has drawn scrutiny before. In 2023, the company agreed to pay a $50 million fine and invest $150 million toward improving its programs, settling state findings that behavioral health patients were facing serious delays in care. That settlement followed a 2021 spike in behavioral health complaints that prompted a state survey. Kaiser now operates under a corrective action plan and must submit quarterly progress updates to regulators.

Further back, in 2014, state regulators fined Kaiser $4 million over lengthy gaps between therapy appointments. Kaiser has largely blamed its past struggles on a broader shortage of mental health providers.

The company is also facing growing criticism over its use of artificial intelligence and digital tools more broadly. Kaiser’s own mental health staff have objected to transcription software that records patient sessions, arguing the company hasn’t been transparent about how that data is used or shared. Separately, call center nurses have raised alarms about Kaiser using AI-driven software to monitor their phone calls.

Original source: CalMatters

The post Union Alleges Kaiser Relied on Algorithm, Not Clinicians, to Screen Mental Health Patients appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

When most people picture the intersection of mental illness and homelessness, they imagine the most visible and severe cases — individuals living outdoors in the throes of untreated psychosis. But according to a new report from CalMatters, the far more common conditions among unhoused Californians are quieter struggles: depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder.

These conditions may not draw the same attention, but they can be just as disabling, often standing in the way of someone’s ability to secure stable housing. Filling out paperwork, making phone calls, and keeping appointments — tasks essential to escaping homelessness — can feel impossible for someone battling severe anxiety or trauma.

Complicating matters further, many unhoused residents simply can’t access traditional mental health care. Getting to a clinic, keeping a standing appointment, or navigating a health care system built for people with stable addresses is often out of reach.

In response, a growing number of therapists across the state have taken a different approach: meeting patients exactly where they are.

“You can find me on the riverbed, you can find me in a tent,” said Lisette Carmona, a Los Angeles-based therapist who conducts sessions wherever her patients feel safe. “Wherever the patient is comfortable, that’s where I’m conducting their therapy.”

That kind of flexibility has proven transformative for people like Jessica Scott, a 35-year-old Sacramento resident who once found the process of seeking housing paralyzing. Scott said her anxiety was so severe that simply scheduling appointments could trigger panic attacks. While living out of her stepfather’s car, she began working with a therapist who taught her grounding techniques to manage her symptoms. A few weeks ago, that progress culminated in a major milestone — Scott moved into her own apartment.

“When you’re panicking so much that you can’t really talk to people, it’s difficult to do anything,” Scott said.

Despite the clear benefits, this kind of street-based therapy remains scarce. Doctors, nurses and clinicians interviewed by CalMatters estimate that between 80% and 90% of their homeless patients are living with a mental health condition that could be treated with therapy — most commonly depression, anxiety or PTSD. Yet one street psychiatrist told reporters his team is able to reach only about 5% of the patients who could benefit from such care, underscoring how far the need outpaces available resources.

—

**Also in California news this week:**

State lawmakers are weighing a bill that would let insurance companies offer discounts to drivers who agree to have their driving habits tracked through in-car “telematics” technology — devices that can record speed, location, braking patterns and swerving. Supporters say the trade-off could reward safe drivers with lower premiums, but privacy advocates and some regulators warn it opens the door to expanded surveillance with limited oversight. A deputy state insurance commissioner cautioned in a letter to legislators that the proposal could create “broad liability loopholes” and shift regulatory responsibility onto private telematics vendors.

Separately, a CalMatters investigation into California’s public colleges and universities found inconsistent compliance with state laws requiring campus police departments to disclose military-grade equipment. Reporters combed through records from all 148 UC, CSU and community college campuses and found stockpiles that included hundreds of semi-automatic rifles and vast quantities of ammunition. Several campuses failed to hold legally required public forums on the equipment, while others — including San Jose State — reported owning gear, such as tear gas grenades, not authorized under system-wide policy.

Original source: CalMatters

The post Homeless Californians Find Healing Wherever Therapists Can Reach Them appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

In 2024, Kaiser announced it was rolling out Abridge, an AI-powered clinical documentation system the health system described as “ambient listening technology.” The tool is intended to help doctors and other clinicians, including mental health providers, generate clinical notes during appointments.

But some Kaiser therapists and social workers say the public description does not fully convey what happens during visits: The tool records entire appointments, including mental health sessions where patients may discuss trauma, family conflict, substance use, medical diagnoses or other deeply personal matters.

Clinicians are required to obtain patient consent before using Abridge, according to Kaiser. However, multiple providers say the consent process does not clearly explain how the recordings are stored, how long they are kept, who can access them or how the data may be used. Some say they have asked Kaiser leadership for those details and have not received adequate answers.

Ilana Marcucci-Morris, a licensed clinical social worker in Kaiser’s psychiatry department in Oakland, said she has chosen not to use Abridge with her patients. Marcucci-Morris also serves on a bargaining committee and said she has repeatedly raised questions with Kaiser representatives about privacy protections, HIPAA compliance and safeguards for AI tools.

She said the responses have amounted to assurances that the system is compliant and has been reviewed by technology experts, without providing the documentation clinicians have requested.

“They won’t show us,” Marcucci-Morris said in an interview with American Community Media. “If you have nothing to hide and you’re doing it ethically, then you would show us, prove it.”

Similar concerns have surfaced in Southern California. Ligia Pacheco, a psychiatric social worker who provides remote therapy services for Kaiser patients in the region, said she also sought more information about Abridge and did not receive the explanations she believes providers need to properly inform patients.

Pacheco said a colleague who raised concerns to a supervisor was told that expressing personal views about AI in the workplace was unprofessional. She said that kind of response makes providers feel they have little room to advocate for patients.

“We’re supposed to be the voice of patients who are coming in their most vulnerable state,” Pacheco said. “And we can’t even be that voice for them, so we feel discouraged.”

The dispute comes as many mental health professionals say they are facing rising workloads and heavy documentation demands. Marcucci-Morris said clinicians may see patient after patient with little time between appointments, making it difficult to keep up with notes and other administrative tasks.

She said providers who fall behind can face workplace investigations or discipline, and that management often recommends Abridge as a way to reduce delays in documentation. In her view, that creates pressure on clinicians to use the technology even if they have unanswered concerns.

“I consider that to be coercive,” she said, “because you’re putting someone in a position to either lose their job or use the software.”

Kaiser has promoted the tool as a way to reduce administrative burdens and improve the patient experience. In a Kaiser news release, Brian Hoberman, chief information officer for The Permanente Medical Group, said Abridge helps support physician well-being by easing documentation demands. He said the technology was implemented after careful review and testing and had been well received by patients and doctors.

A Kaiser Permanente spokesperson said in an emailed statement to American Community Media that clinicians must obtain consent before using Abridge and that “no one is recorded without their knowledge and consent.” The statement said recordings are stored for no more than 14 days and that processing of the data meets HIPAA requirements as well as Kaiser’s privacy and security standards.

The spokesperson also said Abridge allows clinicians to spend more time focused on patients and less time on administrative work. Kaiser says data collected through the tool is not used to train AI models.

Still, some patients and providers remain uneasy, especially when the appointment involves mental health care. One Kaiser patient, who asked not to be named because of privacy concerns, said they feared intimate conversations with doctors or therapists could somehow be exposed.

“I may not want my employers, I may not want my family members, I might not want people to know some of these very intimate conversations and deep conversations I have with my doctors [and] with my mental health provider,” the patient said.

Adriana Webb, a social worker at Kaiser Panorama City in Los Angeles, said the concern is especially serious for patients with highly sensitive medical conditions.

“I work with patients who have sensitive medical diagnoses, like HIV and AIDS,” Webb said, adding that some patients do not even want those diagnoses documented in their charts.

Privacy experts say mental health information carries a particular risk because of the stigma and consequences patients may face if details are disclosed or misused. Nicole Alvarez, senior analyst for technology policy at the Center for American Progress, said records of a person’s most vulnerable moments can be used against them in ways that routine medical information, such as a blood pressure reading, generally cannot.

Alvarez said mental health records may affect employment, child custody disputes, immigration proceedings, security clearances and personal relationships. She said health systems should be clear with patients about how their information is stored, shared and used.

Agreements between health care providers and AI vendors can differ significantly, Alvarez said. Key questions include whether recordings or transcripts can be used to train AI models, whether data is de-identified, how long it is retained, whether it can be shared with other entities and what happens when a vendor contract ends.

Patients often have little visibility into those arrangements, she said. While most patients have the right to refuse recordings, Alvarez said the option to decline is not always presented clearly. In some cases, consent may be requested directly; in others, information may be included in intake paperwork that patients may not closely read.

Meaningful consent, she said, requires more than simply informing patients that a recording will occur. Patients should understand that they can say no and should be told what will happen to their information afterward.

Pacheco said she encountered the issue during her own appointment at Kaiser. She said her doctor did not ask whether Abridge could be used but instead told her it would be used. After a pause, she declined. The doctor stopped the recording, she said, but she felt a noticeable change in the doctor’s demeanor afterward. Pacheco later changed doctors.

Marcucci-Morris said she worries that patients may feel pressured to agree when the tool is framed as something that helps doctors avoid burnout, complete paperwork and spend more time with their families. Patients who care about their clinicians, she said, may feel guilty refusing.

Kaiser has said Abridge is available in 40 hospitals and more than 600 medical offices in eight states and the District of Columbia. The tool operates in more than 14 languages and is part of a broader push by the health care industry to adopt AI systems for clinical support and documentation.

American Community Media said it contacted Abridge AI Inc. multiple times for comment but received no response. On its website, Abridge describes itself as a “Business Associate” to health care providers and directs patients to consult their providers’ privacy policies for information on how their data is protected.

For Marcucci-Morris, the central concern is the relationship between patient and therapist. She said privacy and trust are essential to effective care and that recording a session can alter the dynamic.

“Therapy is most effective in privacy and when trust is achieved through two human beings,” she said. “I believe recording a therapy session changes human behavior. It changes the patient’s demeanor.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post Medical Providers May Be Recording Mental Health Care Visits appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

For Elias Avalos, the pressure became especially heavy during his junior year of high school. Now 17 and a senior, he remembers feeling exhausted and stuck while trying to manage four Advanced Placement classes and the expectations he felt as the son of Salvadoran immigrants.

“I’ve been dealing with feelings of burnout and unbelonging for a while,” Avalos said. When those feelings build, he turns to skateboarding. The hobby, he said, helps him separate from schoolwork and clear his mind.

His experience reflects a broader concern across California. In the 2026 Children Now report card, 94% of Californians ages 14 to 25 reported having mental health concerns in an average month. Stress and anxiety were the most common issues cited.

California Health and Human Services lists crisis hotlines, wellness tools and youth mental health resources on its website. But families and advocates say help remains difficult to obtain. They point to insurance denials, the complexity of navigating mental health systems and the cost of care as barriers that too often keep young people from treatment.

Avalos interns at the RYSE Youth Center in Richmond, where he is part of a youth research team studying what affects teen mental health. He said young people in his community are dealing with neglect, limited coping tools and too few places designed with youth in mind.

“What I learned is that here in Richmond, we don’t have access to a lot of support systems, which leads youth to go down different paths,” he said. Avalos said he knows people who have experienced homelessness, sold drugs to help their families or lost their lives. “It’s a harsh reality that youth in Richmond really do face.”

Kelly Hardy, one of the lead authors of the Children Now report, said the findings show that young people’s mental health needs urgent attention. Services, she said, must be available in places where youth already spend time, including schools and community spaces.

Children Now, an Oakland-based nonprofit, supported a law that took effect in 2024 allowing minors 12 and older to consent to their own mental health treatment or counseling. This year, the organization is backing Senate Bill 363, which would require health insurers to report how often they deny or modify treatment requests. Supporters say the measure is intended to make therapy, counseling and other behavioral health services easier for young people to access.

Hardy said untreated mental health struggles can affect physical health and increase the risk that youth turn to substance use to manage symptoms. The response, she said, should be care and treatment rather than punishment.

Avalos said he never learned how to talk through difficult emotions at home. In some spaces, he did not feel safe opening up, so he learned to keep problems to himself. That is one reason, he said, he has never gone to therapy. Like many Latino youth, he worried that what he told a therapist might be shared with his parents.

“I didn’t want to be a burden to my family and friends with my problems because I didn’t want to add something extra,” he said. “Everyone is going through something. It’s just something I got to get out of myself.”

When relatives ask about his internship, Avalos said he keeps his answers general, focusing on the values he has gained rather than the painful realities he is researching. He said he was raised to observe more than to speak.

Dr. David C. Turner III, an assistant professor of Black life and racial justice at UCLA’s Luskin School of Public Affairs and a senior adviser at the Alliance for Boys and Men of Color, said the mental health struggles of Black and Latino boys cannot be separated from larger systems. He cited structural racism, the overcriminalization of Black children and long-standing problems in education as factors that contribute to poor outcomes.

Turner said harsh discipline and criminalization in schools can push young people away from education and leave them feeling devalued.

“It demonstrates to these young men that they don’t matter, their opinions don’t matter, how they learn doesn’t matter,” he said, adding that school can become a place where young people feel their spirit has been broken.

Turner said children of color are often expected to carry heavy burdens with few support systems. His work includes advocating for legislation that would expand mental health services in schools and efforts to dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline, which disproportionately affects Black and Latino students.

In Los Angeles, 16-year-old Bryce Collins is trying to change conditions for students in the Los Angeles Unified School District. Collins, a high school junior, has worked since October with Students Deserve, an organization focused on ending the school-to-prison pipeline. He is also calling for more school-based spaces that support students’ mental health.

Collins said too many Black youth are dealing with racism, stress and anxiety on their own.

“Being a young Black male lets me know how I have to approach some of these areas,” he said. “I can’t do what everybody else do. I don’t got the privilege. I have to hold myself to a higher standard because that’s not how society views us typically.”

The youngest of seven siblings, Collins said his older brothers helped prepare him for the possibility of racial profiling. Around age 12, he began noticing people who were not Black watching him closely when he entered certain spaces. He believed it was because of his race.

More recently, Collins said, the pressures of being a young Black man, thinking about college and dealing with family responsibilities have added to his stress. Sometimes, he said, the weight of it causes him to shut down.

“My goal is to find better ways to manage my mental health besides going unresponsive to people,” Collins said. “I feel like I should come up with better ways instead of not talking or not letting people know what’s going on in my life.”

Original source: CalMatters

The post Teens Face Mounting Pressures as Mental Health Concerns Deepen appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

“Directing Change gives young people the opportunity to speak openly, support one another and help shape school communities where every student feels valued, understood and encouraged to reach out for help,” Riverside County Superintendent of Schools Edwin Gomez said. “Recognizing our students for expanding mental health awareness is a meaningful opportunity to show how much we value their powerful insights and inspiring creativity.”

Selected entries from the 2026 contest will be shown after a Red Carpet arrival, beginning shortly before 5 p.m. Wednesday at the Fox Performing Arts Center in downtown Riverside.

The competition is held annually as part of the “Youth Creating Change” program. Students are invited to produce vignettes, comparable to public service announcements, that are 30 to 60 seconds long.

A total 213 entries from two dozen schools and nonprofit organizations countywide were submitted this year, according to the Riverside University Health System, which sponsors the contests.

“Supporting the well-being of Riverside County’s young people is one of the most meaningful investments we can make in our future,” Board of Supervisors Chair Karen Spiegel said. “Directing Change gives students a powerful platform to share their voices, uplift one another and inspire change through creativity and compassion. These films reflect the insight, courage and heart of our youth, reminding us that honest conversations build stronger schools, healthier communities and a hopeful future.”

Along with the regular categories focused on suicide prevention and mental health awareness, this year’s event established two additional categories — substance abuse and Boys & Young Men Media Challenge — according to RUHS.

“By encouraging honest storytelling and peer connection, the program helps foster empathy, awareness and a culture of care among youth,” the agency stated.

The event is slated to conclude about 8 p.m. Wednesday.

More information is available at hopeandjustice.art/riversidecounty.

The post ‘Directing Change Film Contest’ Fosters Empathy, Awareness, In Riverside County Students appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Both bills reopen the debate among families and advocates over when it’s appropriate to put someone into mental health treatment without their consent.

One bill would create a pathway for the most severely incapacitated people to go directly from Newsom’s voluntary mental health court into involuntary treatment in a hospital. The other would make it easier for EMTs and other first responders to refer people to mental health court. Both bills recently passed through the Senate Judiciary Committee, despite concerns from disability rights advocates that they would force more people into unwanted treatment.

“While early implementation shows promise,” Sen. Catherine Blakespear, a Democrat from Encinitas, said during a recent committee hearing, “barriers in the current petition process are preventing the program from reaching many of the individuals it was designed to serve.”

CARE Court launched in 2023 as a major piece of Newsom’s strategy to get people in the grip of psychosis off the streets. It allows family members of people with untreated schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders to refer them into the court-based program, where they can work with a judge, a public defender and a case worker on a plan for medication, therapy, housing, and whatever other help they may need.

But a CalMatters investigation found the program is falling short of expectations. As of January, California courts had received 3,817 petitions on behalf of prospective CARE Court participants and approved just 893 treatment agreements. At its outset, the Newsom administration estimated between 7,000 and 12,000 Californians would qualify for the program. 

Some families who attempted to use CARE Court to help their severely ill loved ones told CalMatters they were disappointed by the results. They thought a judge could order their family members into treatment. But that turned out not to be the case. If someone is too sick to realize they need treatment, CARE Court can’t help, which means that their case can be dismissed while the person continues to languish on the street.

That’s the problem Blakespear is attempting to tackle with Senate Bill 1016. It would allow anyone filing a CARE Court petition to request that a judge order a mental health assessment to determine if the subject of the petition is “gravely disabled” or a danger to themselves or others – if the subject can’t comply with voluntary treatment.  

Depending on the results of the assessment, a judge could order that person into a conservatorship, which would likely mean a stay in a locked psychiatric facility and mandatory medication. 

The idea is to create a formal bridge between voluntary treatment under CARE Court and involuntary treatment through a  conservatorship. 

Adding the specter of forced care will make people with mental illness less likely to accept help from CARE Court, Samuel Jain of Disability Rights California said during the committee hearing.

“SB 1016 adds an expensive, coercive and convoluted layer to CARE Court that will drive up costs and further erode the rights and trust of the Californians that our system is supposed to help,” he said. 

Family ‘frustrated’ by CARE Court

Jennifer Farrell, who filed a CARE Court petition in late 2024 for her brother in Alameda County, sees it differently. Farrell’s 59-year-old brother, who struggles with schizophrenia and meth use, had been homeless off and on since 2017. He was able to stay housed via CARE Court for a few months, but then he left his placement in September and disappeared into the streets.

It was clear he needed more help than CARE Court could provide, but the program had no way to elevate him to a higher level of care, Farrell said. 

“I was really frustrated at that point,” she told CalMatters.

Farrell’s brother spent three months deteriorating on the street before a case worker found him in December. He was hospitalized on a temporary psychiatric hold and eventually placed on a conservatorship. He’s still in a locked facility, where he’s medicated and seems to be doing much better, Farrell said. 

To Farrell, it’s “absurd” that there isn’t already a direct link between CARE Court and a conservatorship — a connection that she thinks could have saved her family some grief.

At CARE Court’s inception, Newsom said people who didn’t follow their CARE plans could be moved into a conservatorship. But Farrell and other families CalMatters spoke with said if their loved one couldn’t consent to treatment, there was no clear path forward.

Technically, CARE Court judges can order participants to follow mandatory “CARE plans” — something that happened just 32 times between late 2023 and January — but judges can’t force participants to comply.

Easier CARE Court petitions

Blakespear’s other bill, SB 989, addresses another CARE Court challenge: the low number of people participating. 

Filing a CARE Court petition is a complicated, time-consuming process. Whoever is filing the request needs the person’s medical records. Then, they need to appear at the first court hearing — something overworked first responders don’t always have time to do.

That’s a key reason that people who work in public safety, such as firefighters and EMTs, say they don’t file CARE Court petitions, said Meagan Subers of California Professional Firefighters, who spoke in support of the bill at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. 

SB 989 would create a framework for first responders to refer clients directly to their county behavioral health department, which could then file a CARE Court petition on their behalf. The county would have 30 days to decide whether to file.

Some counties already make an effort to train and support their first responders in filing CARE Court petitions. Stanislaus County allows first responders to refer CARE Court clients directly to the county.

But that collaboration isn’t happening in a systematic way across the state, Subers said. This bill could help fix a broken system where first responders are constantly cycling people with severe mental illnesses in and out of emergency rooms, she said.

“When our members have to run these calls repeatedly on individuals and take them to the hospital, knowing that they’re going to have to respond to that person again, my members tell me that they feel helpless,” she said. “We see this pathway as another option for them.”

Blakespear’s bills follow a similar effort last year by Sen. Tom Umberg of Santa Ana to make CARE Court more effective. His new law, which went into effect in January, expanded CARE Court to include people who experience psychosis as a result of bipolar disorder. The program initially was exclusively for people diagnosed with schizophrenia and other limited psychotic disorders.

The post Plans to fix gaps in Newsom’s mental health court reopen divisions over involuntary care appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

In February, Assemblymember James Ramos, D-San Bernardino, introduced Assembly Bill 440, which would require the state to identify the state-controlled bridges and roadways with the most suicides and the most attempted suicides and report back to the Legislature on potential strategies to reduce deaths by the end of 2027.

“We need to be proactive to ensure we provide at-risk individuals with the help they need,” Ramos is quoted as saying in a news release issued by his office. “Creating strategies that build in time to reconsider fatal choices can save lives and prevent long lasting traumatic pain in families and communities.”

The bill passed the Assembly on a 79-0 vote June 2 and moved on to the state Senate.

On Thursday, June 26, the bill advanced out of the Senate’s Committee on Health by an 11-0 vote.

AB 440 is headed next to the state Senate’s Appropriations Committee.

Ramos’ bill comes after a fall in which two Rancho Cucamonga teenagers killed themselves on the 210 Freeway at the Haven Avenue overpass, in mid- and late September.

According to Jennifer Camacho-Curtis, spokesperson for the city of Rancho Cucamonga, it had been at least a decade since the last suicides at the spot. Since then, the city has met with Caltrans officials several times to push for stronger suicide deterrents at the Haven Avenue overpass, Camacho-Curtis wrote in an email on Friday, June 27.

“While we’ve faced challenges  and have been met with resistance in securing Caltrans’ approval for substantial improvements such as overhanging fencing, we are continuing those discussions with urgency and focus,” she wrote.

In late fall 2024, Camacho-Curtis said, the city worked with San Bernardino County to install two suicide prevention signs at the Haven Avenue overpass. More recently, the city has been working to secure permits for the installation of overpass wing fencing at Haven Avenue.

“The city is funding this improvement directly,” Camacho-Curtis said, “as a demonstration of our commitment to proactive, local action.”

Suicide is a not a new subject for Ramos to tackle. He helped create the state’s Office of Suicide Prevention in 2020 and has continued to advocate for suicide prevention, especially in the Native American community, since then.

Ramos is not the only local legislator responding to the Rancho Cucamonga teens’ deaths.

Earlier in June, San Bernardino County Sheriff Shannon Dicus advocated support for Senate Bill 800. The bill, introduced by state Sen. Eloise Gómez Reyes, D-Colton, and sponsored by the city of Rancho Cucamonga, would install physical barriers and signage to discourage suicide at 10 Freeway overpasses in San Bernardino County, prioritizing those with the highest rate of documented suicides over the past 20 years. SB 800 was approved by the state Senate on June 4 by a vote of 39-0 and is now working its way through the Assembly.

“In the past eight months, deputies have responded to 24 calls for service at seven different freeway overpasses throughout the city of Rancho Cucamonga. During that time, there have been at least ten separate incidents involving individuals either falling or attempting to fall from freeway overpasses in Rancho Cucamonga,” Dicus wrote in an op-ed. “Tragically, four lives were lost including one in the past week involving a 14-year-old who recently graduated the 8th grade. In six other cases, deputies intervened just in time – preventing additional loss of life.”

His department has also answered similar calls in Apple Valley, Colton, Ontario and Redlands, he wrote.

“Our job as law enforcement is to respond – but also to prevent where we can,” Dicus’ op-ed concludes. “SB 800 represents a chance to do both.”

According to the Assembly Committee on Health’s analysis of AB 440, suicide is the No. 1 cause of violent death and self-harm is the third leading cause of injury-related visits to emergency rooms.

How to get help

If you or someone you know is considering suicide or self-harm, mental health resources are available, including free and low-cost services. They include:

• The 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline: Call or text 988, or visit SuicidePreventionLifeline.org
• Crisis Text Line: CrisisTextLine.org
• Know the Signs: SuicideIsPreventable.org
• The Suicide Prevention Resource Center’s Resources and Programs page: SPRC.org/resources-programs
• The Veterans Crisis Line: Call 988 and press 1, or visit VeteransCrisisLine.net
• The National Council for Behavioral Health’s Find a Behavioral Health Provider page: TheNationalCouncil.org/providers/?region=CA
• Born This Way Foundation’s Get Help Now page: BornThisWay.foundation/get-help-now
• Hayden’s Corner: HaydensCorner.org

The post Inland Empire lawmakers’ bills to stop suicide at bridges advancing in Legislature appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

The jail system has reported its highest number of detainee deaths in decades, including several suicides, the New York Times reported. Deaths were reported as homicide, overdose, natural causes and suicide.

Alicia Upton, who died of suicide in 2022, was one of 19 people who died in custody that year. It was the system’s most lethal year in more than three decades. Upton was one of at least four suicides, the newspaper reported.

Neglect by jail employees, access to drugs and cell assignments put detainees at increased risk throughout 2022, the New York Times reported.

The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department has reportedly assumed no responsibility for the deaths. County sheriff Chad Bianco did not respond to interview requests with the New York Times.

Meanwhile, California Attorney General Rob Bonta launched a civil rights investigation into the sheriff’s office last year, citing concerns over its jail facilities.

“Whether you have a loved one in jail or are worried about crime in your neighborhood, we all benefit when there is action to ensure the integrity of policing in our state,” Bonta wrote.

The newspaper reported five key takeaways about the jail system:

1. The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department failed to adequately monitor detainees and intervene when they attempted suicide

2. Mentally ill detainees were able to block cell cameras and cell door windows even though the rules forbade it.

3. Deputies did not relocate detainees who expressed suicidal thoughts to cells where they could be monitored at all times.

4. The sheriff’s department left out important information about the deaths to the public and to the detainee’s families.

5. Riverside County paid out millions of dollars in settlements related to detainee deaths.

Read more from the New York Times: Inside a Deadly Southern California Jail System: 5 Takeaways

The post RivCo Has One Of The Deadliest Jail Systems In U.S.: Report appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.