Behavioral Health Bill Moves Forward, But Provision Allowing Authorities to Intercept Communications of Patients, Among Other Problems, Remain Stumbling Block

A bill that seeks to improve services to children and adults who suffer from behavioral health challenges, mental health disorders, developmental disabilities, and alcoholism, and drug addiction has been approved by senators on the Committee on Health, Hospitals and Human Services.

Last Friday, legislators voted to further amend the Virgin Islands Behavioral Health Act and to refer it to the Committee on Rules and Judiciary for further vetting. The amendments included changing the terms “behavioral health or psychiatric social workers” and replacing it with “licensed certified independent social worker” regarding who can care for these patients and clarifying the meaning of “substance use disorder”.

These and other changes come after numerous reviews by legislators who have rejected several previous drafts of the 70-page bill. The bill requires among other things, the need for intergovernmental and private collaboration to manage behavioral and mental health in the territories. However, none of the changes directly addressed the major challenges aired by the testifiers.

While the bill moves forward, there are several loop holes that still need to be remedied. Concerns range from possible government infringement on the operations of private behavioral health facilities, violation of patients’ rights by secluding and restraining a patient if their medical needs require it, to sharing information on a client’s health without their consent.

For example, Dr. Lori Thompson, clinical psychologist and government relations committee chair of Virgin Islands Psychologist, while supporting the bill, said she was worried about certain stipulations which she believes would “bankrupt the territory” and result in unintentional legal challenges for the government.

“In spite of the bill’s good intention, the bill as drafted raises many problems that will invariably lead to many unintended, undesirable consequences,” she said, naming three primary areas of concern to include the long-term funding of the programs and services proposed in the bill, potential lawsuits against the government based on certain legal language outlined, and violation of patients’ rights.

Dr. Thompson described the bill, as it is written, as yet “another top-heavy-layer of bureaucracy over an already stretched and under-funded system."

“The bill as written gives the illusion of funding through the Casino Revenue Fund but this money is finite. Nonetheless the bill poses infinite obligations, costs and liabilities on the government which will far exceed any revenues generated by the casinos,” she reasoned.