Opponents: Proposal to change extended psych commitments poses ‘danger’

HARTFORD — A proposal to have Connecticut probate courts decide whether patients deemed criminally insane should have their commitments extended poses risks to public safety, opponents told lawmakers on Wednesday.

But supporters say it’s not fair and a violation of patients’ rights to keep them “warehoused” in locked mental wards beyond their commitment periods in Middletown at Whiting Forensic Hospital, the only state-run hospital for the criminally insane.

“This bill is not well thought-out as written because it has some unintentional negative consequences related to public safety,” Vanessa Cardella, executive director of the Psychiatric Security Review Board, said in advance of her testimony before the judiciary committee.

Andrew Reynolds said if the bill becomes law, “it wouldn’t include any notification when an acquittee is released,” he said, calling that “a danger” to the public. Reynolds’ niece,

Jessica Short, 9, died after being stabbed more than 30 times in the summer of 1989 by a Connecticut Valley Hospital patient who was allowed out in the community on an eighthour pass.

The bill, SB 926, seeks to change the way commitment periods are extended for psychiatric patients who are deemed not well enough for discharge from custody when they reach the end of their commitment periods. Called “acquitees,” the patients were found innocent of serious crimes in criminal court by reason of mental disease or defect.

These patients are now committed to the jurisdiction of the Psychiatric Security Review Board, and a state’s attorney recommends the extended committal to a Superior Court judge. However, the proposal would shift this process to civil court for probate court judges to decide.

“If it went to a probate court, it would be different, they would go to the least restrictive setting,” Waterbury State’s Attorney Maureen Platt told the committee.

She also urged the legislators to wait until a special Whiting task force finishes its work and makes recommendations.

But Kathy Flaherty, executive director of Connecticut Legal Rights Project, said she’s tired of seeing “report after report after report” conclude what the state should do with no action taken. She said keeping people at Whiting for years beyond their commitment periods is against their civil rights.

“Our current system violates people’s rights,” she said. “It needs to stop, and this committee needs to be a part of that.”

“We don’t need to wait,” Flaherty said. “Have some political courage and move forward.”

Patients also spoke during the hearing via video feeds.

Hal Bassow testified from Whiting that some acquittees remain at the facility five times longer than their original commitment period.

“It’s not fair. It’s not fairness. It’s not justice and it’s certainly not recovery,” Bassow said.

Vinnie Ardizzone, also a Whiting patient, said, “I feel like this is a life sentence here.”

Anthony Dyous, a patient in the less-restrictive Dutcher unit, said, “the current mental health system in this state is not a health system at all.”

This isn’t the first proposed move toward reducing restrictions for patients. Reynolds was among those who railed earlier this year against a new law that he said also is a threat to public safety, Public Act No. 22-45. The law allows Whiting Forensic Hospital to move committed patients from the highest-security hospital for the criminally insane to a less-secure setting without input from the Psychiatric Security Review Board.

The board may later review the transfer and overrule the decision.

At the end of its Jan. 27 hearing, the board decided to uphold the decision to transfer Chevoughn Augustin, who nearly killed former Hartford Police Officer Jill Kidik by stabbing her repeatedly in the neck, from the highsecurity Whiting to the Dutcher unit.