Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter, did not spend significant time in a psychiatric hospital before last week’s mass slaying — a fact that has intensified the debate on mental health laws in Virginia, Maryland and around the country.
“I don’t think anyone would say that if the law was different in Virginia, it would’ve definitely made a difference,” said Lynn Albizo, a mental health lawyer and the executive director of the Maryland chapter of the National Alliance on Mental Illness. “But it does raise the issue of mental health laws up for discussion.”
Cho’s history seems full of red flags, according to various news sources investigating his life after he killed 32 people in two incidents in a single day, April 16, on the Blacksburg, Va., campus.
The English major’s violent writings frightened professors and fellow students so much that he was removed from class and received individual tutoring. And his pestering of two female students about a year ago led to contact with campus police and then a local hospital, where he was found to be possibly a danger to himself and was prescribed outpatient treatment.
ince last week’s shootings, Virginia’s mental health laws have been criticized for making it too difficult to involuntarily commit individuals who might be a danger to themselves or others. But some mental health advocates say Maryland’s law is just as restrictive.
Both fall into the category of states that have among the strictest laws in the country, said Jonathan Stanley, assistant director of the Treatment Advocacy Center, an Arlington, Va.-based group that advocates for broader commitment laws.
Both Maryland and Virginia should be “more willing to let police officers, judges and doctors step in” and allow both involuntary inpatient and outpatient commitment to be more of an option, Stanley says.
But other mental health experts disagree.
“We’re opposed to any further relaxation of the (commitment) standard that would lead to involuntary admissions” for mentally ill persons that might be considered dangerous, said Laura Cain, an attorney for the Maryland Disability Law Center in Baltimore.
Broadened commitment laws “cut back on the civil liberties” of persons with a mental illness and have not been proven to work, Cain said.
Virginia law states that individuals may only be committed involuntarily if they pose an “imminent danger” to themselves or others or are “substantially” unable to care for themselves.
According to the Treatment Advocacy Center, Virginia is one of only five states with an “imminent danger” threshold for commitment.
Until 2003, Maryland had the same “imminent danger” standard. But it was changed that October to allow police officers, doctors, or anyone “with a legitimate interest” to petition for commitment when an individual presented “a danger to the life or safety” of themselves or others. Two separate doctors must agree with that assessment before an individual can be involuntarily committed to inpatient care.
“With ‘imminent danger,’ you almost have to have someone coming at you at that very moment,” said Albizo.
Now, “if it can be shown an individual has made threats in the past and has access to weapons,” he or she might be evaluated for commitment when released from police custody or a hospital emergency room, Albizo said.
But Cain believes