Opinion ID: 2537785
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Testimony on Bigley's proposed less intrusive alternative

Text: Before the hearing, Bigley's counsel had filed a Motion for Less Intrusive Alternative with the court. In it he proposed that Bigley be allowed to come and go from API as he wishes, including being given food, good sleeping conditions, laundry and toiletry items as reasonably requested. ... If placed at API involuntarily, he proposed that Bigley be allowed out on passes with escort. Furthermore, the proposed alternative called for API to procure and pay for a reasonably nice apartment that is available to Mr. Bigley should he choose to use it. Finally, he proposed that API make sufficient staff available to be with Mr. Bigley to enable him to be successful in the community. (Emphasis in original.) In support of this motion, Bigley offered affidavits from Ronald Bassman, Ph.D., Robert Whitaker, and an affidavit and testimony from Paul Cornils. The affidavit from Whitaker, a journalist who writes about science and medicine, criticized the efficacy and side effects of psychotropic drugs, and argued that recovery rates are superior without them. The affidavit of Ronald Bassman described research supporting the efficacy of recovery from schizophrenia without drugs. A report submitted by Dr. Jackson also described non-drug treatment strategies and summarized studies supporting their efficacy. Most directly relevant was the affidavit of Paul Cornils of CHOICES, because Cornils has worked with Bigley and specifically endorsed Bigley's proposed alternative, describing in some detail a theory of how Bigley could be better treated without psychotropic drugs. Cornils testified that his organization could provide case management and rehabilitative services in the community for someone in Bigley's condition. He thought that Bigley could be supported in the community without medication with the help of a twenty-four hours-a-day personal care attendant, which, over time, might be reduced to less than twenty-four hours. Although Cornils objected to API's use of coercion to treat Bigley, he conceded that CHOICES lacked the funding to provide the kind of support Bigley needed. He also testified that CHOICES would not normally work with a patient who was refusing to take medication against his physician's recommendations, which could preclude CHOICES from working with Bigley. And he testified that a psychiatrist treating Bigley without medications would run a liability risk: [T]he psychiatrist would ultimately be held responsible for the behavior because he is ultimately overseeing the treatment. ... API's Dr. Hopson agreed that the services recommended by Cornils would be valuable and that finding housing for Bigley should be a high priority. However, he said that the approach of treating Bigley without medication had been tried multiple times and failed because in each instance he was evicted from the housing due to his behavior. It had become difficult for his guardian to place him anywhere because they know Mr. Bigley, and they know ... the difficulties they are going to encounter.