Alliance Alert: Yesterday, I joined Susan Arbetter on Capital Tonight to respond to a proposal to create a new Office of Civil Commitment and discuss what New York should be doing instead to better support people with significant mental health needs.
The Alliance believes the conversation must start much earlier than hospitalization. Hospitalization can be useful for some people at particular moments, but it cannot be the centerpiece of our mental health system. Our goal should be to prevent crises whenever possible while ensuring that people have the housing, treatment, relationships, and recovery supports they need to succeed before and after hospitalization. New York itself has been expanding community programs including non-police crisis response, Critical Time Intervention, supportive housing, INSET, and other engagement approaches intended to help people remain successfully in their communities.
We already know a great deal about what works, including for people with significant needs or who have had difficulty engaging with traditional services. Intensive and Sustained Engagement Teams (INSET) provide voluntary, peer-led, flexible, continuous support for people who are underserved by traditional services or at risk of Kendra’s Law orders, hospitalization, or criminal legal system involvement. OMH specifically describes INSET as an approach that can engage people in lieu of Kendra’s Law. Instead of building more pathways into coercion, we should make successful approaches like these available to far more New Yorkers.
During the interview, I also noted that many people want services. We want to clarify that this comment referred specifically to findings from New York’s recently released independent evaluation of Kendra’s Law. The evaluation examined both Kendra’s Law and voluntary treatment, and our analysis of the report highlighted participants who indicated they would have accepted intensive services voluntarily had those options been adequately offered and explained. The state’s evaluation also found significant improvements among people receiving intensive services voluntarily, reinforcing the importance of making those services readily available without requiring court involvement.
We also recognize that some people are reluctant or resistant to engaging with services. Our response should be to better understand why. Previous coercive experiences, trauma, distrust, services that do not meet someone’s needs, or unsuccessful interactions with the system can all create barriers to engagement. The Kendra’s Law evaluation itself identified concerns about traumatic law-enforcement encounters and distrust of the behavioral health system. Effective engagement requires persistence, trust, flexibility, peer involvement, and meeting people where they are, the very principles reflected in programs like INSET.
That means investing in the full continuum of services: affordable and supportive housing, intensive voluntary community services, peer support, INSET, effective outreach and engagement, and strong follow-up when people transition out of hospitals or other settings. And when someone does reach a behavioral health crisis, the Alliance continues to advocate for Daniel’s Law-style health-led, non-police crisis response, so people can receive a trauma-informed health response rather than unnecessarily entering the criminal legal system. New York is currently funding pilots modeled on the Daniel’s Law Task Force recommendations, including a new round intended to establish four additional health-led crisis response programs.
We do not need to wait for people to deteriorate to the point where hospitalization or coercion becomes the answer. We need to invest in what works, reach people earlier, build trust, provide housing and intensive supports, and create a mental health system capable of helping more New Yorkers enter and maintain recovery in their communities.
Continue the Conversation at the Alliance Annual Conference
These questions will be front and center at the Alliance for Rights and Recovery’s 44th Annual Conference, September 23–25 in Albany. The conference will feature a major panel examining Kendra’s Law and the findings of New York’s independent statewide evaluation, bringing together members of the research team, legal experts, county officials, INSET providers, and advocates to discuss what the findings mean for the future of court-ordered treatment and how New York can expand voluntary, intensive community-based alternatives.
We encourage everyone who wants to be part of building a system that leads with services, engagement, rights, and recovery to join us in Albany and help shape what comes next!
Register for Conference HERE
Full Conference Program
Mental Health Advocate Pans Expansion of Civil Commitment for People with Severe Mental Illness
By Susan Arbetter | Capital Tonight | September 14, 2026
Last week, the Republican candidate for New York state attorney general, Saritha Komatireddy, announced she will create an Office of Civil Commitment to deal with people who have serious mental illness and a history of violence if she wins her race against state Attorney General Letitia James.
Komatireddy also promised to build additional residential housing for this population.
The immediate reaction to this idea from the some in the mental health community was a hard “no.”
According to the Alliance for Rights and Recovery, not only would the candidate’s plan be “turning over the mental health system’s responsibility” to the police, courts, judges and attorneys, but the cost of building new residential institutions would be prohibitive.
Luke Sikinyi is a mental health advocate who is firmly against the idea of an Office of Civil Commitment. He is the vice president for public policy for the Alliance of Rights and Recovery and joined Capital Tonight host Susan Arbetter to discuss the issue.
Watch the Interview Here: Advocate pans idea of Office of Civil Commitment