This law was supposed to force more Californians into mental health treatment. What happened?

Detailed summary

Californians braced for major upheaval three years ago when Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law meant to bring people with severe mental illnesses and addictions off the street and…

Californians braced for major upheaval three years ago when Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law meant to bring people with severe mental illnesses and addictions off the street and into involuntary treatment.

Families who championed the measure hoped it would be the answer to their prayers – a tool that finally would compel their loved ones to receive treatment through conservatorship.

Disability rights advocates who opposed the law warned it would traumatize large numbers of people by forcibly medicating them and removing their rights to make decisions about their own care.

County behavioral health officials worried the legislation would unleash a torrent of new referrals on programs that didn’t have the resources to keep up.

And leaders of already overcrowded hospital emergency rooms and psychiatric facilities braced themselves for a large influx of new patients.

In fact, data obtained by CalMatters shows that, in most of the state’s largest counties, the number of conservatorships has barely budged.

“It was not at all as big an impact as we thought it could be,” said Toni Navarro, director of behavioral health for Santa Barbara County, where the number of conservatorships has dropped 1% since the legislation took effect there in July 2025.

Senate Bill 43, signed into law in 2023, broadened a nearly 60-year-old framework known as the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act for determining when someone is so “gravely disabled” that they can no longer care for themselves.

The new law allows more people to qualify for involuntary treatment. “Gravely disabled” used to mean someone could not provide for their basic needs of food, clothing or shelter due to severe mental illness or chronic alcoholism. Now, it also includes people who cannot provide for their safety or medical care, as well as people who are incapacitated due to severe substance use disorder.

Opening of the article, excerpted from Toronto Star. To read the rest, open the article on the publisher's site.