HB1070

HB 1070-FN appears to be misaligned with civil-liberties protections, creates financial ambiguity for towns, and does not meaningfully improve the IEA process. It expands coercive authority without addressing the underlying system failures.

This will be another burden on insurance rate and tax payers to pay for a ride. Ambulance calls are very expensive, and should not be used to force someone for an evaluation.

This compulsory transportation by ambulance is compulsory purchase of commercial services. It is a state-mandated COST to individuals NOT allowed by our Constitution. It is not a tax. It obviates low-cost transport by family or others.

Nothing should be involuntary!

Position: STRONGLY OPPOSE Summary: HB 1070-FN mandates that individuals may be forcibly transported by ambulance for involuntary psychiatric evaluation at the discretion of law enforcement. This bill is non-consensual, unfunded, unsafe, and contrary to gold-standard practices in mental health care. 1. This Bill is Non-Consensual and Potentially Traumatizing The legislation explicitly allows ambulance transport without the individual’s consent. Involuntary interventions in mental health crises should be a last resort, after voluntary engagement and de-escalation strategies have been exhausted. Forcing individuals into protective custody can worsen trauma, erode trust in care systems, and discourage voluntary treatment, undermining long-term mental health outcomes. 2. Unqualified Personnel Are Placed in a Clinical Role The bill grants “peace officers” the authority to determine mental illness and imminent danger, yet New Hampshire does not have officers certified to make clinical mental health assessments. Police officers are not trained or certified to recognize psychiatric emergencies reliably. Reliance on behavioral observation alone is high-risk, inaccurate, and can escalate crises unnecessarily. Evidence-based best practice requires certified clinicians—psychiatrists, psychiatric nurse practitioners, or trained mental health professionals—to conduct initial assessments. 3. Funding Gaps and Fiscal Implications The bill provides no funding for ambulance transport, leaving municipalities or individuals to shoulder unpredictable costs ranging from $414 to over $2,300 per transport. Emergency departments are already overburdened, and unfunded mandates risk delays in care, overtaxed EMTs, and reduced quality of evaluation. 4. Contradiction with Gold-Standard Human Services Practices Current best practices emphasize: Voluntary engagement and crisis de-escalation Assessment by trained mental health professionals Least-restrictive interventions whenever possible HB 1070-FN moves in the opposite direction, substituting force for clinical judgment and creating a system ripe for abuse, misinterpretation, and unnecessary trauma. 5. Broader Implications and Recommendations This legislation risks civil liberties violations and non-evidence-based practice, while increasing the burden on municipalities without addressing the root causes of psychiatric crises. If the Legislature seeks to improve emergency mental health care, investment in certified crisis response teams, training for first responders, and voluntary intervention programs would be far more effective. Conclusion: HB 1070-FN is non-consensual, clinically unsafe, fiscally irresponsible, and contrary to evidence-based mental health practices. I urge the committee to vote INEXPEDIENT TO LEGISLATE and redirect attention to voluntary, trauma-informed, and properly funded mental health crisis interventions.