Recovery in Context: Thirty Years of Mental Health Policy in California

Over the past quarter century, Recovery has become the hegemonic model guiding mental health policy. Advocates presented Recovery as a radical departure from the past, with the promise of dramatically improved outcomes for those with serious mental illness. This article looks at the implementation of Recovery-based policies in California from the 1990s to the present and interrogates the ways these policies emerged out of and reinforced many of the problems they were intended to solve. Against the backdrop of welfare reform, managed care, and a growing belief in market forces and individual responsibility, California policymakers pivoted from rigorously studied pilot programs that were intended to provide intensive, long-term treatment to Recovery-oriented programs that, while initially intensive, promised to "flow" increasingly independent and self-sufficient patients to less-intensive services. Moreover, these new programs promised to produce cost savings by reducing homelessness, hospitalization, and incarceration. Reported outcomes from these programs have been overwhelmingly positive but are based on flawed evaluations that lean more heavily on belief than on evidence. While proclaiming a comprehensive, patient-centered approach, Recovery's embrace of independence over long-term care and social supports has justified a system of care that systematically fails the sickest patients by abandoning them to the streets and jails.