In San Jose, families say California’s CARE Court, the much-touted civil program meant to route adults with psychosis into help, is leaving many of their loved ones stuck in limbo instead of in treatment. Parents and advocates describe petitions tossed on technicalities, clinicians refusing to sign key affidavits, and long waits that stretch on while people never receive the services judges say they should get.
Since Santa Clara County launched CARE Court in December 2024, the Superior Court has received 63 petitions; 34 were dismissed, six people agreed to voluntary treatment and there were no court-ordered involuntary plans in the past 15 months, according to SFGATE. One San Jose father told reporters a judge rejected his petition after a private psychiatrist said she no longer had a treating relationship with his adult child and would not sign the clinician form, a case that families say shows how paperwork can quietly kill a plea for help.
Those local numbers line up with the broader rollout. Across California, just 2,421 CARE petitions had been filed through July 2025, and only 528 of those resulted in treatment agreements or plans, CalMatters reported. A July 2025 annual report from the California Department of Health Care Services found that among petitions dismissed in the program’s first nine months, about 56% of respondents did not go on to receive county behavioral health services.
“The program is not working,” said Monica Porter Gilbert of Disability Rights California, reflecting what many families and local advocates have been saying, as reported by LAist. Critics point to bare-bones staffing, slow-moving bureaucracy and the high price tag as reasons that court-ordered or strongly recommended services often never reach the people at the center of these cases.
How CARE Court Is Supposed To Work
Under the CARE Act, relatives, clinicians, first responders and a few other parties can ask a civil court to help an adult with a qualifying psychotic disorder secure medication, housing support and case management. Santa Clara County’s Behavioral Health Services Department explains that a typical petition must include a form from the person filing and a clinician affidavit, or documented proof of recent intensive treatment, before a judge will order an investigation, help negotiate a voluntary CARE agreement or, if needed, direct a more formal CARE plan.
Why Families Say The System Stalls
Families and clinicians say that the affidavit requirement often becomes a bottleneck. Treating providers frequently decline to sign if they are no longer seeing a patient or cannot safely assess someone who avoids appointments or refuses contact. Petitioners also report that respondents can be hard to track down, whether staying behind closed doors in apartments or sleeping outside, and judges have been reluctant to convert petitions into involuntary treatment, a trend reflected in local reporting and court data.
What Advocates Want Instead
Disability and mental health advocates argue that the state should put more money into mobile crisis teams, round-the-clock hotlines and faster access to housing and outpatient therapy rather than leaning so heavily on court orders, LAist reported. In their view, those tools meet people where they are, literally and figuratively, and can keep family pleas for help from turning into a slow, legalistic process that feels more punitive than supportive.
Legal Changes And What They Mean
State lawmakers have moved to widen the front door to CARE Court. Senate Bill 27, which took effect Jan. 1, 2026, expanded eligibility to include people with bipolar I disorder with psychotic features and also lets nurse practitioners and physician assistants sign certain mental health declarations, changes the courts say are meant to increase access. The California Courts newsroom notes that the bill is designed to ease some capacity constraints, while advocates caution that widening eligibility alone will not fix the underlying shortage of services.
For now, families say they are not giving up. The Superior Court expects more petitions this year and maintains a dedicated CARE calendar, and the county has an outreach team tasked with guiding petitioned individuals toward services. Parents warn, though, that unless clinicians, county agencies and courts can reliably turn hearing dates into housing, medication and therapy, CARE Court risks becoming exactly what they fear most: a legal pathway without the care that was promised.
