Why Women Especially Should Watch Out For COPD

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

We’ve written before about Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), which is a rising killer of Americans, and affects an estimated 9% of the population. Even accounting for 10almonds readers probably being healthier than average, we’d bet this means it still affects at least 1 in 20 readers.

If you’re thinking “good thing that’s not me”, then do bear in mind that an estimated 50% of people with COPD don’t know it.

See also: Why Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Is More Likely Than You Think ← you can also see the symptoms of it there, and you’ll see why it often escapes notice for quite a while, sometimes years at first.

Much like how in a house with a carbon monoxide leak, the inhabitants get less and less oxygen, but usually don’t notice it.

Gender disparity

Recent research has shown that women are around 50% more likely than men to develop COPD, even if they have never smoked or smoked less.

This is very reminiscent of what we talked about recently for lung cancer, here: Why Lung Cancer Is On The Rise Even In Women Who’ve Never Smoked

Historically, it was assumed that women got it more simply because we were more vulnerable to cigarette smoke, but these statistics show that can’t be the reason.

You may be wondering about the validity of the study, the size etc, and: data from the 2020 US National Health Interview Survey was used, involving over 23,000 adults aged 40+.

In this study, women reported lower use of cigarettes, cigars, pipes, and smokeless tobacco, although similar vaping rates to men, and yet COPD prevalence was higher in women (8%) than in men (6.5%).

It’s worth noting also that of the people with COPD, 26.5% of women had never smoked vs 14% of men.

Even after adjusting for other factors, female gender was linked to a 47% higher COPD risk.

What this tells us: tobacco susceptibility alone doesn’t explain the gender gap in COPD risk.

What remains a mystery: where this gender gap is actually coming from.

The researchers also note:

❝Studies have shown that primary care physicians are less likely to consider COPD in women compared with men presenting with similar symptoms, that use of spirometry can correct this bias, but that unfortunately women undergo spirometry testing less frequently than men❞

…which is unfortunately a very familiar song when it comes to things that predominantly or disproportionately affect women.

You can read the study paper itself in its entirety here:

Gender, tobacco and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: analysis of the 2020 National Health Interview Survey

(the 2020 date in the paper title makes it seem like it’s not new research, but we promise it is; this was published just two days ago at time of writing, on the 8th of May 2025, and represents a very comprehensive analysis of the pre-COVID data)

Want to learn more?

For practical advice, check out:

Seven Things To Do For Good Lung Health!

And for a very in-depth treatment of the topic, you might like this book we reviewed:

Triple Life Threat – by Donald R. Lyman

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Oscar contender Poor Things is a film about disability. Why won’t more people say so?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Readers are advised this article includes an offensive and outdated disability term in a quote from the film.

    Poor Things is a spectacular film that has garnered critical praise, scooped up awards and has 11 Oscar nominations. That might be the problem. Audiences become absorbed in another world, so much so our usual frames of reference disappear.

    There has been much discussion about the film’s feminist potential (or betrayal). What’s not being talked about in mainstream reviews is disability. This seems strange when two of the film’s main characters are disabled.

    Set in a fantasy version of Victorian London, unorthodox Dr Godwin Baxter (William Dafoe) finds the just-dead body of a heavily pregnant woman in the Thames River. In keeping with his menagerie of hybrid animals, Godwin removes the unborn baby’s brain and puts it into the skull of its mother, who becomes Bella Baxter (Emma Stone).

    Is Bella really disabled?

    Stone has been praised for her ability to embody a small child who rapidly matures into a hypersexual person – one who has not had time to absorb the restrictive rules of gender or patriarchy.

    But we also see a woman using her behaviour to express herself because she has complex communication barriers. We see a woman who is highly sensitive and responsive to the sensory world around her. A woman moving through and seeing the world differently – just like the fish-eye lens used in many scenes.

    Women like this exist and they have historically been confined, studied and monitored like Bella. When medical student Max McCandless (Ramy Youssef) first meets Bella, he offensively exclaims “what a very pretty retard!” before being told the truth and promptly declared her future husband.

    Even if Bella is not coded as disabled through her movements, speech and behaviour, her onscreen creator and guardian is. Godwin Baxter has facial differences and other impairments which require assistive technology.

    So ignoring disability as a theme of the film seems determined and overt. The absurd humour for which the film is being lauded is often at Bella’s “primitive”, “monstrous” or “damaged” actions: words which aren’t usually used to describe children, but have been used to describe disabled people throughout history.

    In reviews, Bella’s walk and speech are compared to characters like the Scarecrow in The Wizard of Oz, rather than a disabled woman. So why the resistance?

    Freak shows and displays

    Disability studies scholar Rosemarie Gardland-Thomson writes “the history of disabled people in the Western world is in part the history of being on display”.

    In the 19th century, when Poor Things is set, “freak shows” featuring disabled people, Indigenous people and others with bodily differences were extremely popular.

    Doctors used freak shows to find specimens – like Joseph Merrick (also known as the Elephant Man and later depicted on screen) who was used for entertainment before he was exhibited in lecture halls. In the mid-1800s, as medicine became a profession, observing the disabled body shifted from a public spectacle to a private medical gaze that labelled disability as “sick” and pathologised it.

    Poor Things doesn’t just circle around these discourses of disability. Bella’s body is a medical experiment, kept locked away for the private viewing of male doctors who take notes about her every move in small pads. While there is something glorious, intimate and familiar about Bella’s discovery of her own sexual pleasure, she immediately recognises it as worth recording in the third person:

    I’ve discovered something that I must share […] Bella discover happy when she want!

    The film’s narrative arc ends with Bella herself training to be a doctor but one whose more visible disabilities have disappeared.

    Framing charity and sexual abuse

    Even the film’s title is an expression often used to describe disabled people. The charity model of disability sees disabled people as needing pity and support from others. Financial poverty is briefly shown at a far-off port in the film and Bella initially becomes a sex worker in Paris for money – but her more pressing concern is sexual pleasure.

    Disabled women’s sexuality is usually seen as something that needs to be controlled. It is frequently assumed disabled women are either hypersexual or de-gendered and sexually innocent.

    In the real world disabled people experience much higher rates of abuse, including sexual assault, than others. Last year’s Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability found women with disability are nearly twice as likely as women without disability to have been assaulted. Almost a third of women with disability have experienced sexual assault by the age of 15. Bella’s hypersexual curiosity appears to give her some layer of protection – but that portrayal denies the lived experience of many.

    Watch but don’t ignore

    Poor Things is a stunning film. But ignoring disability in the production ignores the ways in which the representation of disabled bodies play into deep and historical stereotypes about disabled people.

    These representations continue to shape lives. The Conversation

    Louisa Smith, Senior lecturer, Deakin University; Gemma Digby, Lecturer – Health & Social Development, Deakin University, and Shane Clifton, Associate Professor of Practice, School of Health Sciences and the Centre for Disability Research and Policy, University of Sydney

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • Online Reaction Tests & Women’s Cognitive Health (Test Yours!)

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    A team of researchers looked into the use of online reaction tests (in which, for example, one clicks whenever a certain prompt is shown, or for more of a cognitive challenge, one presses a numerical key when the corresponding digit is shown) to cognitive health in women at different ages.

    Why women? To quote the man who had the honor of being the first-listed author on the study (something that happens mysteriously often in science),

    ❝Women have long been under-represented in healthy aging research, despite making up more than half the population. We developed an easy way to measure cognitive function in the home, without the need for individuals to travel to clinics or receive home visits. Our research shows that testing of cognitive function in the home largely acceptable, easy and convenient❞

    About that convenience: they used data from the UK Women’s Cohort Study, which involved over 35,000 British women, and then specifically focused on a follow-up study of 768 participants aged 48–85.

    Of the two kinds of online reaction tests we described up top, they used the numerical kind. The participants also filled in a questionnaire about their personal traits (demographic data, mostly, though things like self-reported level of health literacy, and how they would rate their overall health).

    What they found

    The findings included:

    • Younger women were more likely to participate, with participation rates dropping from 89% at age 45 to 44% at age 65.
    • Each higher level of education increased the likelihood of volunteering by 7%.
    • Women who rated themselves as having “high” intelligence were 19% more likely to participate than those who considered themselves of “average” intelligence.
    • Women with lower self-reported health literacy made fewer errors, possibly due to taking longer to decide on answers—consistent with findings from older adults.

    You can read the full paper itself here: Health literacy in relation to web-based measurement of cognitive function in the home: UK Women’s Cohort Study

    Why this matters

    We wrote, a little while ago, about the use of online games (of a specific kind) to improve cognitive function:

    Synergistic Brain-Training: Let The Games Begin (But It Matters What Kind) ← the good news is, these are very accessible too

    When it comes to rapid and/but correct reactions, this becomes really critical:

    How (And Why) To Train Your Pre-Frontal Cortex ← Dr. Sandra Chapman advocates strongly for this, and it’s closely related to working memory and the ability to focus

    Want to test yours?

    Here are two ways to do it (now, for free, without needing to sign up for anything; the tests are right there on the page):

    • HumanBenchmark.com’s Reaction Time Test ← this one’s just a “click when the red panel turns green” test, but the merit here is that it compares your scores to a very large dataset of other people
    • Keypress Reaction Time Test ← this one’s the kind that was used in the study, and requires pressing the correct numerical key when the corresponding digit is shown on the screen. You can make it easier or harder by restricting or increasing the range of numbers it uses (default setting is to use the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6)

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Can kimchi really help you lose weight? Hold your pickle. The evidence isn’t looking great

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Fermented foods have become popular in recent years, partly due to their perceived health benefits.

    For instance, there is some evidence eating or drinking fermented foods can improve blood glucose control in people with diabetes. They can lower blood lipid (fats) levels and blood pressure in people with diabetes or obesity. Fermented foods can also improve diarrhoea symptoms.

    But can they help you lose weight, as a recent study suggests? Let’s look at the evidence.

    Remind me, what are fermented foods?

    Fermented foods are ones prepared when microbes (bacteria and/or yeast) ferment (or digest) food components to form new foods. Examples include yoghurt, cheese, kefir, kombucha, wine, beer, sauerkraut and kimchi.

    As a result of fermentation, the food becomes acidic, extending its shelf life (food-spoilage microbes are less likely to grow under these conditions). This makes fermentation one of the earliest forms of food processing.

    Fermentation also leads to new nutrients being made. Beneficial microbes (probiotics) digest nutrients and components in the food to produce new bioactive components (postbiotics). These postbiotics are thought to contribute to the health benefits of the fermented foods, alongside the health benefits of the bacteria themselves.

    What does the evidence say?

    A study published last week has provided some preliminary evidence eating kimchi – the popular Korean fermented food – is associated with a lower risk of obesity in some instances. But there were mixed results.

    The South Korean study involved 115,726 men and women aged 40-69 who reported how much kimchi they’d eaten over the previous year. The study was funded by the World Institute of Kimchi, which specialises in researching the country’s national dish.

    Eating one to three servings of any type of kimchi a day was associated with a lower risk of obesity in men.

    Men who ate more than three serves a day of cabbage kimchi (baechu) were less likely to have obesity and abdominal obesity (excess fat deposits around their middle). And women who ate two to three serves a day of baechu were less likely to have obesity and abdominal obesity.

    Eating more radish kimchi (kkakdugi) was associated with less abdominal obesity in both men and women.

    However, people who ate five or more serves of any type of kimchi weighed more, had a larger waist sizes and were more likely to be obese.

    The study had limitations. The authors acknowledged the questionnaire they used may make it difficult to say exactly how much kimchi people actually ate.

    The study also relied on people to report past eating habits. This may make it hard for them to accurately recall what they ate.

    This study design can also only tell us if something is linked (kimchi and obesity), not if one thing causes another (if kimchi causes weight loss). So it is important to look at experimental studies where researchers make changes to people’s diets then look at the results.

    How about evidence from experimental trials?

    There have been several experimental studies looking at how much weight people lose after eating various types of fermented foods. Other studies looked at markers or measures of appetite, but not weight loss.

    One study showed the stomach of men who drank 1.4 litres of fermented milk during a meal took longer to empty (compared to those who drank the same quantity of whole milk). This is related to feeling fuller for longer, potentially having less appetite for more food.

    Another study showed drinking 200 millilitres of kefir (a small glass) reduced participants’ appetite after the meal, but only when the meal contained quickly-digested foods likely to make blood glucose levels rise rapidly. This study did not measure changes in weight.

    Kefir in jar, with kefir grains on wood spoon
    Kefir, a fermented milk drink, reduced people’s appetite.
    Ildi Papp/Shutterstock

    Another study looked at Indonesian young women with obesity. Eating tempeh (a fermented soybean product) led to changes in an appetite hormone. But this did not impact their appetite or whether they felt full. Weight was not measured in this study.

    A study in South Korea asked people to eat about 70g a day of chungkookjang (fermented soybean). There were improvements in some measures of obesity, including percentage body fat, lean body mass, waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference in women. However there were no changes in weight for men or women.

    A systematic review of all studies that looked at the impact of fermented foods on satiety (feeling full) showed no effect.

    What should I do?

    The evidence so far is very weak to support or recommend fermented foods for weight loss. These experimental studies have been short in length, and many did not report weight changes.

    To date, most of the studies have used different fermented foods, so it is difficult to generalise across them all.

    Nevertheless, fermented foods are still useful as part of a healthy, varied and balanced diet, particularly if you enjoy them. They are rich in healthy bacteria, and nutrients.

    Are there downsides?

    Some fermented foods, such as kimchi and sauerkraut, have added salt. The latest kimchi study said the average amount of kimchi South Koreans eat provides about 490mg of salt a day. For an Australian, this would represent about 50% of the suggested dietary target for optimal health.

    Eating too much salt increases your risk of high blood pressure, heart disease and stroke. The Conversation

    Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • What is PNF stretching, and will it improve my flexibility?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Whether improving your flexibility was one of your new year’s resolutions, or you’ve been inspired watching certain tennis stars warming up at the Australian Open, maybe 2025 has you keen to focus on regular stretching.

    However, a quick Google search might leave you overwhelmed by all the different stretching techniques. There’s static stretching and dynamic stretching, which can be regarded as the main types of stretching.

    But there are also some other potentially lesser known types of stretching, such as PNF stretching. So if you’ve come across PNF stretching and it piques your interest, what do you need to know?

    Undrey/Shutterstock

    What is PNF stretching?

    PNF stretching stands for proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation. It was developed in the 1940s in the United States by neurologist Herman Kabat and physical therapists Margaret Knott and Dorothy Voss.

    PNF stretching was initially designed to help patients with neurological conditions that affect the movement of muscles, such as polio and multiple sclerosis.

    By the 1970s, its popularity had seen PNF stretching expand beyond the clinic and into the sporting arena where it was used by athletes and fitness enthusiasts during their warm-up and to improve their flexibility.

    Although the specifics have evolved over time, PNF essentially combines static stretching (where a muscle is held in a lengthened position for a short period of time) with isometric muscle contractions (where the muscle produces force without changing length).

    PNF stretching is typically performed with the help of a partner.

    There are 2 main types

    The two most common types of PNF stretching are the “contract-relax” and “contract-relax-agonist-contract” methods.

    The contract-relax method involves putting a muscle into a stretched position, followed immediately by an isometric contraction of the same muscle. When the person stops contracting, the muscle is then moved into a deeper stretch before the process is repeated.

    For example, to improve your hamstring flexibility, you could lie down and get a partner to lift your leg up just to the point where you begin to feel a stretch in the back of your thigh.

    Once this sensation eases, attempt to push your leg back towards the ground as your partner resists the movement. After this, your partner should now be able to lift your leg up slightly higher than before until you feel the same stretching sensation.

    This technique was based on the premise that the contracted muscle would fall “electrically silent” following the isometric contraction and therefore not offer its usual level of resistance to further stretching (called “autogenic inhibition”). The contract-relax method attempts to exploit this brief window to create a deeper stretch than would otherwise be possible without the prior muscle contraction.

    The contract-relax-agonist-contract method is similar. But after the isometric contraction of the stretched muscle, you perform an additional contraction of the muscle group opposing the muscle being stretched (referred to as the “agonist” muscle), before the muscle is moved into a static stretch once more.

    Again, if you’re trying to improve hamstring flexibility, immediately after trying to push your leg towards the ground you would attempt to lift it back towards the ceiling (this bit without partner resistance). You would do this by contracting the muscles on the front of the thigh (the quadriceps, the agonist muscle in this case).

    Likewise, after this, your partner should be able to lift your leg up slightly higher than before.

    The contract-relax-agonist-contract method is said to take advantage of a phenomenon known as “reciprocal inhibition.” This is where contracting the muscle group opposite that of the muscle being stretched leads to a short period of reduced activation of the stretched muscle, allowing the muscle to stretch further than normal.

    What does the evidence say?

    Research has shown PNF stretching is associated with improved flexibility.

    While it has been suggested that both PNF methods improve flexibility via changes in nervous system function, research suggests they may simply improve our ability to tolerate stretching.

    It’s worth noting most of the research on PNF stretching and flexibility has focused on healthy populations. This makes it difficult to provide evidence-based recommendations for people with clinical conditions.

    And it may not be the most effective method if you’re looking to improve your flexibility in the long term. A 2018 review found static stretching was better for improving flexibility compared to PNF stretching. But other research has found it could offer greater immediate benefits for flexibility than static stretching.

    At present, similar to other types of stretching, research linking PNF stretching to injury prevention and improved athletic performance is relatively inconclusive.

    PNF stretching may actually lead to small temporary deficits in performance of strength, power, and speed-based activities if performed immediately beforehand. So it’s probably best done after exercise or as a part of a standalone flexibility session.

    A man stretching his hamstring overlooking the ocean.
    Static stretching may be a more effective way to improve flexibility over the long-term. GaudiLab/Shutterstock

    How much should you do?

    It appears that a single contract-relax or contract-relax-agonist-contract repetition per muscle, performed twice per week, is enough to improve flexibility.

    The contraction itself doesn’t need to be hard and forceful – only about 20% of your maximal effort should suffice. The contraction should be held for at least three seconds, while the static stretching component should be maintained until the stretching sensation eases.

    So PNF stretching is potentially a more time-efficient way to improve flexibility, compared to, for example, static stretching. In a recent study we found four minutes of static stretching per muscle during a single session is optimal for an immediate improvement in flexibility.

    Is PNF stretching the right choice for me?

    Providing you have a partner who can help you, PNF stretching could be a good option. It might also provide a faster way to become more flexible for those who are time poor.

    However, if you’re about to perform any activities that require strength, power, or speed, it may be wise to limit PNF stretching to afterwards to avoid any potential deficits in performance.

    Lewis Ingram, Lecturer in Physiotherapy, University of South Australia and Hunter Bennett, Lecturer in Exercise Science, University of South Australia

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Next Level – by Dr. Stacy Sims

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    First of all: if you are a man, you will probably get little to nothing out of this book on a personal level (you may, however, find it of interest anyway if you have women in your life), as it is heavily tailored towards women.

    We previously reviewed this author’s “ROAR”, which is about boosting athletic performance with female hormones in mind. This time, the focus is on thriving through menopause (including: postmenopause) and going from strength to strength.

    Dr. Sims uses the first few chapters to explain the menopause in more detail than most people know it, before launching into the main part of the book, which is the “what to do” section.

    Here, we learn about HRT, adaptogens, and other interventions, the respective roles of cardio and resistance training, the undervalued yet critical importance of gut health, how to make sure your body gets all of what it needs in terms of nutrition when what it needs is changing, the dos and don’t of bone health when it comes to later-life athleticism, and a lot of mythbusting with regard to supplements (for some and against others), and plenty more besides.

    The style is accessible pop-science, with various facts, statistics, charts, and the like peppered throughout. On which note, there are no citations while reading, but there is a bibliography at the back, arranged on a chapter-by-chapter basis.

    Bottom line: if you find even just 10% of this book’s advices new and useful, then buying and reading this book will have been worthwhile and will have made a substantive difference (specifically: improvements) to your life.

    Click here to check out Next Level, and take your health to the next level!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Mental Health Courts Can Struggle to Fulfill Decades-Old Promise

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    GAINESVILLE, Ga. — In early December, Donald Brown stood nervously in the Hall County Courthouse, concerned he’d be sent back to jail.

    The 55-year-old struggles with depression, addiction, and suicidal thoughts. He worried a judge would terminate him from a special diversion program meant to keep people with mental illness from being incarcerated. He was failing to keep up with the program’s onerous work and community service requirements.

    “I’m kind of scared. I feel kind of defeated,” Brown said.

    Last year, Brown threatened to take his life with a gun and his family called 911 seeking help, he said. The police arrived, and Brown was arrested and charged with a felony of firearm possession.

    After months in jail, Brown was offered access to the Health Empowerment Linkage and Possibilities, or HELP, Court. If he pleaded guilty, he’d be connected to services and avoid prison time. But if he didn’t complete the program, he’d possibly face incarceration.

    “It’s almost like coercion,” Brown said. “‘Here, sign these papers and get out of jail.’ I feel like I could have been dealt with a lot better.”

    Advocates, attorneys, clinicians, and researchers said courts such as the one Brown is navigating can struggle to live up to their promise. The diversion programs, they said, are often expensive and resource-intensive, and serve fewer than 1% of the more than 2 million people who have a serious mental illness and are booked into U.S. jails each year.

    People can feel pressured to take plea deals and enter the courts, seeing the programs as the only route to get care or avoid prison time. The courts are selective, due in part to political pressures on elected judges and prosecutors. Participants must often meet strict requirements that critics say aren’t treatment-focused, such as regular hearings and drug screenings.

    And there is a lack of conclusive evidence on whether the courts help participants long-term. Some legal experts, like Lea Johnston, a professor of law at the University of Florida, worry the programs distract from more meaningful investments in mental health resources.

    Jails and prisons are not the place for individuals with mental disorders, she said. “But I’m also not sure that mental health court is the solution.”

    The country’s first mental health court was established in Broward County, Florida, in 1997, “as a way to promote recovery and mental health wellness and avoid criminalizing mental health problems.” The model was replicated with millions in funding from such federal agencies as the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Department of Justice.

    More than 650 adult and juvenile mental health courts were operational as of 2022, according to the National Treatment Court Resource Center. There’s no set way to run them. Generally, participants receive treatment plans and get linked to services. Judges and mental health clinicians oversee their progress.

    Researchers from the center found little evidence that the courts improve participants’ mental health or keep them out of the criminal justice system. “Few studies … assess longer-term impacts” of the programs “beyond one year after program exit,” said a 2022 policy brief on mental health courts.

    The courts work best when paired with investments in services such as clinical treatment, recovery programs, and housing and employment opportunities, said Kristen DeVall, the center’s co-director.

    “If all of these other supports aren’t invested in, then it’s kind of a wash,” she said.

    The courts should be seen as “one intervention in that larger system,” DeVall said, not “the only resource to serve folks with mental health needs” who get caught up in the criminal justice system.

    Resource limitations can also increase the pressures to apply for mental health court programs, said Lisa M. Wayne, executive director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. People seeking help might not feel they have alternatives.

    “It’s not going to be people who can afford mental health intervention. It’s poor people, marginalized folks,” she said.

    Other court skeptics wonder about the larger costs of the programs.

    In a study of a mental health court in Pennsylvania, Johnston and a University of Florida colleague found participants were sentenced to longer time under government supervision than if they’d gone through the regular criminal justice system.

    “The bigger problem is they’re taking attention away from more important solutions that we should be investing in, like community mental health care,” Johnston said.

    When Melissa Vergara’s oldest son, Mychael Difrancisco, was arrested on felony gun charges in Queens in May 2021, she thought he would be an ideal candidate for the New York City borough’s mental health court because of his diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder and other behavioral health conditions.

    She estimated she spent tens of thousands of dollars to prepare Difrancisco’s case for consideration. Meanwhile, her son sat in jail on Rikers Island, where she said he was assaulted multiple times and had to get half a finger amputated after it was caught in a cell door.

    In the end, his case was denied diversion into mental health court. Difrancisco, 22, is serving a prison sentence that could be as long as four years and six months.

    “There’s no real urgency to help people with mental health struggles,” Vergara said.

    Critics worry such high bars to entry can lead the programs to exclude people who could benefit the most. Some courts don’t allow those accused of violent or sexual crimes to participate. Prosecutors and judges can face pressure from constituents that may lead them to block individuals accused of high-profile offenses.

    And judges often aren’t trained to make decisions about participants’ care, said Raji Edayathumangalam, senior policy social worker with New York County Defender Services.

    “It’s inappropriate,” she said. “We’re all licensed to practice in our different professions for a reason. I can’t show up to do a hernia operation just because I read about it or sat next to a hernia surgeon.”

    Mental health courts can be overly focused on requirements such as drug testing, medication compliance, and completing workbook assignments, rather than progress toward recovery and clinical improvement, Edayathumangalam said.

    Completing the programs can leave some participants with clean criminal records. But failing to meet a program’s requirements can trigger penalties — including incarceration.

    During a recent hearing in the Clayton County Behavioral Health Accountability Court in suburban Atlanta, one woman left the courtroom in tears when Judge Shana Rooks Malone ordered her to report to jail for a seven-day stay for “being dishonest” about whether she was taking court-required medication.

    It was her sixth infraction in the program — previous consequences included written assignments and “bench duty,” in which participants must sit and think about their participation in the program.

    “I don’t like to incarcerate,” Malone said. “That particular participant has had some challenges. I’m rooting for her. But all the smaller penalties haven’t worked.”

    Still, other participants praised Malone and her program. And, in general, some say such diversion programs provide a much-needed lifeline.

    Michael Hobby, 32, of Gainesville was addicted to heroin and fentanyl when he was arrested for drug possession in August 2021. After entry into the HELP Court program, he got sober, started taking medication for anxiety and depression, and built a stable life.

    “I didn’t know where to reach out for help,” he said. “I got put in handcuffs, and it saved my life.”

    Even as Donald Brown awaited his fate, he said he had started taking medication to manage his depression and has stayed sober because of HELP Court.

    “I’ve learned a new way of life. Instead of getting high, I’m learning to feel things now,” he said.

    Brown avoided jail that early December day. A hearing to decide his fate could happen in the next few weeks. But even if he’s allowed to remain in the program, Brown said, he’s worried it’s only a matter of time before he falls out of compliance.

    “To try to improve myself and get locked up for it is just a kick in the gut,” he said. “I tried really hard.”

    KFF Health News senior correspondent Fred Clasen-Kelly contributed to this report.

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    USE OUR CONTENT

    This story can be republished for free (details).

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: