Using Emerging Technology to Treat Mental Illness

On January 10, 2001, Scott Harlan Thorpe went on a shooting spree in the small mountain towns of Grass Valley and Nevada City, California. Thorpe shot a total of five people, killing three. Two people died at the Nevada County Behavioral Health office and one at a nearby Lyon’s restaurant. Thorpe suffered from several mental health conditions including depression and agoraphobia, a fear of open spaces. He believed the FBI was out to get him and that Lyon’s was poisoning his food. Prior to the shootings, Thorpe’s family had tried to get him help; however, their requests were denied due to privacy laws and a lack of available resources (Interlandi, 2017). On the horizon, though, are advanced treatment options that could help people like Thorpe and prevent these types of tragedies.

Background

Unfortunately, Thorpe’s case is one of many where someone with a serious mental health condition harms themselves or someone else. In fact, people suffering from serious mental health conditions are over 10 times as likely to experience police use of force than the general population (Laniyonu & Goff, 2021) and over one million arrests of someone with a serious mental illness occur annually in the United States (Compton, M. and Watson, A., n.d.). One of the biggest challenges in treating mental illness is that many individuals do not recognize they need help. This is called “anosognosia” which is derived from the Greek meaning “to not know a disease” (National Alliance on Mental Illness, 2024).

Seeking treatment is nearly impossible for individuals who do not recognize their own condition. This is complicated by the fact that mental health conditions can manifest themselves in several ways from a minor bout of depression or anxiety to bipolar disorder, major depression, or schizophrenia. The difficulty for police officers that respond to calls for service involving someone suffering from an acute mental health episode is that they aren’t medical doctors trained to make a diagnosis and offer treatment solutions. This deficit in expertise can sometimes lead to tragic outcomes.

Officers often respond to calls where a subject is demonstrating one or more bizarre behaviors whose root cause may be unknown or undiagnosed. In addition, the subject may be self-medicating with alcohol and drugs which compounds an underlying mental health condition even further. In today’s legal climate, officers may not even respond to a mental health-related call, especially if there is no associated danger to the general public.

In response to public demands for change to the ways the police deal with mental issues, some departments, such as the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office, have changed their policies and have stopped responding to mental health-related calls for service unless there is an associated criminal act (KCRA, 2025). Even in communities where the police may not respond to many calls of this type, it intensifies the need for competent responders in those instances where the mental health crisis is more severe.

Current Treatments Available for the Mentally Ill

Given the challenges law enforcement faces in handling mental health crises, effective treatment becomes crucial. One of the primary treatment options available today for mental health conditions is medication. It is currently not known exactly how many medications are available to treat mental illness, however since 2008, a total of 118 medications for these conditions have been approved by the FDA (IsHak, W. W., 2024). Mental health medications, though, can also have significant side effects - drowsiness, restlessness, muscle spasms, sexual dysfunction, blurred vision, weight gain, sleep problems, and mood swings, among many others (Demitri, M., 2016). The difficulty in treating mental illness with medication is that modern pharmaceuticals are only able to act on six of the 100+ neurotransmitters in the human brain (Dimitropoulos, S., 2021). Neurotransmitters, the chemical messengers that help cells communicate with each other, are essential for life. They regulate blood pressure, breathing, muscle movement, emotions, learning, thoughts, and digestion. Neurotransmitter imbalance is thought to have a key role in mental health conditions such as depression, schizophrenia, and ADHD (Khaliq, R., 2023). With current pharmacological interventions affecting so few neurotransmitters, no regimen of medications can be fully effective.

Mental health conditions can be very complex and differ greatly from individual to individual. It can be very difficult to find the right combination of medication to treat a person’s mental health issues, especially if they suffer from more than one condition. Other treatment options do exist, including psychotherapy or counseling, support groups, physical activity, Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), and Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy (American Academy of Family Physicians, 2023). With all of the medication and treatment options available, it can be difficult to find the right combination of methods to properly stabilize someone’s condition. For law enforcement, even if medical interventions become more effective, it still leaves the issue of the ways first responders intervene in crisis situations where officers must arrive, diagnose a mental state and act, often with little time to deliberate on the options.

Today’s Police Response Model to Mental Health Calls for Service

Police have made major strides in providing crisis intervention training to officers, and many departments now use co-responder models where sworn officers are paired up with trained mental health professionals. Since January 2020, 15 out of the of the 50 largest police departments in the country created new co-responder programs, and at least 28 of the largest 50 had co-responder programs before 2020 (Subramanian, R., & Arzy, L., 2022). Co-responder models are not only used in the United States; they are also present in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom (IACP, n.d.) These programs have several benefits including 1) enhancing crisis de-escalation, 2) increasing connection to services, 3) reducing pressure on the criminal justice system, and 4) reducing pressure on the health care system (IACP, n.d.). One example of this success comes from a mid-size agency in Northern California.

The Redding (CA) Police Department has been using a co-responder model since September 2021. The Crisis Intervention Response Team (CIRT) consists of two sworn police officers and a mental health clinician. During their first nine months of operation, they responded to 568 calls for service, 159 of which were mental health referrals. Of those referrals, 41 people were taken to the hospital for an involuntary mental health commitment (Chandler, M., 2022). CIRT officers receive advanced de-escalation training are also able to follow-up with clients placed on involuntary mental health holds to ensure they receive proper care once they are discharged from the hospital. This follow-up care includes ensuring appointments are kept and connecting clients to housing and job-related resources. One citizen in Redding who had been contacted by a CIRT team said, “They go around helping guys like me and worse cases than me. Actually, I get better help from the crisis team and the police than I would at a homeless shelter” (Chandler, M., 2022). These novel approaches, coupled with ongoing training, are a step in the right direction, however new medical interventions may offer a more complete solution to addressing long-term mental illness.

Emerging Technologies to Treat Mental Illness

A new approach to mental health treatment being studied and developed is Deep Brain Stimulation, or DBS. DBS uses an implantable device to set electrode wires deep in someone’s brain. DBS devices themselves are not new; they have already been approved to treat Dystonia (uncontrollable muscle movements), essential tremor (uncontrollable shaking of hands, arms, and other body parts), medication-resistant epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease, and medication-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder. It is estimated that by 2019, around 160,000 people had received a DBS device since their use began in the 1980’s (Cleveland Clinic, n.d.).

DBS is now being looked at to treat mental illness in addition to the listed physical conditions. DBS implants for mental health treatment are designed to monitor a person’s brain signals and then provide electrical stimulation in response to a detected event. Early attempts using DBS to treat mental illness, however, have been met with mixed results largely because devices were only designed to provide constant stimulation to a single region of the brain (UCSF, 2021). Recent studies have shown promising results treating depression when using devices that are customized to the patient and are designed to provide targeted stimulation to specifically mapped regions of the brain. These regions were mapped by looking for patterns of brain activity that correlated with the patient’s emotional state (UCSF, 2021). By using a DBS device designed to treat epilepsy, researchers were able to target specific regions of the brain that they felt were responsible for depression in a single patient. The results were promising with the patient even stating, “In the early few months, the lessening of the depression was so abrupt, and I wasn’t sure if it would last. But it has lasted. And I’ve come to realize that the device really augments the therapy and self-care I’ve learned while being a patient here at UCSF.” (UCSF, 2021). Commercial companies, such as Neuralink, are also investigating brain implants as a way for humans to interface directly with computers.

While similar to DBS devices, Neuralink devices are billed as brain-human interfaces (BHIs). Other key differences include the fact Neuralink electrodes are surgically implanted into a brain by a robot and these electrodes provide data with more precision than typical DBS devices (Fiani, B., Reardon, T., Ayres, B., Cline, D., & Sitto, S. R., 2021). Neuralink devices are also designed to be “two-way” where the signals from a person’s brain can be read by the device and electrical stimulation can be administered in response (Benes, J., 2021). As of January 2025, three people have received a Neuralink implant (Ungar, L., 2025). Several technical challenges still need to be solved in order for DBS to be a viable mainstream treatment option; however, recent advancements keep inching us closer to this goal. For example, one of the difficulties with DBS is the fact that the brain rejects items it detects as foreign objects, such as electrodes. Advancements have been made with new electrode materials that more closely resemble natural neurons, reducing the risk of brain rejection (McDermott-Murphy, C., 2019).

Challenges for new technological treatments and patient consent

Although their use is promising, there are significant ethical, social, and physical risk factors regarding the implantation of devices into the brain and body. Can someone that suffers from a serious mental health condition even properly consent to this type of treatment? Laws and regulations need to be created and refined to ensure there is a proper balance between individual rights and the ability of treatment providers to help manage mental health conditions.

Today, there are limited circumstances where someone can be involuntarily treated with medication. One such example is via Laura’s Law, which was enacted in 2002 and is named for 19-year-old Laura Wilcox, one of Thorpe’s victims (DHCS, n.d.). Laura’s Law allows court-ordered involuntary outpatient treatment for people that are not able to participate in community mental health treatment programs without supervision. While court-ordered outpatient treatment under Laura’s Law may help individuals who lack insight into their illness, forcing DBS implantation raises new ethical dilemmas.

While some may argue that DBS should be considered no different than other medical interventions, its invasive nature makes it distinct. Unlike psychiatric medication, which can be adjusted or discontinued, a brain implant is a far more permanent intervention, as they require surgery for installation. This raises the ethical dilemma: If we allow court-mandated DBS for individuals with severe conditions, where do we draw the line? Could this technology eventually be used beyond the most extreme cases, leading to broader implications for civil liberties?

In a Scientific American opinion piece, IBM Senior Vice President and Director of Research Dr. Dario Gil asks if someone could face employment discrimination because an algorithm used for hiring misinterprets someone’s neurological data. Another aspect he discusses is the fact that neurological data is generated unconsciously, which means a person may not have control over what information is being received by a DBS device. He states, “So, in some applications of neurotech, the presumption of privacy within one’s own mind may simply no longer be a certainty” (Gil, D., 2020).

Another major concern is the security of DBS. Medical cybersecurity concerns are not hypothetical. In 2017, the FDA recalled certain pacemakers due to their vulnerability to hacking, which could allow an attacker to alter a patient’s heart rate remotely (Kuehn, B., 2018). If DBS devices were internet connected, and malicious actors were able to access one, the consequences could be severe—potentially manipulating an individual’s emotions or behavior in real time. Would a malicious actor be able to even cause physical harm to a patient by manipulating a DBS device? As these devices become more advanced, robust cybersecurity protections must be a top priority before any widespread implementation.

This is particularly critical for law enforcement, as officers may one day encounter individuals whose actions are influenced—either positively or negatively—by a compromised device. It may be difficult for public safety personnel to determine if someone’s behavior is due to a compromised DBS device as they will have to respond to the behavior being presented. Since the use of DBS to treat mental illness is still in its infancy, it is hard to know what the potential consequences of a compromised device may be.

As DBS devices continue to be researched and refined, it is important to consider not only the technology itself but also its broader implications for public safety, ethics, and policy. DBS has the potential to provide highly effective and customized treatment for people suffering from serious mental health conditions; however, these factors must be carefully evaluated before widespread implementation. Dr. Gil summarized it well by saying, “As new, emerging technology, neurotech challenges corporations, researchers and individuals to reaffirm our commitment to responsible innovation. It’s essential to enforce guardrails so that they lead to beneficial long-term outcomes—on company, national and international levels. We need to ensure that researchers and manufacturers of neurotech as well as policymakers and consumers approach it responsibly and ethically” (Gil, D., 2020).

Law enforcement professionals interact with individuals suffering from serious mental health conditions daily, making it imperative that we have a part in shaping the future of mental health treatment. This real-world experience would provide valuable data to researchers and others currently working to develop DBS for mental illness. DBS technology is advancing rapidly, and while it may be several years away from mainstream medical use, its eventual impact on crisis response and public safety is inevitable.

Solution: Be Proactive and Collaborate, Develop Training and Appropriate Policies

Law enforcement must proactively prepare for a future that includes implanted neurological devices by developing an understanding of how DBS devices function, their limitations, and the legal and ethical considerations surrounding their use. To prepare for this future, law enforcement agencies can take three steps today:

1. Collaborate with medical experts, policymakers, and legal professionals to ensure that DBS technology is developed with real-world public safety experiences in mind.
2. State training regulators should integrate DBS awareness and response protocols into law enforcement training, ensuring that officers are equipped to recognize and respond appropriately to individuals with these implants.
3. Agencies should leverage relationships with relevant commercial companies and research institutions in their area to look for ways to collaborate on projects and initiatives related to DBS.

Proactively, the police must shape policies and training strategies to create a future where technology not only aids mental health treatment but also prevents tragic incidents like the 2001 shootings from occurring again. If DBS becomes a viable treatment option for serious mental health conditions, the one million arrests annually could be drastically reduced.

Conclusion

Law enforcement agencies that engage now can help shape policies that balance public safety, individual rights, and technological innovation. Waiting until DBS is fully implemented in society may leave agencies unprepared for the ethical and operational challenges that will undoubtedly arise. It is important police leaders understand advanced treatments to help the mentally ill and offer training and sound policies to greatly reduce crisis incidents with the police and keep patients, officers and the public safer.

References

Interlandi, J. (2017, June 14). How can we treat the seriously mentally ill before tragedy occurs, instead of after? Pacific Standard. https://psmag.com/social-justice/how-can-we-treat-the-seriously-mentally-ill-before-tragedy-occurs-instead-of-after

Laniyonu, A., & Goff, P. A. (2021, October 12). Measuring disparities in police use of force and injury among persons with serious mental illness. BMC Psychiatry, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-021-03510-w

Compton, M., & Watson, A. (n.d.). Research to improve law enforcement responses to persons with mental illnesses and developmental disabilities. Bureau of Justice Assistance. https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media/document/Research_to_Improve_Law_Enforcement_Responses_to_Persons_with_Mental_Illnesses_and_Developmental_Disabilities.pdf

National Alliance on Mental Illness. (2024, February 12). Anosognosia | NAMI. https://www.nami.org/about-mental-illness/common-with-mental-illness/anosognosia/

KCRA. (2025, February 5). Sac County deputies no longer responding to mental health calls. KCRA. https://www.kcra.com/article/sacramento-county-deputiesmental-health-calls/63669920

IsHak, W. W., et al. (2024, March 1). Psychiatric medications approved by the FDA: 2008–2023 review. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 18(2), 123–135. https://wjarr.com/sites/default/files/WJARR-2024-0705.pdf

Demitri, Michael (2016, May 17). Common side effects of psychiatric medications. Psych Central. https://psychcentral.com/lib/common-side-effects-of-psychiatric-medications#1

Dimitropoulos, S. (2021, December 10). Are brain implants the future of treatment for depression and anxiety? Upworthy Science. https://upworthyscience.com/are-brain-implants-the-future-of-treatment-for-depression-and-anxiety/

Khaliq, Rabia. (2023, February 16). Neurotransmitters and mental health: Understanding the impact. Medvidi. https://medvidi.com/blog/neurotransmitters-and-mental-health-understanding-the-impact

American Academy of Family Physicians. (2023, April). Different types of mental health treatment. FamilyDoctor.org. https://familydoctor.org/different-types-mental-health-treatment/

Subramanian, R., & Arzy, L. (2022). Rethinking how law enforcement is deployed. Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/rethinking-how-law-enforcement-deployed

International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). (n.d.). Review of co-responder team evaluations. https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/IDD/Review%20of%20Co-Responder%20Team%20Evaluations.pdf

Chandler, Michelle (2022, June 30). Out on the street with Redding's Crisis Intervention Response Team. Redding Record Searchlight. https://www.redding.com/in-depth/news/2022/06/30/redding-crisis-cops-police-mental-health-shasta-county/9897990002/

Cleveland Clinic. (n.d.). Deep brain stimulation (DBS). Cleveland Clinic. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/21088-deep-brain-stimulation

University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). (2021, September 27). Treating severe depression on demand with brain stimulation. UCSF News. https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2021/09/421541/treating-severe-depression-demand-brain-stimulation

Fiani, B., Reardon, T., Ayres, B., Cline, D., & Sitto, S. R. (2021). An examination of prospective uses and future directions of Neuralink: The brain-machine interface. Cureus, 13(3), e14192. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.14192

Benes, J. (2021, March 1). Neural implantations: Ethics of 'mind control'. Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/healthcare-ethics-blog/neural-implantations-ethics-of-mind-control/

Ungar, Laura. (2025, January 13). Elon Musk's Neuralink implants brain chip in second patient, with more trials planned. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-neuralink-brain-computer-interface-9dbc92206389f27fd032825cf1597ee5

McDermott-Murphy, Caitlin. (2019, March 12). Neuronlike brain implants may help treat disease, mental illness. Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/03/harvard-neuronlike-brain-implants-may-help-treat-disease-mental-illness/

California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS). (n.d.). Assisted outpatient treatment program (Laura’s Law). https://www.dhcs.ca.gov/formsandpubs/Pages/Assisted-Outpatient-Treatment-Program.aspx

Gil, D. (2020, December 26). The ethical challenges of connecting our brains to computers. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-ethical-challenges-of-connecting-our-brains-to-computers/

Kuehn, B. M. (2018). Pacemaker recall highlights security concerns for implantable devices. Circulation, 138(15), 1530–1531. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.037331