Are all Family Members Created Equal?

The lack of definition for the term "family member" has become a frustrating issue for many who are the primary caregiver of a person with a serious mental illness and who want to contribute to the MHSA* process of creating strong, meaningful strategies and programs that support those who struggle with mental illness. Without definition, by our government representatives (Dept. of Mental Health or the Oversight and Accountability Commission), the term family member can be interpreted by county systems to mean anything from 'ole Aunt Millie who lives in North Carolina and bakes pies while living alone; to your own son, Leroy who has been arrested and admitted to an IMD (Institute for Mental Diseases - BTW a horrible term!) Both are admittedly "family members", but are their experiences equall in terms of required stakeholder contributions for improving local county mental health systems of care? Most primary caregivers to seriously mentally ill loved ones would say "no". Yet, without a clear definition, many counties interpret a family member as anyone who says that they have someone in their family with a serious mental illness (SMI**). This is important because families who have waited many hours in emergency rooms while their loved one suffered, or felt the sting of discrimination by a landlord telling their loved one, they "don't rent to crazies" or endured the frustration of a system that has repeatedly abandoned their care believe they are being left out and/or replaced by county employees and other community members who have little or no experience.
Wouldn't it be better to define the term by the level of care that is provided for a loved one? By this definition we would be establishing that the contribution we seek to improve local mental health services in California Communities is improved by the people who have experienced the local system first hand. By determining a representational numerical value for primary caregivers and other family members we can acknowledge and validate the significant contribution primary care givers can make without dismissing the value of the experiences of all family members as contributing to the improvement of mental health services.

*(The Mental Health Services Act - MHSA/Prop 63 taxes those Californian's making more than $1 million to expand services for citizens in California who struggle with serious mental illness - SMI**)

Mental Health Services and MHSA

I am a 50 something person who is frustrated by local and state politics around healthcare - especially mental health care. California's Mental Health Services Act plan while well-intended leaves us all (families, clients, providers and even county employees) helpless and angry for the promise it intended and the minimal delivery it has provided for those who are sick with a mental illness. I use the word "sick" because I am tired of political correctness negating the facts that mental illness is an illness like many others. When we dance around the language, those who lack the information and education about specific mental illness can continue their dialogue of stigma and discrimination towards sufferers. (And yes, I do think many - not all of the people with thess illnesses are suffering.)
So has the MHSA delivered at all? Like a politician I will answer yes and no from my experience. Some have been helped with support services and they report their lives have been changed, but for many who have been abandoned because they no longer fit the "criteria", their lives have been changed for the worst.
Share your experiences - maybe we can contribute to righting something that seems to have gone very wrong.