31–40 of 397 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is, more space and freedom to do whatever they want there.
But clearly what they want is to remain within society, otherwise they would have simply run off into the wilderness on their own accord.
An institutional system can be built with cross-checks, inspections, corruption fighting mechanisms, etc. By this I mean actual, independent, not powerless, not perfunctory, corruption-fighting, enforceable, etc. As opposed to the usual such cross-checks around here. This is a far broader issue that just mental health but simply (not) doing mental health on the street isn't a great solution.
Clearly HN does not seem to like this idea so much. But I do have to ask, what exactly do you propose as a solution to the massive, growing hordes of drug addicted zombies in west coast cities? You can't tell me that this problem doesn't exist, anyone who's been to a west coast city knows it's very real. The past 20 years of the "compassion" approach or whatever is clearly a total disaster. At what point do we just s…
First, I reject the notion that there are "massive, growing hordes of drug addicted zombies in west coast cities." Having lived in Seattle for over a decade, now living in Olympia, and having visited San Franscisco, Portland, and other west coast cities plenty of times, what you're describing doesn't line up with my experience at all. If you drop the hyperbole perhaps we agree, but then why hyperventilate? It undermi…
>… my answer would be to greatly reduce inequality
We’ve been screaming the same tune for over a decade at this point. Equality is a problem but it’s a parallel issue. Doing the same policies, but louder, is not a good faith proposal because it’s just repetition of what doesn’t work. Many, and indeed I would posit most, do not want your or my help to live as a “contributing member of society”. Some are so far gone they’re not in the position to even make a choice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First, I reject the notion that there are "massive, growing hordes of drug addicted zombies in west coast cities." Having lived in Seattle for over a decade, now living in Olympia, and having visited San Franscisco, Portland, and other west coast cities plenty of times, what you're describing doesn't line up with my experience at all. If you drop the hyperbole perhaps we agree, but then why hyperventilate? It undermi…
I’ve lived in various west coast cities since 2011 and while a “horde of drug addicted zombies” roaming the streets is not literally true (like out of a zombie apocalypse film or something), you can’t deny that there is a significant problem in certain areas of these cities. In the same way that hyperbolizing the descriptor undermines the point, imagining that it isn’t a problem and just something you deal with is th…
Perhaps I've been "screaming the tune" for a decade but in that time the cost of housing has gone up dramatically. In 2009 I rented a 2-br apartment in Capitol Hill for $1,600 -- parking included. In 2019 I rented a studio apartment in the same neighborhood for the same -- parking not included. I can produce examples like this all day.
My point is, we haven't successfully tackled the problem of inequality and affordability. In my opinion, we must tackle the root problem if we hope to resolve the issue long term. We can do that _and_ address the symptoms in parallel. However if I had to bet, my money is on housing continuing it's inexorable rise over the next decade, pushing further people into destitution.
I've tried to respond in "good faith." Your turn.
Reinventing the E.R. For America's Mental Health Crisis (subtitle: EmPATH units are advancing a radically new approach to psychiatric emergencies. It seems to be working.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve lived in various west coast cities since 2011 and while a “horde of drug addicted zombies” roaming the streets is not literally true (like out of a zombie apocalypse film or something), you can’t deny that there is a significant problem in certain areas of these cities. In the same way that hyperbolizing the descriptor undermines the point, imagining that it isn’t a problem and just something you deal with is th…
I didn't deny that homelessness is a problem, please re-read my comment. Perhaps I've been "screaming the tune" for a decade but in that time the cost of housing has gone up dramatically. In 2009 I rented a 2-br apartment in Capitol Hill for $1,600 -- parking included. In 2019 I rented a studio apartment in the same neighborhood for the same -- parking not included. I can produce examples like this all day. My point…
And then there's the huge sub-problem of people who are chronically homeless, drug-addicted, and visible.
Large efforts at simply improving access to housing are likely to make a large dent in the larger homelessness problem, but may not be effective in addressing people with long-standing drug addiction and behavioral disorders. Many/most have behaviors that are incompatible with conventional housing.
The solution for this subgroup is going to be a lot more complicated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve lived in various west coast cities since 2011 and while a “horde of drug addicted zombies” roaming the streets is not literally true (like out of a zombie apocalypse film or something), you can’t deny that there is a significant problem in certain areas of these cities. In the same way that hyperbolizing the descriptor undermines the point, imagining that it isn’t a problem and just something you deal with is th…
I didn't deny that homelessness is a problem, please re-read my comment. Perhaps I've been "screaming the tune" for a decade but in that time the cost of housing has gone up dramatically. In 2009 I rented a 2-br apartment in Capitol Hill for $1,600 -- parking included. In 2019 I rented a studio apartment in the same neighborhood for the same -- parking not included. I can produce examples like this all day. My point…
These people we’re talking about will all be dead by the time any of yours or my pet ideas to increase housing supply come to fruition. And yet, in the here and now, there’s a continuing escalation of health and safety issues that, again, don’t go away if rents suddenly drop.
Asylums still exist. What this person wants to bring back is the ability to lock people up and keep people locked up there with little recourse. A typical case from this time[1]: > [Cramer] frankly discusses the “regimented, often hopeless conditions of state mental hospitals”, talks about a hospital in Alabama where “care was worse than simply inadequate: one psychiatrist for 5000 patients; astonishingly low funding…
In a sentence, we need a public infrastructure in place to care for the mentally ill that currently are forced to live on the streets of our major cities. We need a way to pay the people that do the work, buy the buildings, keep the lights on. We call this infrastructure asylums, whatever you want to call it we need it desperately.
If you want to stop things like what you cited from happening, lobby to have rules and regulations surrounding these institutions that get you what you want. But it doesn't mean we don't need the 90% good they will do for fear of the 10% bad they've done in the past
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should write more on this topic.
There is no shortage of writing on this. The Supreme Court decisions of the early 1970s on mental health were well-intentioned but disastrous.
Those decisions still left much room for coerced treatment, so it's not clear how disastrous they were. Most if not all states and cities ended up with additional legislation, caselaw, and normative policies that made coerced treatment (including outpatient treatment) much more difficult.