Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Time to bring back asylums?

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 397 posts

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#251

Post by abenga »

imgabe wrote: post #243
abenga wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think they're suddenly going to put homosexuality and BDSM back in the DSM-4 and lock people up for it? Are you asking whether rights people enjoyed for decades can be rolled back? You can't think of a single instance of that happening?

Lots of things can happen, I’m talking about addressing problems that are happening and not letting hypothetical fearmongering get in the way of doing that. What’s the point here? We should never do anything if even one person can come up with some possible hypothetical scenario where it turns out badly?

The point is _right now, as we speak_ there is a concerted effort to roll back rights and freedoms women and gay people have enjoyed for years; you should not give people doing this more tools to harm people.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#252

Post by simbolit »

yardstick wrote: post #73
coldtea wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Maybe that's putting the cart before the horse? How about what is needed is changing the conditions in society, workplace, and culture, so that fewer people end up "mentally ill", and those that are environmentally or genetically mentally ill do not get broken an…

But there will still be some mentally ill people right? Not everything and everyone can cured. Just like we will always need jails.

"Just like we will always need jails." citation needed

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#253

Post by dryrun »

imgabe wrote: post #230
creata wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think coming up with a comprehensive mental health policy is a little beyond the scope of a HN comment True, but that's clearly not what I asked for. > If there are, we already have an example in homosexuality of how we can stop considering them mental illnesses. It's clearly a thing that's possible to do, so if necessary, let's do that. Also true, but (1) our understanding of what should be treated as a mental i…

A few years ago a woman was murdered on the block where I worked. She was out jogging in the evening and was stabbed by a schizophrenic homeless man. The murderer had been arrested several times, they knew he was ill, but he couldn't be forced to receive treatment. What's the solace you offer for her family? "Hey sorry your daughter got killed, but maybe people won't be unjustly institutionalized in this hypothetical…

US human rights _just_ regressed less than two years ago, with limitations to access to abortion!?! Is there a need for more proof that what you dismiss as 60 years ago poor decisions is already being reimplemented?

I absolutely understand your point regarding mental illness, but so far the US don't seem to be in a good shape to handle it without SERIOUS risks to others, and on another scale than people getting stabbed randomly, which happens with our without mentally ill people (and is also a very bad thing).

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#254

Post by doctor_eval »

_8j50 wrote: post #90
doctor_eval wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they could do these things, they wouldn't be banished.

Yes they would, we are not talking about mental/physical handicapped people here. It's people who are already in mainstream society and end up being insane from the perspective of society, they can still fish, hunt, farm. Moreover, concerned people or even the government can provide them aid if they need it, they are still citizens.

How many regular people do you think are able to fish, hunt and farm - and whose life now depends on it? What about agoraphobics or germaphobes? Who will give up the very valuable arable land and clean water needed for these activities? Who will teach them to do it?

It’s very difficult to shake the idea that you’re trolling.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#255

Post by coryrc »

swivelmaster wrote: post #203
bko wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source about California mental health spending being cut? Anytime i read a comment about spending being cut or austerity it never materializes when I look it up. I blame the media that reports "cuts in the future anticipated spending growth" as "cuts". So basically someone said spending on X will grow Y percent a year and someone else comes in and changes Y to slightly lower. Sure enough: > The chart be…

You’re not going back far enough. https://calmatters.org/justice/2019/03/hard-truths-about-dei...

There are no dollar amounts in that article.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#256

Post by mixmastamyk »

imgabe wrote: post #230
creata wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think coming up with a comprehensive mental health policy is a little beyond the scope of a HN comment True, but that's clearly not what I asked for. > If there are, we already have an example in homosexuality of how we can stop considering them mental illnesses. It's clearly a thing that's possible to do, so if necessary, let's do that. Also true, but (1) our understanding of what should be treated as a mental i…

A few years ago a woman was murdered on the block where I worked. She was out jogging in the evening and was stabbed by a schizophrenic homeless man. The murderer had been arrested several times, they knew he was ill, but he couldn't be forced to receive treatment. What's the solace you offer for her family? "Hey sorry your daughter got killed, but maybe people won't be unjustly institutionalized in this hypothetical…

Thank you. These people that demand perfection are poison to any kind of progress, and one of the reasons the US is an increasing failure. Was recently in Asia, and the contrast was clear as day.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#257

Post by lukeschlather »

graeme wrote: post #119
phatskat wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or make healthcare accessible. Make housing accessible. Make food accessible. We can house feed and care for every person on the planet but we don’t because money. A made up concept that has no actual value outside of what we place on it. It’s arbitrary, as much as markets would want us to believe otherwise. As a species we choose to let them have that power, and with it they will kill us all (seriously)

In Canada we have free health care and a similar homelessness situation as in the US. USA 17.5 per 10K Canada 10 per 10K Americans like to think that universal health care solves every problem but it really doesn’t. It’s a good system and helps many things but not a panacea.

Free health care isn't free housing nor is it free food. Housing and food are the most important things for maintaining health. Healthcare is of very little value if you're routinely sleeping outside in wet and cold weather and have difficulty finding food.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#258

Post by imgabe »

abenga wrote: post #251
imgabe wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of things can happen, I’m talking about addressing problems that are happening and not letting hypothetical fearmongering get in the way of doing that. What’s the point here? We should never do anything if even one person can come up with some possible hypothetical scenario where it turns out badly?

The point is _right now, as we speak_ there is a concerted effort to roll back rights and freedoms women and gay people have enjoyed for years; you should not give people doing this more tools to harm people.

There is also right now an epidemic of homeless people harassing, assaulting, and even murdering people and generally making major cities nearly unlivable. So when you create a false dichotomy between "treat mentally ill people who might murder you" or "lock up gay people", YOU are in fact giving tools to the people who want to lock up gay people. However much your average, non-gay person supports rights for gay people, I guarantee you they support not getting murdered more. So when you force a choice between "maybe, hypothetically, gay people get locked up" and "you might get murdered", people are going to choose the "don't get murdered" side. People, really, really don't like being murdered.

Instead, how about we don't force that choice on people? How about we offer the option "don't lock up gay people" and also, "don't let mentally ill people murder anyone"? Call me a crazy idealist if you must, but I really think we just might be able to do both things.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#259

Post by mlyle »

ec109685 wrote: post #231
mlyle wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ER visits are inordinately costly, but are generally the only way for homeless people to receive care (behavioral, chronic health conditions, etc). I'm having difficulty finding the source, but I've read that individual "frequent fliers" have consumed hundreds of thousands of dollars of emergency services without receiving substantive care that would improve their situation.

Why is an ER fundamentally so much more expensive than another office visit? Just an anecdote, I don’t see any late night “urgent care” places anymore. If they were sufficiently less expensive than ERs, it seems like insurance companies would incentivize them to have longer hours. Otherwise, after 9pm, you have to go to ER.

> Why is an ER fundamentally so much more expensive than another office visit?

Two main reasons: you need to use personnel, equipment, and rooms that can offer the highest levels of care. And you need to pay for having a facility staffed to handle worst case loading (with triage) 24/7.

You also tend to have pretty exhaustive testing on the "emergent" side to make sure everything is immediately OK prior to discharge.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#260

Post by wavemode »

imgabe wrote: post #230
creata wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think coming up with a comprehensive mental health policy is a little beyond the scope of a HN comment True, but that's clearly not what I asked for. > If there are, we already have an example in homosexuality of how we can stop considering them mental illnesses. It's clearly a thing that's possible to do, so if necessary, let's do that. Also true, but (1) our understanding of what should be treated as a mental i…

A few years ago a woman was murdered on the block where I worked. She was out jogging in the evening and was stabbed by a schizophrenic homeless man. The murderer had been arrested several times, they knew he was ill, but he couldn't be forced to receive treatment. What's the solace you offer for her family? "Hey sorry your daughter got killed, but maybe people won't be unjustly institutionalized in this hypothetical…

All of this is common sense, frankly.

The people arguing against you are arguing from fear and emotion. You won't convince them with logic.

Post reply on HN