Time to bring back asylums? • Hacker News Board

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#231

Post by ec109685 » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:35 AM UTC

mlyle wrote: post #100

creata wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lots of mentally ill people don't get proper treatment, yet are still a huge burden on the health care system. I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but why do you believe that?

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.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#232

Post by pineapple_guy » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:42 AM UTC

We have to do something with our politicians

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#233

Post by ec109685 » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:43 AM UTC

fragmede wrote: post #161

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 response to baby formula getting stolen, supermarkets put it at the front under lock and key. Which is an entirely logical conclusion under our current system and culture. But something is clearly wrong with how we distribute resources when helpless infants can't get what they need.

Government SNAP benefits provide poor kids baby formula and other necessities. Mothers do not have to steal it.

It’s easy to fence is the reason it is locked up.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#234

Post by mixmastamyk » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:44 AM UTC

harimau777 wrote: post #188

kelnos wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and those organizations are dumb, and should be ignored. Any organization that somehow thinks that leaving mentally ill people on the streets to live in squalor and danger is better than institutionalization should not have a place in policy decisions. It is mind-boggling to me that this is at all debatable. Obviously we need to mandate levels of treatment and care, and constantly audit institutions to ensure co…

That's a strawman argument. They are not arguing that it's good for people to live on the streets. What they are arguing is that the abuse associated with making it easier to incarcerate mentally ill people is too great of a risk.

Seems to work in civilized countries. The solution is obviously to treat patients well, not abandon them.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#235

Post by abenga » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:47 AM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #106

pierat wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they can be used as a punishment, they WILL be used as a punishment. Not too long ago, BDSM was considered a mental illness. We'not talking the 1960s either.. this was 2010 when the DSM-4 had BDSM and similar removed. Prior to 1980, homosexuality was also in the DSM-4. The trend is obvious and troublesome: this is mainly a list of consensual actions that were listed as "mental health problems" and therefore could…

Do you think they're suddenly going to put homosexuality and BDSM back in the DSM-4 and lock people up for it? I mean, you look at the current political climate and you believe that is a thing that could actually happen when the White House is hosting a Pride parade? There are real people getting assaulted and murdered by the mentally ill right now. Not to mention the mentally ill themselves who are subject to violen…

> 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?

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#236

Post by ec109685 » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:47 AM UTC

bitwize wrote: post #155

amadeuspagel wrote: post #11

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…

This sounds like that movie I Care a Lot , which is about a woman who runs a scam getting old folks locked away in care homes while acquiring power of attorney and cleaning out their assets.

That movie was a rollercoaster.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#237

Post by sangnoir » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:49 AM UTC

m463 wrote: post #210

creata wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lots of mentally ill people don't get proper treatment, yet are still a huge burden on the health care system. I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but why do you believe that?

I have direct experience with this. The police and emergency responders can be called, but are unable to take any action to help a clearly mentally ill individual unless they are a danger to themselves and others. The same is true for doctors/hospitals/emergency rooms. It is common for an individual to have 20 or 30 public service calls before they are admitted and start to receive guided treatment. Even individuals…

What kind of "action" would you want the police to take?

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#238

Post by imgabe » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:50 AM UTC

creata wrote: post #204

imgabe wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which of the following statements are you advocating for: 1. There is never any reason to involuntarily commit someone 2. There are valid reasons, but there is no known diagnostic that can detect them. 3. There are valid reasons, and we can detect them, but there is no way to prevent people from involuntarily committing people for other reasons, even if we make laws and conduct audits to ensure that only valid reason…

Not the person you're replying to, but I'm curious: what's wrong with position (3)? That's kinda where I am right now.

It’s pretty bleak and pessimistic for one thing. If you want to solve a problem you have to at first believe that it’s possible to solve. Otherwise, why wouldn’t you just give up?

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#239

Post by warning26 » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:50 AM UTC

nemo44x wrote: post #154

wtetzner wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest problem is who gets to decide which individuals "need" help.

That is extremely difficult and dangerous. For instance, someone who doesn’t go along with whatever the latest dogma is could be sent away by whom ever is in power. When does it go from mental help to reprogramming? Saying that I agree we need to bring back a new version of asylums. I’d hope there’s a bipartisan project there.

> For instance, someone who doesn’t go along with whatever the latest dogma is could be sent away by whom ever is in power.

This can be the case for literally any legal system. It's why checks and balances and an independent judiciary are important.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#240

Post by sangnoir » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:51 AM UTC

woeirua wrote: post #228

bobthepanda wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that when you carve out exceptions to human rights, they get abused. If you can suspend the rights of someone declared mentally ill, the unscrupulous parts of government will be tempted to declare politically inconvenient people mentally ill and strip them of their rights. Even in the United States, this happened during the suffragette movement; those women hunger striking for the vote were sometimes imp…

Yes, there will be some abuse. But the question should be will we still reduce suffering overall? Fighting your own mind is insufferable. It is not humane to let people wander the streets locked in an eternal battle with themselves. I vote yes, bring back involuntary inpatient therapies, but with strict safeguards.

> Yes, there will be some abuse. But the question should be will we still reduce suffering overall?

This is basically the argument of the pro-gun-control folk. The counter-argument I keep hearing is that rights are sacrosanct, any concomitant negatives are the price of liberty.