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

331–340 of 397 posts

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#331

Post by baremetal »

thebooktocome wrote: post #135
baremetal wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The Nuremberg Code is about medical experimentation, not vaccination programs. The Nuremberg Code is not really relevant to modern medical ethics, or even to the history of medical ethics--its authors plagiarized [1] half of it from the 1931 Guidelines for Human Experimentation [2]. The relevant standard these days is the seventh revision of the Declaration of Helsinki, by the World Medical Association. No, the use o…

Emergency use authorization is experimental.

Otherwise it wouldn't be "emergency use".

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#332

Post by nradov »

kelnos wrote: post #178
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…

I agree, but band-aids at least stop the bleeding while the bigger issues are being taken care of. Changing those conditions, even if everyone could agree on what needs to be done, and the political will were there, right now, will be a multi-year -- perhaps multi-decade -- process. I don't think we should let people suffer while we wait for that to happen. I think we should start committing mentally ill homeless peo…

Higher minimum wages are the last thing those people need. We're talking about the least productive workers. If minimum wage is $20 and their labor is only worth $10 then no one will hire them at all. They will remain dependent on handouts and never have the opportunity to gain real work experience.

Under the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) of 2008, medical insurers are already required to cover mental health the same way they cover physical health. The issue is not so much with insurers but availability of providers. It doesn't matter whether your insurer will pay the claim if you can't get an appointment with a local psychiatrist in the first place.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#333

Post by iancmceachern »

yardstick wrote: post #220
iancmceachern wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are not resource limited. A B2 bomber costs 2 billion and we have 20.

What’s the debt level at now? 30+ trillion?

But that's just a made up number.

The pentagon has failed 5 audits in a row.

Money is not real.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#334

Post by peteradio »

creata wrote: post #278
mixmastamyk wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm not demanding perfection. I'm literally just asking "what would be different this time", and the only answer I'm getting is "we know better this time around". Seriously: the reason asylums were so prone to abuse in the past was not because the people running them didn't know better.

Homosexual marriage is universally legal in the States, doesn't that indicate legal precedents have changed significantly in the intervening time?

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#335

Post by indymike »

m463 wrote: post #65
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…

As someone with direct experience with someone that has a mental illness, there needs to be something better than the present system. I think something went right, then wrong with the treatment of mental illness in california. Years ago, when the laws were changed to allow mentally-ill but benign or even non-ill people to escape the "snake pits", lots of people could recover. But later state mental illness funding wa…

> As someone with direct experience with someone that has a mental illness, there needs to be something better than the present system.

This is the truth. But the answer is not to go back to the system that the current one replaced (every US state has horror stories, in my state's case it was so bad someone opened a haunted house in the former state mental hospital), which was by all means, a lot worse. Right now the current system is so poorly funded that it has huge quality problems, care is largely inaccessible to people who need it, and workers burnout on high hours/low pay.

> I also think it would pay for itself, as lots of mentally ill people don't get proper treatment, yet are still a huge burden on the health care system.

Not to mention our social welfare system, judicial system and so on.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#336

Post by thfuran »

darkerside wrote: post #321
ec109685 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If they were staffed like an ER, they would cost as much as an ER. On top of us already paying for an ER.

Urgent care is never going to be staffed and equipped the same as an ER. It's not an ER. If you get shot, the ambulance isn't going to take you to an urgent care.

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#338

Post by ec109685 »

wildrhythms wrote: post #318
ec109685 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Such 'benefits' are yet another lock and key; another hurdle that people in need must jump over. It's baby formula. You are just reiterating their point.

What are parents going to feed their baby if it is all stolen?

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#339

Post by abenga »

mpalmer wrote: post #329
newaccount74 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we just might be able to do both things Yes. But there is no easy solution. History shows that anything that involves locking up people because they might commit a crime will result in innocent people being locked up and abused.

Better not do anything then, certainly not try to figure out a better way. The only safe choice is to oppose every proposal and offer nothing as an alternative.

Fix the root causes of the homeless crisis. Home affordability, employment, mental health treatment (with consent).

Re: Time to bring back asylums?

#340

Post by phatskat »

graeme wrote: post #213
sudosysgen wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mental healthcare coverage in Canada is pretty abysmal. It's barely covered at all unless you're in a crisis situation, which is not very different from many US states.

That’s fair. Though to be clear the following are covered: * Family doctor or clinic visits for mental health * Psychiatrist visits * In most provinces, medications Talk therapy through a psychologist is what is generally not covered outside of work insurance. That’s a big gap, but also not quite right to say “not covered at all”.

Therapists and psychologists are two incredibly impactful resources when it comes to mental health. No one said it wasn’t covered at all, just that the coverage is missing the most impactful services.
Post reply on HN