Republicans made a deal with JFK to phase out mental health hospitals and replace them with community based facilities that had a more home like atmosphere.
They did the gutting part.
Then JFK was assassinated.
Republicans decided that they didn't have to do any more after that, and LBJ used most of his political capital to get the voting rights act passed.
That's why our mental health system is so broken.
If republicans wanted to fix the system, they could start with funding the VA. Many of our troops wind up with mental health conditions due to their time in the service.
back when they rolled that out (Bush era) was when they really started assaulting people with vacuous catchphrases. Opposition to the Iraq was was answered with ‘support the troops!’ which made no sense… okay, I support them, I don’t want them to go get PTSD from urban warfare and killing civilians and leave their lives here to sit around in a tent in the desert at 130 degrees. Another one was if you opposed anything Bush/Cheney was doing, “Why do you hate America??”, which is obviously a ridiculously loaded question and very shitty debate tactic.
The VA needs some serious reform in how they operate. A major problem with staffing there is just plain burn out and then 6 months to hire a replacement. The entire organization is understaffed and over worked.
The issue with institutionalization (besides SCOTUS ruling it violates the ADA in 1999’s Olmstead v LC, rendering it illegal for anyone with a disability), is that it’s expensive. That’s why Reagan defunded them all.
To be clear, deinstutionalization was a good idea, but unlike JFK’s push, Reagan pushed for it without replacing institutions with well-funded community services. Which would be cheaper than institutions, most of which sit unoccupied and decaying, so there’s also the question of where Trump wants to put these people.
This doesn’t get said enough. Getting rid of them was a legitimately good idea, the some of the abuses in those places was hair-raising. We just didn’t replace them with anything, so the mentally ill all just turned into homeless mentally ill, which just made more people miserable, which in turn probably contributes to more individual incidents of mental illness occuring.
Exactly what I said. Needed to be done, just needed an improved plan instead. Choices were No Plan, A Bad Plan, and A Good Plan. Mental institutions were a bad plan. We got rid of them and went with no plan. We need a third possibility nobody tried–a good plan.
It comes down to the same issue with the police. When you look at the effort it would take to reform what was wrong, it would be nearly impossible. A better idea would be to toss out everything and start from scratch.
Im in the disability field and honestly I feel like we need something and need it bad. Not institutions, at least not like they were, but I honestly wouldn’t be surprised to see some people in the disability community respond positively to this with the hopes that its different this time, lord know the people who like him don’t believe his words at face value. I can also tell you thers definitely is a not insignificant amount of people in the community who have a neutral to faborable feeling on Trump.
The key here I think is that during the pandemic, even before mask mandates, we started seeing services get cut, orgs defunded, and staff reduced. So much of the disability community right now is relying on support staff and self directed program funding, which is essentially the disbursement of medicare and medicaid funding to one individual, not necessary with a medical background, to help the person with the disability with their day to day stuff and goals stated in their Individual Service Plan. The flexibility is great but its just one person at a time, they don’t even get a budget to do things typically.
A lot of people with disabilities are missing the structure of actual organizations that has the resources to do more than what a one on one support worker can, and someone on Trumps team is either smart enough to know that, or quite lucky.
Nice, I also used to work in the disability field (ID/A). And you’re right, although at least in my state we haven’t had cuts, more so just a lack of sufficient new funding.
I will say that I don’t think many in the disability will support this, but some do seem ignorant of the past and the old realities of institutionalization.
And yeah, self-directing is a double edged sword. I’ve seen it done well and I’ve seen it abused by families just to get some extra money, while not really sufficiently meeting the needs of their family member with disabilities. I also think it’s nearly inescapable in the future, given the staffing shortages we already see in direct care and the aging boomer population that will require even more staffing.
Self directed seems to be the answer to budget problems, but there should be pooled resources that all support staff can tap into if we want to even keep the same level of service we had pre pandemic, and honestly the disability community still deserves more than that bar. Hopefully we get there.
question of where Trump wants to put these people.
Decriminalize/legalize all drugs, transfer all for-profit prisons back to the government and/or not for profit charities, shuffle prisoners around to free up prisons to be converted to mental healthcare and drug rehabilitation facilities, and fund it with a taxed and regulated drug market.
Not that he thinks far enough to come up with that.
Most reputable sources have reported decriminalization in Oregon did not lead to an increase in overdoses, which correlates with the rest of the fucking planet and isn’t surprising.
However, your source is behind a paywall, so I can’t check it out.
Yeah, after reading each link provided, you’re reaching. I’m not sure if you’re paid to be a shill or just brain washed, but the decriminalization is overwhelmingly recognized as a benefit to humanity.
Not in Oregon it’s not. Source: I live here. I watch it DAILY.
The #1 problem we have is that there’s NO incentive to get treatment. If you get caught with drugs it’s a $100 fine and that fine gets waived if you call a toll free number and ask about treatment. You don’t actually have to GET treatment, all you have to do is ASK about getting treatment.
16,000 people ticketed, 137 called the treatment line. Tons of people using the free needle exchange and naloxone though.
I suddenly can’t see the comment chain where we were having a conversation. Did you delete your comments as after I posted the law that you said didn’t exist?
A typical and predictable response from someone selfish and immature enough to knowingly do nothing about serious and exploitable bugs on a platform they choose to be wholly dependent on for online discourse. And they expect people to blindly go along with it simply because they did.
If we were on a spaceship, and I was telling you about serious air leaks in the hull, would you look at me and tell me to my face “Feel free to leave” as you suffocate? Or would you go patch the holes?
Nope. I’ll feel free to continue complaining about it as that’s the only way it’s ever going to be acknowledged or addressed.
Feel free to put up with it.
Or feel free to pretend you’re accomplishing something through unwarranted loyalty to a platform run by jackasses who couldn’t give less of a shit about you as you do about them. Whatever you think will accomplish more.
we will bring them back to mental institutions, where they belong
As someone that struggles with mental issues, and has spent some time in a facility when I was at my worst, this line pisses me off to no end. Feels no different than what he would say about so-called criminals or immigrants. Wish he would go where he belongs.
A comprehensive mental health system would have both out-patient and in-patient treatment, just like with physical health. The problem is we've had both extremes - all institutionalization, and all out-patient.
Very true. The place I stayed in for a few days was good though and they had out and in-patient treatment. And they recommended doing in-patient treatment where you would go in for most of the day but could go home after, after I did my locked in in-patient. I was happy with their treatment, but yeah, very much exception to the rule.
Please stop spreading misinformation. You clearly don’t understand the system. As I explained in my other reply to you on this post, that’s just not how involuntary commitments work. Commitments beyond a few days are difficult, beyond a week requires such crazy evidence that some who could benefit from it don’t get it, and beyond a few weeks/a month is incredibly rare.
Obviously we need wraparound community services, but you’re pushing an outdated fiction about institutionalization.
As I said, SCOTUS has already held its illegal. I’ve seen no case challenging that, let alone one that’s made it to a high level of appeal. Holds are up to 72 hours, meaning you see a judge by the 72nd hour. Like I said, it’s often before that. Getting a judge to extend the hold is insanely hard. The fact that they were able to extend yours speaks to how rough your situation was. I’m sorry if that sounds harsh, but I’m not trying to mince words
Spoken like someone who has never been in one. They’re completely different places. It’s incredibly difficult to hold someone more than a day or two in an institutionalized setting. Even SCOTUS has ruled it violates your rights (Olmstead 1999). You pretty much get to a judge within a few days of an involuntary commitment (assuming it’s the weekend, less if it isn’t) and then again within a week or two. Long term holds are insanely rare.
I’ve been in them only to visit, but I’ve heard descriptions from staff (friends) and patients (former clients of mine) and it’s nothing like the 70s. The industry went through massive reforms, partially in response to One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, but insiders had been pushing since even before that in some cases.
Spoken like someone who assumes every institution is held to these standards. The quality and treatment varies WILDLY in the US across different states, or even different counties. Some are arguably borderline torture, with patients having no autonomy nor rights.
Regardless of the quality of an individual facility, it’s a myth that people are held long term. Also, the quality of the worst facilities today are still a far cry from the 70s. There’s a large amount of legal protections around people being involuntary held. Nothing is comparable to legitimate torture.
To be clear, you can ONLY be held if you continue to be a threat to yourself or others. The only rights you can lose are those that involve stopping damage, violence, suicide, homicide, etc. and the more extreme the case, the more extreme the intervention. I’m not going to lie and say that people who are physically violent and attempt to harm staff don’t get chemically sedated.
It is absolutely not a myth, long term involuntary holds do continue to this day. In my state, you get a 72 hour hold to determine if you’re a danger to yourself or others, followed by up to 3 month holds which can be repeated indefinitely. I can quote exact laws if that will help you grasp what I’m saying. I just got done with clinicals in a psychiatric hospital, I can assure you what you’re saying is categorically incorrect.
Sure, I’d love to see a quote from a state law where the 90 day hold is authorized after 72 hours. Never heard of such a model in any state I’ve lived in
However, the psychologist providing treatment can recommend further care. If they think you are gravely disabled or are a threat to yourself or others, they can certify you for more treatment. If you do not agree to this treatment, it will trigger a court process under CRS 27-65-107. If you get certified for more care, it can last up to 3 months.
Pretty wild, never seen a state where they do 90 days right out of the gate. Still, in reviewing Colorado’s own data, it seems like it’s rarely invoked (roughly 3-4K times per year). Definitely not a good model for involuntary commitments, but it also sounds like the holds rarely extend for the full 90 days, although I don’t see data on that
I’ve actually met psychiatrists who work in these facilities and medications are notoriously difficult to balance. I’m sorry that you felt condescended to, but considering the insanely high legal threshold for commitment and the fact that you were approved for an entire week reflects how extreme your situation probably was.
This is condescending. Instead of listening to the lived experience that the OP gave you, you’re telling them that they must have been really sick to have to stay for a week.
Going from a 72-hour hold to a 7-day hold is relatively easy, especially in the south where I worked as a crisis responder. All you need is for a doc to recommend the additional days. Judges typically will grant the extension to 7 days with minimal input from hospital staff. Now, 14- and 21-day holds, a judge is usually going to want more. But 7? That was almost always a given if the first 72-hour went through.
Anyway, none of that really matters beyond the technical. What matters is not saying “I’m sorry you felt that way, but you probably deserved it.”
Or, hear me out, I’ve seen way more than a sample size of 1 and have heard a bunch of people use that commenter’s complaint. Every one of them was held with good reason. I also don’t support fearmongering about vital treatment that saves lives, so it needed to be said.
That damage to society by people bashing mental health treatment is far greater than the damage to one person’s ego by me explaining that treatment doesn’t happen unless it’s necessary.
Yep, that was the first thing I thought of after reading the headline. I read ‘The woman who.would not be silenced’ and it left a big impression on me.
Driving the news: "When I am back in the White House, we will use every tool, lever, and authority to get the homeless off our streets," Trump said in a video posted on his campaign site in August, saying that he'll work with states to ban urban camping.
Trump said his administration would offer treatment and other resources for people who are "just temporarily down on their luck" or have less severe mental health issues.
"And for those who are severely mentally ill and deeply disturbed, we will bring them back to mental institutions, where they belong," he said, "with the goal of reintegrating them back into society once they are well enough to manage."
So "every tool, lever, and authority" except building shelters and affordable housing. Because, of course, the homeless themselves are the problem that needs to be fixed, not a symptom of a society that needs to be fixed.