Could’ve saved us all a lot of trouble when Trump was living there
AMagicalKittyCat on
From a civil rights aspect it just seems reasonable that in order for the government to lock someone up for an extended period of time against their will, they should have to follow a strict due process like the courts. You should not be able to sidestep around basic liberties by saying “it’s for your own good”, it’s an obvious mechanism for state abuse. Make them prove the necessity of care in a stringent and open process.
datums on
Financially comfortable people with strong support networks often struggle badly to manage serious mental health conditions for their entire lives, even though they want to improve, actively seek treatment, and have the ideal mix of resources available to them.
The idea that you’re going to solve the mental health and addiction problems of the hardest cases by incarcerating them and forcing treatment on them against their will is just laughable. We literally do not know how to do that, we barely know how to treat the cases that want treatment.
If you want to actually help these people, you need to start by getting them housing, ie. the housing first model. But that’s obviously not happening, so locking them up seems like a reasonable way to make the problem less visible to the public, to the detriment of the people you’re pretending to help.
amperage3164 on
I hope so
sennalen on
People who aren’t causing a problem should be left alone. If someone breaks laws, then mental illness should be a sentencing consideration for what kind of facility they go to. Not a defense.
FrostyArctic47 on
This is unhinged, nazi like, Stalinist authoritarianism.
6 Comments
Could’ve saved us all a lot of trouble when Trump was living there
From a civil rights aspect it just seems reasonable that in order for the government to lock someone up for an extended period of time against their will, they should have to follow a strict due process like the courts. You should not be able to sidestep around basic liberties by saying “it’s for your own good”, it’s an obvious mechanism for state abuse. Make them prove the necessity of care in a stringent and open process.
Financially comfortable people with strong support networks often struggle badly to manage serious mental health conditions for their entire lives, even though they want to improve, actively seek treatment, and have the ideal mix of resources available to them.
The idea that you’re going to solve the mental health and addiction problems of the hardest cases by incarcerating them and forcing treatment on them against their will is just laughable. We literally do not know how to do that, we barely know how to treat the cases that want treatment.
If you want to actually help these people, you need to start by getting them housing, ie. the housing first model. But that’s obviously not happening, so locking them up seems like a reasonable way to make the problem less visible to the public, to the detriment of the people you’re pretending to help.
I hope so
People who aren’t causing a problem should be left alone. If someone breaks laws, then mental illness should be a sentencing consideration for what kind of facility they go to. Not a defense.
This is unhinged, nazi like, Stalinist authoritarianism.