7 ms·
> Lauren Singer, who worked for six months at the front desk of Colorado’s Highlands Behavioral, said people who were waiting in the lobby for an assessment wou
by DashRattlesnake 10y ago
> Lauren Singer, who worked for six months at the front desk of Colorado’s Highlands Behavioral, said people who were waiting in the lobby for an assessment would ask her what it would entail. “I would frequently get yelled at for overstepping my bounds and telling them too much about the evaluation process,” Singer said. A button behind the receptionist’s desk controlled the lock to the front door of the facility, and, she said, “If someone came in voluntarily, I wasn’t allowed to let them out of the door.”
That's terrifying. Earlier in the article they talked about people coming in for simple depression screening based the hospital's ads, but things like locking the doors behind people who choose to come in are probably keeping a lot of people from getting the help they need.
Medical care, especially medical care with an involuntary component, should never be for profit. The profit motive is just too corrupting.
- cmdrfred 10y agoIf these allegations are proven and those responsible for these policies don't spend significant time in prison then we can no longer deny that we live in a corrupt society.
- eli_gottlieb 10y agoI mean, this sounds a lot like criminal kidnapping.
- cmdrfred 10y agoIf abducting someone for profit isn't kidnapping then I don't know what is.
- gumby 10y agoAnd indeed she reached a settlement with the company which presumably means they were worried about losing a lawsuit or worse.
- eli_gottlieb 10y agoWhy weren't criminal charges pressed? Why is nobody in jail? Holding people hostage is definitely illegal.
- gumby 10y agoBecause in the US (at least) if the victim won't press charges the police can't take action. And in a case like this the defence will attempt to attack the (alleged, at the time of the trial) victim's credibility, which can be devastating. It's the main reason why rapists so often get away with it. Also why gang members are hard to convict. Some crimes don't have a legal victim, e.g. murder (victim is dead) or so-called "victimless" crimes (prostitution, drug possession, speeding, etc).
- cmdrfred 10y agoKidnapping in the the latter category it does not require anyone to press charges. Assault is the same way as well. If LE has evidence they can move on it. The fact of the matter is prosecutors don't want to risk their win loss ratio.
- mikeash 10y agoThat's not true. The decision about whether to press charges is up to the prosecutor. The prosecutor will often take the victim's wishes into account when deciding what to do, but they aren't required to.
- nommm-nommm 10y agoThis is not true. The only person with the choice/authority to prosecute is the prosecutor.
- Spooky23 10y agoProsecutors want trophys. If a victim won't testify, unless there is alt of other evidence, good luck getting a conviction.
- Avshalom 10y agoSo I mean this is all super fucked up but: http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.40&full=true http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.40&full=true I suspect If I kept google-ing danger to self or others gives institutions authority to restrain.
- scythe 10y agohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal
- bitJericho 10y agoFeel free to think otherwise, but we are living in a corrupt society. This isn't any news to anybody except those with no experience with any part of the government system.
- GrinningFool 10y ago> then we can no longer deny that we live in a corrupt society I've not heard anyone denying this. The only thing people like to debate is which aspect - as if it were a binary choice.
- maxerickson 10y agoThere can be pernicious motives whether a facility is nominally for profit or not. (For instance, say there is a doctor who gets paid in proportion to the time they spend treating patients at a non profit facility)
- DashRattlesnake 10y agoThat's true, but removing the profit motive of the facility removes one major incentive for coordinated, large scale corruption like this. Other incentives (like production-based compensation being gamed by unscrupulous individuals) will have to be dealt with in other ways.
- sageikosa 10y agoSo without profit, the operating metric will be what exactly?
- danso 10y agoEr...are you questioning the existential purposes of the non-profit sector in general, or just non-profit healthcare?
- sageikosa 10y agoJust trying to point out that human action without profit requires something else to account for the costs; otherwise there is no way to judge comparatively how limited resources should be applied. So if there isn't going to be profit driven activity, what will be the metric for success? If it is "outcomes", then we should start plowing everything we've got into it. Of course, should that mean we stop plowing resources into other endeavors? Do we make a vote of it? A law case?
- bandrami 10y agoIn healthcare we have this amazing thing called "outcomes".
- deleted 10y ago
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- scythe 10y ago>should never be for profit. That may be, but -- as other commenters have noted -- the definition of "for profit" is colloquial and subject to concept creep. A more specific prescription (heh), I think, would be that medical care (or at least involuntary care) should never be subject to fiduciary duty in the sense of Dodge v. Ford.
- StanislavPetrov 10y agoThis is kidnapping plain and simple. The fact that it is done under the guise of a corporate/medical structure should not be relevant. Those involved in these crimes should be arrested and prosecuted under RICO laws, from the top to the bottom.
- ethbro 10y agoSadly, I can see the counter argument. "It's not kidnapping, because someone with mental health issues can't be trusted to make their own decisions." {Cue jury ignoring logic errors and nodding} Maybe it's currently reading Larsson's books, but mental health issues seem to raise incredibly challenging ethical questions (under economically feasible settings).
- throwaway729 10y agoMental health issues may raise incredibly challenging ethical questions, but that's beside the point in this case. There is a legal structure set up for this sort of thing. You don't just lock people in a building against their will for days or weeks without a court order. And you certainly don't choose which people to lock up based upon availability of insurance money. IMO Matthew Salanger should be facing down charges carrying hard jail time right now.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]