3 ms·

> I personally believe that in the US, our society is quick to demand people seek treatment, even forcibly. As far as I can tell, the US is unusually permissiv

> I personally believe that in the US, our society is quick to demand people seek treatment, even forcibly. As far as I can tell, the US is unusually permissive of people with mental health issues. Entire cities have thousands of people who are visibly unwell and free to do whatever they want.

KittenInABox 1y ago
Where do you live and what happens to mentally unwell people in your society? [Just curious]
- shuckles 1y ago
  I live in San Francisco but am familiar with Denmark where it's relatively straightforward for a physician to involuntarily commit someone for ~a month at a time and the state to extend it in six month increments. To contrast, LPS in California limits involuntary holds to 72 hours and makes it very hard to hold anyone longer than that even despite recent reforms.
  - KittenInABox 1y ago
    Who pays to keep a mentally unwell person at a hospital for six months at a time in Denmark?
    - xboxnolifes 1y ago
      You already know the answer to that. It's the same for all social services.
    - shuckles 1y ago
      The same people who pay to keep mentally unwell people housed in residential hotels with inconsistent (but expensive) social worker based health treatments, their ER visits, Medicaid, etc. in the United States. Big cities spend huge amounts per capita on public health. The difference in results isn't explained by the purse.
    - UltraSane 1y ago
      Taxes
Kittensmittens3 1y ago
This is due to a lack of resources to commit everyone. There are still plenty of people that are committed, such as the main character of this article.
- shuckles 1y ago
  Those resources were explicitly redirected to community based nonprofits that spend most of their budgets facilitating the lives of the aforementioned people who would previously be in locked institutions. You've got cause and effect backwards.
  - Kittensmittens3 1y ago
    You're right. They still commit some people though. And I didn't mean to say specific policies are in play. It's the outcry of the surrounding communities that have a loud but powerless group that want people forcibly locked up. (Seattle here)
- nitwit005 1y ago
  While funding is an issue, we used to do it. Attitudes changed. There's simply not a lot of support for involuntary psychiatric care outside some immediate emergency.
  - bcrl 1y ago
    I'm not so sure it was due to attitudes changing. At least here in Ontario funding for many long term facilities was scrapped in the 1990s as governments slashed budgets for non-essential services to cut costs while higher levels of government downloaded services to lower levels. Smaller municipalities simply cannot afford to fund social services when property taxes are their primary source of funding. The effect was the same as the higher level of governments canceling many of these programs, albeit without having to take as heavy a political hit. The same thing happened to many low income housing programs in Canada as well. Few people remember that there were once federal programs to provide affordable housing which were also part of the 1990s cost cutting exercises. Locally we have a few long term retirement homes that are municipally funded, but capacity is very limited with long wait times.
UltraSane 1y ago
In San Francisco I saw a naked homeless man sitting in a wheelchair shove a dildo in and out of his anus right on a sidewalk. Even though I looked away the exact moment I realized what I was seeing I will never forget it despite really wishing I could.

KittenInABox 1y ago

Where do you live and what happens to mentally unwell people in your society? [Just curious]

shuckles 1y ago
I live in San Francisco but am familiar with Denmark where it's relatively straightforward for a physician to involuntarily commit someone for ~a month at a time and the state to extend it in six month increments. To contrast, LPS in California limits involuntary holds to 72 hours and makes it very hard to hold anyone longer than that even despite recent reforms.
- KittenInABox 1y ago
  Who pays to keep a mentally unwell person at a hospital for six months at a time in Denmark?
  - xboxnolifes 1y ago
    You already know the answer to that. It's the same for all social services.
  - shuckles 1y ago
    The same people who pay to keep mentally unwell people housed in residential hotels with inconsistent (but expensive) social worker based health treatments, their ER visits, Medicaid, etc. in the United States. Big cities spend huge amounts per capita on public health. The difference in results isn't explained by the purse.
  - UltraSane 1y ago
    Taxes

Kittensmittens3 1y ago

This is due to a lack of resources to commit everyone. There are still plenty of people that are committed, such as the main character of this article.

shuckles 1y ago
Those resources were explicitly redirected to community based nonprofits that spend most of their budgets facilitating the lives of the aforementioned people who would previously be in locked institutions. You've got cause and effect backwards.
- Kittensmittens3 1y ago
  You're right. They still commit some people though. And I didn't mean to say specific policies are in play. It's the outcry of the surrounding communities that have a loud but powerless group that want people forcibly locked up. (Seattle here)
nitwit005 1y ago
While funding is an issue, we used to do it. Attitudes changed. There's simply not a lot of support for involuntary psychiatric care outside some immediate emergency.
- bcrl 1y ago
  I'm not so sure it was due to attitudes changing. At least here in Ontario funding for many long term facilities was scrapped in the 1990s as governments slashed budgets for non-essential services to cut costs while higher levels of government downloaded services to lower levels. Smaller municipalities simply cannot afford to fund social services when property taxes are their primary source of funding. The effect was the same as the higher level of governments canceling many of these programs, albeit without having to take as heavy a political hit. The same thing happened to many low income housing programs in Canada as well. Few people remember that there were once federal programs to provide affordable housing which were also part of the 1990s cost cutting exercises. Locally we have a few long term retirement homes that are municipally funded, but capacity is very limited with long wait times.

UltraSane 1y ago

In San Francisco I saw a naked homeless man sitting in a wheelchair shove a dildo in and out of his anus right on a sidewalk. Even though I looked away the exact moment I realized what I was seeing I will never forget it despite really wishing I could.