4 ms·
You know, it's certainly possible to have a better mental health care system in the US. The barrier is we don't want to pay for it. Discussing this on a place
by x0x0 12y ago
You know, it's certainly possible to have a better mental health care system in the US. The barrier is we don't want to pay for it. Discussing this on a place like HN with a strong undercurrent of glibertarian fyigm is wasting your time and energy. See, for example, any of the threads discussing the many negative effects of the tech boom on sf; the idea that we live as part of a community and have shared responsibilities is anathema to HN.
- astockwell 12y agoI definitely agree that HN is first and foremost utilitarian. Which is why I have every confidence that, in the coming years, as the # of HN'ers who've reproduced grows, there will come a critical mass of folks out to maximize the outcomes for their children.
- xorcist 12y agoHow is it utilitarian? Utilitarianism is about maximizing the usefulness for the most people. The latter is the key. A system that is great for some, but really bad on average is as from utilitarian you can get.
- fennecfoxen 12y agoIf you'd like to improve mental health care in the United States, forget the funding issues for a moment: instead, start with disassembling the likes of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, a division of Health and Human Services which is staffed more or less entirely by "consumer/survivor"-movement flunkies and uses its $3.6 billion annual budget to oppose everything the modern medical establishment has to say about mental health and mental health care, whether it take the form of psychiatry, drugs, or outpatient treatment. But these margins are too narrow to contain a full discussion of the matter so I'll leave continued research as an exercise to the reader. :P