News

A broad funnel ending in jail.

It depends. Define define.

Seriously... No hyperbole, I'd imagine the majority of people that would enthusiastically vote for trump in this next electron after he led a violent insurrection to try to end American democracy (and had actual discussed plans for the military to shoot American civilians if the overthrow were successful and there was an opposition movement) actively suffer from a listed disorder and are in need of treatment.

Yes. This is written to police the homeless exclusively.

Federal courts have already ruled that you can't throw people in jail for being homeless, so I don't see that happening. The headline mentions treatment which doesn't have to be in-patient necessarily.

I'm definitely on the fence here as I'm no fan of authoritarianism, but on the other hand I'm no fan of homeless meth addicts living in a clapped out RV on the side of the road, stealing catalytic converters by night and standing in the road shouting at cars by day. Something has to give here as people like this have been taking advantage of this messy situation.

I have a nosy neighbor that also happens to be a social worker. She made my life hell last year by getting cops involved in a situation that didn't necessitate them, and additionally forced me to go through all sorts of hoops and psychological examinations to prove my state of mind. This law, despite it's good intentions, makes me super nervous after having gone through that BS

It's always "I believe that (subordinate group) should get basic rights, but.... (and then something about being inconvenienced)."

It says at the end of the article that there's already a law that does that for certain diagnoses and at a judge's discretion. I don't see why it would ever need to go farther than that. I've worked in and been in mental health and addiction facilities and they already use mental health diagnoses and medication to subjugate people living through homelessness and the disease of addiction. Conservatorship is not the answer to someone not being able to pay rent. It will be used to diagnose people who are not mentally ill just to keep them from being an "eyesore." It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that. You also can't force someone into addiction treatment and expect it to magically work. It's their life, they have to want to quit. We're going to waste so many resources forcing people into addiction treatment and it won't do anything except to make them resentful of the system. Even worse, if you lock someone away who doesn't want to quit and their tolerance for drugs goes down, then they get out and use, they will definitely OD. So many people die or nearly die that way after getting out of jails and prisons for victimless crimes like addiction and homelessness.

The answer is making treatment more available to people. Then giving them a place to live and resources to live on while they find jobs and reintegrate into society. Only having (forced) treatment will accomplish nothing and likely make the problem worse while allowing authoritarianism into California. This law is fucking disgusting, dehumanizing, and scary. We should be ashamed of ourselves as a society that this is how we treat our most vulnerable as a society.

ETA: This is how available addiction and mental health treatment is to Californians with Medi-Cal: it's not. Miles of red tape and bureaucracy that people with no resources or transportation are somehow supposed to navigate, just to have an indefinite wait list at the end of it. Ask me how I know. If treatment were made available to meet people where they are, it would be far more effective, if paired with reentry programs that actually treat them like people.

If I ever lose my job I'm moving to CA before my meds wear off.

Interesting how you dropped the second half of that sentence to try to hammer it into your point about "oh em gee teh gubmint is gunna git me".

The new law, which reforms the state’s conservatorship system, expands the definition of “gravely disabled” to include people who are unable to provide themselves basic needs such as food and shelter due to an untreated mental illness or unhealthy drugs and alcohol use.

I agree. While this sounds great on paper, there's a chance for it to get abused. And we all know that it will end up being abused.

theres few therapists, even less good therapists.

Good therapists exists, but unless you are incredibly lucky, its a chore and financial burden trying to find them.

They're targeting homeless people. This is gonna go bad real quick.

What's the other option? Brand them as "undesirables" and let them suffer until they either get help on their own or go on a killing spree? People who are steadfast against law enforcement have been calling for better care for the severely mentally ill so incidents don't have to end with a shootout. Getting them into care is an important step.

There is a not unreasonable argument that allowing the mentally ill to "choose" to become addicted junkies living on the street in an extremely hostile and dangerous environment is not exactly the epitome of merciful empathy.

Sometimes we need a proverbial kick in the ass to get moving though this is a very complicated issue. My crazy hoarding obese pain pill addicted neighbor has zero family to help her. She definitely needs someone to intervene but there is no legal way to do so.

As a Californian who also works in the ED, there are levels to mental illness. Clearly you haven't seen the worst of it.

Also who paying for the help? If state then fine but your telling these people to get help our else and not paying for it then fuck you.

How many people are going homeless while giving themselves a plethora of other issues all in the name of sticking it to capitalism??