Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iysg8gw wrote

Reply to comment by Thtguy1289_NY in What forced hospitalization feels like in New York City, as Mayor Adams pushes for more by psychothumbs

The answer is literally as simple as building more housing and expanding the social safety net. That’s all progressives have been advocating for this entire time.

−6

Thtguy1289_NY t1_iysgbd0 wrote

How does housing help someone who is unable to care for themselves?

9

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iysht5q wrote

Because more housing means more supportive housing programs, which will help these people take care of themselves.

1

InfernalTest t1_iytd1oi wrote

the problem is they require the monitoring and maintenance that is only allowable for someone who s under the control of the state

they cant be forced to return home ( and not live on teh street or ride the trains ) or ( the biggie ) take psych meds or keep a job - all of which someone who is severe schizo affective or schizophrenic and bi polar cant manage unless someone is MAKING them do those things

and lets not even talk about the ppl that are addicted to sucstances or alchohol who again - are so addicted that they already dont follow through exactly because of their addiction...

and then of course you have to find a mass of people willing to manage these sorts o f people as a full time job .....and pay them enough to retain them.

8

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iytdfku wrote

Are you saying that as an argument against supportive housing? Because that’s already what’s going to happen under Adams’ plan.

1

InfernalTest t1_iyug5b8 wrote

my reply is rather that what youre saying is "supportive" housing doesnt really address what these people need given the way the law and how supportive housing works.

there is no place thats making people take meds and/or controlling their movement... unless that person is in the custody of the state.

1

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iyuhe94 wrote

Adams’ plan doesn’t give them that either. You’d be surprised how much social support and trust building will solve the problem.

2

InfernalTest t1_iyvgtub wrote

it may solve SOME problems but clearly it doesnt do it enough for the vast majority of people that are severely mentally ill - there is a ton of services for people IF they decide to take advantage of them ...the issue is there is no process / mechanism to to make someone who chooses to not take their meds and not sleep on the streets to do so UNTIL they do something ( harmful) to themselves or to someone else.

they require someone /or something and for them to subject to that treatment of this is "where you HAVE to be , and these are the meds you MUST take"

our laws currently dont allow for that kind of control unless they are in the custody of the state..and the only way you get into custody is either criminally or voluntarilly ...there is no inbetween legally for the kinds of controls that they need versus whats legally allowable. really thats it

1

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iyx5jrc wrote

> it may solve SOME problems but clearly it doesnt do it enough for the vast majority of people that are severely mentally ill

[citation needed]

> there is a ton of services for people IF they decide to take advantage of them

And they are likely underfunded and understaffed under this administration. Imagine if we actually had someone competent running things…

1

InfernalTest t1_iyxll83 wrote

- this is about those who refuse or ignore the help of supportive services despite the fact they are severely mentally ill and need meds- or are substance /alchohol dependant....

no matter how much you may offer them a free home or counseling there is ( at least in NY ) nothing that can MAKE them take it when clearly they need it and aside from involuntarily making them subject to being detained or controlling them after they are medically stabilized ...there is little to MAKE them continue to adhere to meds or stay where a home is offered if they decide to not take meds and not take the bed you offer them...so the solution for them isnt supportive housing since they refuse to accept or acknowledge that they should be subject to services

this situation is described over and over by psychiatric and medical staff at hospitals and halfway houses ...

1

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iyy1p02 wrote

> this situation is described over and over by psychiatric and medical staff at hospitals and halfway houses ...

Yeah, because those places aren’t equipped to handle these people long term. They’re chronically understaffed and underfunded by a government that only sees them as a political pawn.

1

Thtguy1289_NY t1_iyslc96 wrote

Yea but some of these people literally can't take care of themselves though, how does it help them? Like even with support they cannot live on their own

2

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iysoo7s wrote

Do you not know what supportive housing is?

5

happybarfday t1_iz1msgl wrote

I mean no, why the fuck would I? It's not my job or industry... the problem is that you never get specific about the hard questions.

At the end of the day I never see a real solid answer for how to handle people who don't want this assistance and refuse to live like a civilized human because they are mentally ill or just fucking antisocial assholes. The answer is always just "throw more money and resources at it" and apparently someday they will willingly change? No, some people are just NOT ever going to get it together for themselves no matter how many resources are available.

1

Key-Recognition-7190 t1_iyv6w3v wrote

And that's ultimately where we have a problem it ISNT simple.

Building in NY is hella expensive and reality is NO one with any influence or money wants to build that kind of housing. After all who is going to spend possibly billions of dollars to house a population that let's be honest here only about 20% will ultimately be able to take care of themselves. Are tax payers just expected to take care of these increasing number of people for the rest of their lives? What guarantee is there that supporting a system like that wouldn't be a budget nightmare like what the MTA has become.

While I'm on the topic assuming we do somehow build the housing what stops the vast majority of homeless in the country from migrating here to use these new housing? It's a never ending cycle. Please don't say nationalizing that isn't something feasible until atleast another 2 or 4 years.

On Expanding the safety net (Atleast in New York) in an administration that is filled with unqualified and honestly lazy workers is just asking for fraud and abuse. It's not that I don't think it's a bad idea it's just unless it's manned by an experienced and motivated administration it's once again just going to be filled with massive fraud and abuse!

It's 7 in the morning and I'm phone posting but all I'm saying is the answer isn't so simple there are so many prerequisites needed for this.

1

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iyx59si wrote

> Building in NY is hella expensive and reality is NO one with any influence or money wants to build that kind of housing.

So force them to. We have the power both in the city government and state government to completely overhaul rezoning laws and community councils. Why don’t we?

> After all who is going to spend possibly billions of dollars to house a population that let's be honest here only about 20% will ultimately be able to take care of themselves.

That’s the point of a social safety net, though. Not everything needs to turn a profit.

> While I'm on the topic assuming we do somehow build the housing what stops the vast majority of homeless in the country from migrating here to use these new housing?

Nothing, but then again, they’re being sent here anyway. If we give them housing, they’re more likely to contribute positively to the city instead of being on the street, y’know, like you people are so concerned about.

> On Expanding the safety net (Atleast in New York) in an administration that is filled with unqualified and honestly lazy workers is just asking for fraud and abuse

Then maybe we shouldn’t have drank the crime Kool aid and voted him in.

1

happybarfday t1_iz1mxod wrote

> So force them to.

So we can force developers to build unprofitable buildings but we can't force destructive, sick, mentally ill addicts to get help for their own good and the good of society...

1

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iz2cco9 wrote

Yes? Developers don’t have rights.

1

happybarfday t1_iz2dy6z wrote

I don't have the right to go piss on the door of your building, shoot up heroin, then pass out there and shit myself and then attack you when you try to wake me up to get the fuck out of the way, but this shit happens on the daily in our city. Happened right outside my own building.

1

Evening_Presence_927 t1_iz2kxou wrote

Huh? That’s not how civil rights work. Also lmao at you defending big real estate like that.

> Happened right outside my own building.

Sure it did.

1

happybarfday t1_iz2neki wrote

You have anything to actually contribute other than naysaying and condescending remarks? Solutions? Research studies? Insights of your own? No?

0

[deleted] t1_iz2qzqs wrote

[removed]

0

happybarfday t1_iz2ra7i wrote

Won't happen, might as well say we should give them magic beans... let me know when it does and I'll eat my hat.

0