When you think about budget cuts for those in need

[swamp]

Jun 26, 2011 10:12:12 GMT -5 ameiko said:

Jun 26, 2011 9:30:11 GMT -5 Lady Gaga Gaga Snerd said:

Protecting society is not a free lunch. Dealing with people who are ill or unable to care for themselves is different than giving out a freebie.

There are multiple ways to protect society. Some are pretty cheap- the price of a bullet. Can we go there?

We used to keep people like this locked up but that was considered inhumane so we started these group homes. Well, she paid the price for this arrogance and to ignore that in favor of whining about funding is truly missing the point.

It's not cheap to keep people locked up, either. But frankly, I think it's more inhumane to put some of the mentally ill out on the streets because they aren't able to care for themselves.

And it's barbarian to suggest we start shooting the schizophrenic. We're not some ass backward third world country like Afghanistan.

[ameiko]

Jun 26, 2011 9:32:43 GMT -5 cereb said:

Jun 26, 2011 9:30:11 GMT -5 Lady Gaga Gaga Snerd said:

Protecting society is not a free lunch. Dealing with people who are ill or unable to care for themselves is different than giving out a freebie.

Some people just don't get that until it's their daughter, son, mother, uncle or aunt who ends up drawing the schizophrenia card.

What an irrational and illogical arguement. It's like asking someone who is against the death penalty if they would want to kill the SOB who raped/murdered their wife/daughter/whatever.

Well OF COURSE he or she would want to kill that criminal but that desire has nothing to do with the morality of the death penalty. I get greedy so it's ok to steal? I get horny so it's ok to rape?

Please.

[ameiko]

Jun 26, 2011 9:40:55 GMT -5 cereb said:

"hat is not what I said Ma'am..not even close but nice try again.."


Maybe you are unaware of it, but that is exactly what you said.

Schizophrenia is an extremely debilitating mental illness, much like Cancer can be a debilitating physical disease. The end result particularly during initial treatment phases leaves a person unable to function. Actually, the cancer patient has a better shot at it. Many cancers are curable. Schizophrenia is treatable in some cases, but not curable.

Cancer doesn't make people kill people.

[mmhmm]

Jun 26, 2011 10:05:04 GMT -5 cereb said:

Jun 26, 2011 10:00:01 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

It's beyond reason that there would be only one staff member on duty in a group home the residents of which include the mentally ill. That endangers the staff member and the residents. There's no way to know when mental illness will erupt into violence. Personally, even at night, I don't believe two staff members to be enough since those afflicted are easily upset by what goes on around them. I must wonder if this particular group home was following its own policies and procedures. It just doesn't sound right, to me, that only one staff member in a place like this would be legal.

Unfortunately mmhmm, it's the norm. Juvenile programs are the exception because DCF and DYS have more funding and better staffing mandates.

Some of the private drug treatment group homes have better staffing, but be prepared to pay 20 grand a month for care.

DMR, ( mass dept of mental retardation) has more money as well, and if necessary they staff much more appropriately to the needs of the clients.

Frankly, that's ridiculous! From what little I've seen of these group homes, they're not well equipped to deal with crises in schizophrenic patients anyway. To have only one staff member on duty (or, two, for that matter) is a recipe for disaster and damned if one didn't up and happen.

[cereb]

"We used to keep people like this locked up but that was considered inhumane so we started these group homes. Well, she paid the price for this arrogance and to ignore that in favor of whining about funding is truly missing the point."



No. Missing the point is negating the success of thousand of MH clients who have managed to stay out of a hospital, learned skills to cope with their illness, and have become productive members of society when certain barriers to their success have been removed or revised. Missing the point is not understanding how far less expensive it is to have someone live in a group home environment than it is to warehouse them in an institution. Do some belong on long term state facilities? Absolutely. Do all of them? Half of them? 10% of them? No.

[cereb]

"Frankly, that's ridiculous! From what little I've seen of these group homes, they're not well equipped to deal with crises in schizophrenic patients anyway. To have only one staff member on duty (or, two, for that matter) is a recipe for disaster and damned if one didn't up and happen."

This particular guy should have been screened and sectioned as soon as he went off his meds. The agency dropped the ball and the staff didn't have the tools to understand they needed to get him screened instead of trying to de-escalate the guy.

[cereb]

"Cancer doesn't make people kill people."


Most of the time, neither does schizophrenia.

[ameiko]

Jun 26, 2011 10:15:50 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jun 26, 2011 10:12:12 GMT -5 ameiko said:

There are multiple ways to protect society. Some are pretty cheap- the price of a bullet. Can we go there?

We used to keep people like this locked up but that was considered inhumane so we started these group homes. Well, she paid the price for this arrogance and to ignore that in favor of whining about funding is truly missing the point.

It's not cheap to keep people locked up, either. But frankly, I think it's more inhumane to put some of the mentally ill out on the streets because they aren't able to care for themselves.

And it's barbarian to suggest we start shooting the schizophrenic. We're not some ass backward third world country like Afghanistan.

Would it be so backwards to put down humanely a mentally ill person who is violent and has little hope of living a normal life? It might be the only sane thing a society can do.

I understand that we want to help these people, really I do. But some people can not be helped with all the money in the world and we certainly don't have that.

We are going through some changes that, quite frankly, are making this a third world nation (this includes importing third worlders by the boatload but also the preferential breeding of the unintelligent and lazy). At the risk of sounding like a total Facist (and I think many here know that I am fairly libertarian), we need some sort of major shakedown and even purging in this society to restore some sanity.

Some of that purging may be: "sorry, we feel bad for your schizophrenia but we can't help you. All we can do is make the pain stop forever."

Maybe once we rebuild ourselves and put in system to stop another regression can we become a more compassionate society. I doubt it though; Rome fell and so are we.

[mmhmm]

The majority of the mentally ill can be helped to fit into society and get along reasonably well. They must take medications, yes. They need assistance, yes. They need ongoing care, in many cases, yes. However, they can make it with those elements in place. To keep those who can get along in the world locked up is far beyond inhumane. Careful evaluation is needed, and these folks need time to learn and adjust. There will always be those who must be kept in facilities to prevent harm to themselves, or others; however, those who can get along certainly deserve the opportunity to do so, IMO.

[cereb]

Jun 26, 2011 10:16:38 GMT -5 ameiko said:

Jun 26, 2011 9:32:43 GMT -5 cereb said:

Some people just don't get that until it's their daughter, son, mother, uncle or aunt who ends up drawing the schizophrenia card.

What an irrational and illogical arguement. It's like asking someone who is against the death penalty if they would want to kill the SOB who raped/murdered their wife/daughter/whatever.

Well OF COURSE he or she would want to kill that criminal but that desire has nothing to do with the morality of the death penalty. I get greedy so it's ok to steal? I get horny so it's ok to rape?

Please.

I'm sorry, but I'm really not understanding you on this one. Please clarify?

[mmhmm]

Jun 26, 2011 10:25:46 GMT -5 cereb said:

"Cancer doesn't make people kill people."


Most of the time, neither does schizophrenia.

Cancer can result in very serious depression. There have been cases where that depression resulted in violent actions on the part of the afflected individual.

[cereb]

Jun 26, 2011 10:26:24 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

The majority of the mentally ill can be helped to fit into society and get along reasonably well. They must take medications, yes. They need assistance, yes. They need ongoing care, in many cases, yes. However, they can make it with those elements in place. To keep those who can get along in the world locked up is far beyond inhumane. Careful evaluation is needed, and these folks need time to learn and adjust. There will always be those who must be kept in facilities to prevent harm to themselves, or others; however, those who can get along certainly deserve the opportunity to do so, IMO.

Exactly.

[mmhmm]

I think, lonewolf, some medications are too often prescribed for those who don't really need them. Sometimes, an anti-anxiety medication is prescribed for a person undergoing a temporary crisis. When the crisis is over, instead of weaning off the medication, it's just automatically continued when what was needed was ongoing therapy to resolve the situational anxiety and learn new ways of coping. This is true for anti-depressants, as well. There's still some stigma attached to seeking help for emotional/mental difficulties, so people resist doing so. Instead, they seek the quick fix and find doctors who are willing to prescribe something to make them think they've found it. Actually, they've not found a fix, but another problem.

[Deleted]

I'm thinking you missed the point entirely. It isn't about the man with mental illness. It's about the people who work with those who have mental illness, and keeping THEM safe. It's about a woman who was murdered quite possibly because she was working with someone who was very unstable...alone. She should not have been alone with this man, but budget cuts mean staffing cuts and improper/ unsafe staffing ratios.

If that's the point wouldn't it be a lot cheaper to hire people that are big enough to take care of themselves? That seems like a more cost effecent method than building a whole government run program around this guy.

[busymom]

If you want to see people battling mental illness, all you have to do is check for homeless people who exist underneath the bridges (or wherever else they find shelter) in the big cities. During the time my parents were young adults, people with mental illness were institutionalized. Now we've swung the other direction. We don't want to "jail" them, but we've made the rules so lax that we at times don't protect the general public from unexpected mood swings. No easy answers here.

[Deleted]

No. Missing the point is negating the success of thousand of MH clients who have managed to stay out of a hospital, learned skills to cope with their illness, and have become productive members of society when certain barriers to their success have been removed or revised.

Yes thousands of MH patients have managed to say out of hospitals & have lived productive lives. But that doesn't mean that a certain percentage of them are not dangerous. Nor does it mean that if you spend the entire monetary output of the U.S. economy that percentage will noticeably change.

[Shirina]

It's about time because the days of a free lunch by our government are over because of our enormous debt..

Of course, whenever there is money to be saved, some folks immediately put the knife against the jugular of society instead of looking at, perhaps, our enormous military machine and the wars we seem to keep getting into. We spend more on our military than the other top 20+ nations combined. Look it up if you don't believe it.

As far as Ameiko's deranged comments about shooting people, that rose enough bile in my throat that I think I'll refrain from participating in this thread.

It's amazing how some folks believe no price tag is too big as long as we're killing people, but helping is just too damned expensive.

[reasonfreedom]

Jun 26, 2011 10:17:53 GMT -5 ameiko said:

Jun 26, 2011 9:40:55 GMT -5 cereb said:

"hat is not what I said Ma'am..not even close but nice try again.."


Maybe you are unaware of it, but that is exactly what you said.

Schizophrenia is an extremely debilitating mental illness, much like Cancer can be a debilitating physical disease. The end result particularly during initial treatment phases leaves a person unable to function. Actually, the cancer patient has a better shot at it. Many cancers are curable. Schizophrenia is treatable in some cases, but not curable.

Cancer doesn't make people kill people.

Also most cancers are caused by the humans personal choices like smoking. I feel no pity for the person that gets cancer from smoking.

[reasonfreedom]

Jun 26, 2011 11:48:25 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

I think, lonewolf, some medications are too often prescribed for those who don't really need them. Sometimes, an anti-anxiety medication is prescribed for a person undergoing a temporary crisis. When the crisis is over, instead of weaning off the medication, it's just automatically continued when what was needed was ongoing therapy to resolve the situational anxiety and learn new ways of coping. This is true for anti-depressants, as well. There's still some stigma attached to seeking help for emotional/mental difficulties, so people resist doing so. Instead, they seek the quick fix and find doctors who are willing to prescribe something to make them think they've found it. Actually, they've not found a fix, but another problem.

Ritalin for ADD was ridiculously over prescribed. My cousin was on it and he eventually died from pharmaceuticals at age 26. He never really needed it in the first place, he was placed on them for getting bad grades in school so called not paying attention. I remember that being a gateway drug to more pharmaceuticals, eventually he died of overdose. Also Ritalin and pain pills/muscle relaxers opened up a huge can of worms for street drugs. The euphoric feeling they gave you just made people more addicted and less aware of reality.
My aunt had worked in a chem lab for the state and some guy had been putting chemical agents in the ventilation system to the room she was working in. She was prescribed Prozac and oh my I think it made her more mentally unstable. She would start getting weird mood swings like from listening to her normal country to listening to Metallica. She would also go from being her normal mellow/shy/nice self to being a complete irrational B%*$#.

[handyman2]

To protect society in some cases incarcerating violently criminally persons is the unfortunately may be the only answer. But with good treatment many can be treated and be an asset to society. Just look at the many military personel who return from hell and have developed mental issues. Do we just scrap these people?
True we can cut waste in some ways but when we lose our humanity to one another we are in more trouble than just budgets and debt.

[commentator]

Jun 26, 2011 10:25:52 GMT -5 ameiko said:

Would it be so backwards to put down humanely a mentally ill person who is violent and has little hope of living a normal life? It might be the only sane thing a society can do.

I understand that we want to help these people, really I do. But some people can not be helped with all the money in the world and we certainly don't have that.

We are going through some changes that, quite frankly, are making this a third world nation (this includes importing third worlders by the boatload but also the preferential breeding of the unintelligent and lazy). At the risk of sounding like a total Facist (and I think many here know that I am fairly libertarian), we need some sort of major shakedown and even purging in this society to restore some sanity.

Some of that purging may be: "sorry, we feel bad for your schizophrenia but we can't help you. All we can do is make the pain stop forever."

Maybe once we rebuild ourselves and put in system to stop another regression can we become a more compassionate society. I doubt it though; Rome fell and so are we.

Fascist is not the WWII political view that you appear to hold.

Just sayin'.

ETA: My apologies to Careb for mistributing to her this call for mass murder which was, in fact, advocated by ameiko.

[cereb]

Jun 26, 2011 23:57:55 GMT -5 @commentator said:

Jun 26, 2011 11:20:30 GMT -5 cereb said:

... At the risk of sounding like a total Facist (and I think many here know that I am fairly libertarian), we need some sort of major shakedown and even purging in this society to restore some sanity.

Some of that purging may be: "sorry, we feel bad for your schizophrenia but we can't help you. All we can do is make the pain stop forever." ...

Fascist is not the WWII political view that you appear to hold.

Just sayin'.

WHOAAAAAA!!! those are not my words!!! I quoted someone else! Please fix that!

[moon/Laura]

Commentator, the quote you attributed as being by Cereb, was in fact made by ameiko - see post #44

when cereb quoted ameiko, it must have come out strange.

[floridayankee]

For over a year, Mr. Chappell, a schizophrenic with a violent criminal record, had seemed relatively stable in a state-financed group home in Charlestown. But after a fight with another resident, Mr. Chappell was shuttled from home to home, and his mother believed that he had fallen off his medication along the way.

Just another example of a failed government nanny state.

[swamp]

Jun 26, 2011 10:12:12 GMT -5 ameiko said:

Jun 26, 2011 9:30:11 GMT -5 Lady Gaga Gaga Snerd said:

Protecting society is not a free lunch. Dealing with people who are ill or unable to care for themselves is different than giving out a freebie.

There are multiple ways to protect society. Some are pretty cheap- the price of a bullet. Can we go there?

We used to keep people like this locked up but that was considered inhumane so we started these group homes. Well, she paid the price for this arrogance and to ignore that in favor of whining about funding is truly missing the point.

They talk about the burden of society to provide high quality care but what about the right of society to protect itself? People like this are very difficult to keep on their meds and are dangerous. Barring some sort of permanent medications, do we just lock them up or put them down?

Assuming for argument's sake that some people do deserve to be shot, who is going to make that decision? The government? You don't trust them to do anything else competently or efficiently, why would you entrust them with a decision of this magnitute

[commentator]

Jun 27, 2011 5:26:54 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

Commentator, the quote you attributed as being by Cereb, was in fact made by ameiko - see post #44

when cereb quoted ameiko, it must have come out strange.

Thank you, and my apologies to Cereb.

[commentator]

Jun 27, 2011 5:26:54 GMT -5 moon/Laura said:

Commentator, the quote you attributed as being by Cereb, was in fact made by ameiko - see post #44

when cereb quoted ameiko, it must have come out strange.

In any event, since ameiko's call for mass murder is still in place and you are well aware of its content, I must presume that the post does not violate the COC.

Neither is it a violation, clearly, to make a thinly veiled suggestion (in another thread) that homosexuals be burned to death.

However, telling a moderator to put his personal attack where the sun doesn't shine is a violation.

I'm beginning to form a picture of the rules of engagement.

[privateinvestor]

However, telling a moderator to put his personal attack where the sun doesn't shine is a violation.

I'm beginning to form a picture of the rules of engagement.


Ok Commentator let me know if you need my help...the only rule of engagement I have trouble with is "just because" but all the others I am intimately familiar with ..

[Deleted]

It's beyond reason that there would be only one staff member on duty in a group home the residents of which include the mentally ill. That endangers the staff member and the residents.

The truth is that you can't base any business on what "might" happen. Look at it this way. The same night that this lady was killed because she was along there were 1,000's & maybe 10's of thousands of places manned the exact same way that nothing happened at. You would have to hire that many people again just to have 2 people there. Then there's discrimination. You would be sued if you didn't allow women & for that matter small women. So a medium sized man & a small women & you still have a problem if the guy was big. We won't even get into what if 2 people went off the deep end at the same time.

Stuff like this happens & to try to throw money at it to prevent it just doesn't work. A locked cell type environment would work but then you would be talking about how cruel these places were.
This is a no win type deal & so the only thing that you can do is to be practical & hope that your not the one involved in something like this.

Now I didn't read all the posts but there is usually someone that tries to blame the doctors (he should have seen this coming, etc). As a matter of fact there are always comments like you need to see a MH doctor, etc. The truth there is that MH processionals cure almost nobody & it isn't even close to an exact science. Many times the doctors are just trying to piece together the why someone does something & they are nowhere near the how to change them.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...I agree that there are no easy answers...

...and this thread has become all the more difficult, imo, due to posters complaining about ameiko's contributions, rather than engaging in the discussion...