• dreadgoat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You are underestimating the type of people this law is targeting. Nobody who is just stressed out is going to be forced into an institution (although I agree the law should be carefully written to guarantee that). This is meant to get people who are full-on batshit insane off the streets and in an environment where they at least have a CHANCE of getting sorted out.

    For example, I have a friend who is psychotic. No, I’m not misusing the word or exaggerating, this is a person who is sincerely and obviously psychotic, diagnosed as such by a psychiatrist, sees and hears things that are not there, believes that the government is all rape-demons from hell that are out to harvest our sanity.
    When unmedicated, that is.
    Once medicated, she is like “holy shit clarity thank god, keep giving me the medicine.” But if there’s ever a lapse, we go right back to the rape-demons from hell trying to force pills down her throat and the only way to save her is to, essentially, violate her by being the rape-demon from hell that forces pills down her throat. Which is of course very illegal but people care enough about her to do it anyway.

    It would be very nice for it to NOT be illegal to save people from the rape-demons from hell, to have a support system in place aside from what is basically a secret cabal of friends and family as a safety net should this person end up somewhere alone and unable to access their meds.

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think you’re underestimating who this law will target.

      Addicts it says. Yes, people with other chronic mental health conditions too. But it sounds to me like California’s plan to deal with the opioid crisis is to start locking addicts in rehab facilities until they figure out how to be treatment wise if they’re not already (this is a term meaning, play the treatment game with therapists without doing the work).

      Treatment really requires people to be willing. And unless they’re an immediate danger to themself or others, I don’t agree with forcing people into treatment. On both moral grounds and practical ones.

      If this is an alternative to prison or jail, for crimes aside from drug charges, then great! But from what I could gather from the article, this isn’t really what’s going on.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It looks like they are also trying to implement funding for medical treatment as well, which is why the plan can be delayed up to two years.

        But there are grey areas to being an immediate danger to themselves or others. If someone is walking into traffic because they are too high to be aware of their surroundings or a schizophrenic homeless man is randomly yelling at people in a park he lives in, there is a danger.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And unless they’re an immediate danger to themself or others, I don’t agree with forcing people into treatment.

        The schizoid homeless this law is targeting ARE imminent dangers to themselves and others.

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Read the bullet points someone posted in these comments.

          Just being homeless and having a substance use disorder is enough.

          It goes way behind a psych hold.