M1ch431

I want to live in a kind and free world. Sorry you feel differently.

But many of these people couldn’t afford “affordable housing”, so it would need to be free. Food would need to be free, electricity would need to be free, water, internet, etc would all need to be free (for them, but paid for by taxpayers). Also where is the new affordable housing being built, and who is paying for it?

That would be up for the state of New York to determine. Housing is a right, whether or not the laws have caught up. Food is a right and so is water. Electricity isn't a luxury. If they could afford the housing at a later date, their eligibility for things being "free" should be re-evaluated.

Perhaps the many corporations and billionaires that dodge taxes could pay for it. Perhaps the federal government could stop spending trillions on war out of US taxpayer money and provide homes for homeless and vulnerable individuals? Perhaps, if we allow these individuals to feel safe and heal, without punishing them criminally or otherwise traumatizing them, they would later offset the expenses spent to better them.

Huh? The point was that using YOUR scenario, people could easily abuse the system to simply get free housing/food/etc by missing a rent payment and getting taken away and given a free house/food/etc.

You aren't abusing the system by needing a house. If we're talking free or affordable housing, again, there is a crisis, and it should be provided to individuals.

I didn't suggest that people are locked up for "simply for missing their rent". Never once did I suggest people are locked up permanently.

There are no mental health professionals that arrive on the scene. It could be EMT, firefighters, or police that initiate contact. None of the above are mental health professionals. A little training does not make you qualified.

Go advocate for freedom instead of arguing with me. Presumably, you aren't even from the United States, so how can you claim to be an expert?

When it comes to psychiatric holds, yes, that is effectively what happens. And definitely yes in many other instances.

who are clearly having an episode.

What if it was hearsay? What if they got the wrong person? Are you aware that a false report could be made by somebody who hates homeless people? A homeless person experiencing an "episode" could be them expressing grief, sorrow, and any number of emotions in reaction to their life or situation, but they lack the privacy to express themselves. Better take their freedom away, then.

A person who uses drugs is not inherently mentally ill. Why cart them to a mental institution instead of giving them the option to go to a rehab?

The state of New York could buy these homes and use them to re-home individuals placed into them or repurpose them. Or build new, affordable housing.

Just don’t pay your rent and get taken away to be given a free house and food and all your bills paid!

Are you seriously arguing for renting and no social safety net? If rent was affordable and fair, it'd be another story.

If you ignore the due process and evidence I guess. This is for when police would have been dispatched to a mental health emergency.

A first responder is dispatched and kidnaps them. Where is the due process or evidence? Appearing mentally ill or being impoverished is not a crime or evidence of mental illness. A first responder is not a psychiatrist or able to diagnose somebody in such an environment.

And they often lack the funds because of their severe mental illness that makes them unable to function properly in society. It’s hard to hold down a job (or even get one) when you think that everyone is a lizard person who is trying to take over the world and are laying eggs in peoples brains, because of severe mental illness.

And who could blame them for thinking that? These are people that see first-hand the horrors of society and capitalism, of drug abuse and addiction. You can be unemployable in the US for different reasons than severe mental illness, like having a criminal conviction. Should they receive treatment for their delusions if it is imminently harming themselves or others, they are violent, or have committed a crime? Yes, it would likely be appropriate.

There are people that literally cannot take care of themselves due to mental illness. No matter how many services you offer them, it’s just more services that they won’t use. If the option is commit them and take care of them, or let them die, you’re saying let them die.

If they are a threat to themselves and others, have committed a crime, or are actively violent, they should be given due process and treatment they consent to prior to involuntary treatment.

I’ll ask again - if a homeless severely, severely mentally ill person refuses all help, what do you suggest the government do?

I've answered this in abundance. Re-read. It is the job of society and everybody in it to create a world that is less traumatizing, that is less exploitative, that nurtures every one of its members and helps them to unleash their potential. For individuals experiencing psychosis who are not violent, they should be given the option of an environment similar to a Soteria House.

This is for the state of New York, which is a large area that encompasses more than just New York City. In 2022, there were over 1 million vacant houses just in the state of New York. Affordable housing and the lack thereof is a crisis. It must be rectified for a healthy society to thrive.

As for New York City, apartment buildings could be constructed or individuals could be relocated.

As of January 2024, there were approximately 158,019 homeless individuals in New York State, with the majority located in New York City. This number reflects a significant increase in homelessness, driven by factors such as a lack of affordable housing and an influx of asylum seekers.

As of January 2025, it is estimated that over 350,000 people are homeless in New York City

If there are over a MILLION vacant houses, and 350k (or slighty more) homeless people, what the fuck are we doing?

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

I’m sorry but you can’t just let all mentally ill people go free to do whatever they want

This is a free society. There is no due process or evidence before they are kidnapped in this instance.

I’m sorry but you can’t just let all mentally ill people go free to do whatever they want, and you definitely can’t just throw money and houses at them and expect the problem to go away.

No money is thrown at them before they get to be in the situation they are in. They are homeless because they lack funds. They cannot afford insurance or reliably access medical care. If there are public services available to them, they may not know they have access to them, or they may be under-served by them.

You might not like it, but there are people with mental illnesses who either need someone to be a full time carer for them

I have suggested multiple times that they be given all social supports that are available to them. If they require that, they should be given that option.

The other option is you just let them die on the streets, maybe killing some other people along the way.

Your characterization of people suffering from mental illness or homeless people in general being violent is not reflected by the facts. People with schizophrenia are more likely to be the VICTIMS of a crime, than be the perpetrator.

If you read my initial comment in the thread, you would have seen me saying this:

If somebody is unable to provide for their needs, give them the ability to do so. Provide food, real housing, actual medical care, and an option for outpatient mental health care for them to recover if they are not in crisis.

Even in the comment you are responding to I said this:

In the latter situation, the best you can do is try to earn their trust and ensure they are provided an environment where they feel safe - providing them with every social support and alternative that they should be entitled to explore for their betterment.

I meant housing.

Nowhere in the article does it suggest that one needs to be psychotic or schizophrenic, only that they appear mentally ill to first responders. They are not able to diagnose this.

Even if you refuse to read the article, the subtext here on Lemmy reads:

The foundation of the new policy is that New York state will be able to authorize first responders to forcibly hospitalize mentally ill New Yorkers who cannot meet their own basic needs such as food, shelter or medical care.

There are economic and societal reasons for individuals to not be able to meet those needs.