ToDaZeD CaliZuela *facepalm*

[another] sticky question edition

San FranFreakshow [City and County thereof], famous nationwide for PoopApps [eg; Snap Crap], has decided they must do *something* about their “homeless” population. This is *something* so they did it — along with the County of Los Angeles and the County of San Diego.

Eight months after San Francisco authorized a new program meant to compel persons suffering from mental illness and substance abuse into treatment… The City has yet to conserve anyone…

“compel persons suffering from substance abuse into treatment”

“compel persons suffering from mental illness into treatment”

“compel persons into treatment”

Humans do not yet know how to “cure” the common cold: how is it imagined that we have the knowledge — or even the ability — to “cure” the infinitely more complex and difficult issues of mental illness or addiction? The simpler ‘answer’ of “treatment” is still a hit or miss. Recovery to the point of self-sufficiency and being able to contribute is …not the most common outcome for “treatment.”

It is an extremely knotty, thorny problem; how does a Free society of Civilized individuals treat its most vulnerable members?

[NB a good national timeline of the issue here, including this interesting notation:
1975 - The film, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest,” hit theaters. Jack Nicholson's Oscar-winning portrayal of a mistreated patient further turned public opinion against mental hospitals.
]

OTOH, the pretense of “cure” plus legal compulsion might be a handy bucket into which one can disappear help …difficult individuals. Maybe with some nice Occupational Therapy separating recycling or making iPhones and sneakers?

In the late 1950′s – 60′s, CA changed its approach to the question of ‘what do we do about people who cannot take care of themselves’ away from long term commitment to mental hospitals. [Lanterman-Petris-Short Act 1967 [LPS] effectively ended involuntary civil confinement of mental patients in California] It was realized that the institutions to which the severely mentally ill were involuntary committed were functioning poorly, at best. The idea was to decentralize and focus on creating the necessary medical facilities more locally. Somehow that didn’t work out …because funding. …or something.

CZ currently has a 72 hour psychiatric hold called “5150″ to address [in CaliZueleeze, our own peculiar language]: “a person who is incapable of caring for the person’s own health and well-being due to a serious mental illness and/or substance use disorder”. “The person’s”; cuz, see, “the person” might rather use ‘pers’, ‘vis’, ‘fairself’, …ad nauseum. Yes. Written In The Law That Way. Teh Iron, eh?

SB1045 kicks in for a 5150 frequent flyer [8x/year+] [You call that "insensitive"? hold my beer.]. Conservatorship for an individual terminates after one [1] year with mechanisms to reestablish via the courts. Plus huge funding drains & ginormous bureaucracy.

SB40 the conservatorship would automatically terminate 6 months, rather than one year with mechanisms to reestablish via the courts. Both seem to expire 1/1/2024.

…and somewhere along the road I missed where a county’s Mental Health Department has now morphed into Behavioral Health Department. Where “substance abuse” is now “substance abuse disorder“.

Now SF is looking to walk backwards by focusing on the involuntary commitment aspect of the Law before creating even vaguely reasonable facilities, beds, or treatment protocols/personnel. Where they gonna put those people is …a puzzle. Hell — they can’t even properly gather stats on the target population.

There were limitations to the data, however, and the report said that the “true count” of 5150s during this time period “is likely higher, though it is not possible to approximate at this time.”

…The Department of Public Health, which oversees the program, has estimated that 50 to 100 people would meet the criteria for conservatorship. …There were at least 5,754 emergency 5150 holds in San Francisco during the fiscal year 2018-19 that were attributed to 3,810 different people…

So a program to limit citizens’ freedoms has limitations to the data

What could possibly go worng?

6 Comments!

  1. DougM (just entertainin' myself in this here sandbox)
    Posted January 28, 2020 at 11:48 pm |

    I suspect that a big part of the CAgovs not being able to solve the problem is their need for (D) voter registrations.

  2. rickn8or
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 11:32 am |

    If naught else, CZ can serve as a shining example of what not to do to fix a problem.

  3. Veeshir
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 3:46 pm |

    What could possibly go worng?

    As will all things CA, the true question is “What could go right?”

    Of course, to answer that you need to try to figure out why the pols are doing this. Is it to appease unions? Greenies? Illegal aliens?

    Whenever the left starts talking about mental illness I assume they’re talking about sane people who don’t buy into their insanity so this is probably so they can put gun-owners (owning a gun is a prima-facie evidence of mental illness and insecurity) in prisons with soft walls and wrap-around jackets.

  4. Blake
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 5:31 pm |

    ^What veeshir said.

  5. Dave
    Posted January 29, 2020 at 6:26 pm |

    Mohammed Nuru, head of SF Public Works, arrested in FBI corruption probe.

  6. Claire: rebellious pink pig with car keys - and a *cause*
    Posted January 30, 2020 at 9:15 am |

    San FranFreakShow –> San FranShitteShow