Texas Sheriffs Worry Over Proposed Mental Health Cuts — Department of State Health Services.
Sheriff Pat Burnett is fed up, and he’s not going to do it anymore. He’s not going to put two of his deputies on the road for 12 hours each way from Van Zandt County in East Texas to El Paso — paying hundreds of dollars for overtime, gas, lodging and food — just to find a free bed for a mentally ill inmate.
“We now refuse to do that,” Burnett says. “It’s not only bad for the patient. It’s also bad for the taxpayer.”
Budget shortfalls.
The number of beds at Texas’ state mental hospitals has gradually declined from 2,800 in 1996 to about 2,400 now. As the number of beds shrinks, treatment waiting lists expand. That means treatment delays for both law-abiding Texans and criminal offenders with mental illness.
Without appropriate treatment, mentally ill Texans often land in a costly cycle of hospitalization, homelessness and incarceration.
Over at Uppity’s we were discussing the Panama School Board shooting. Clay Duke said his wife was terminated. Money problems.
Clay Duke, the Florida gunman who opened fire at a school board, ranted against the rich in what appears to have been a final manifesto on Facebook.
Duke, a 56-year-old ex-convict, was mentally ill and had been planning the attack for some time, police said today.
Money problems or unable to cope with his bipolar personality? I have a strong suspicion that we will be seeing more of these problems. What happened in the eighties when Ronald Reagan was POTUS was not the downfall of mental healthcare, it all began unraveling much earlier.
THE policy that led to the release of most of the nation’s mentally ill patients from the hospital to the community is now widely regarded as a major failure. Sweeping critiques of the policy, notably the recent report of the American Psychiatric Association, have spread the blame everywhere, faulting politicians, civil libertarian lawyers and psychiatrists.
Psychiatrists, lawyers and politicians, YIKES!!!!!
”The bureaucrat-psychiatrists realized that there was political and financial overpromise,” he said.
Dr. Brown, then an executive of the National Institute of Mental Health and now president of Hahnemann University in Philadelphia, stated candidly in an interview: ”Yes, the doctors were overpromising for the politicians. The doctors did not believe that community care would cure schizophrenia, and we did allow ourselves to be somewhat misrepresented.”
”They ended up with everything but the kitchen sink without the issue of long-term funding being settled,” he said. ”That was the overpromising.”
This won’t end well, so what’s the answer? Drugs? More Money?
December 16, 2010 at 11:48 am
Sounds to me like those Texas deputies are doing a job that should really be the responsibility of the State Department of Health (or whoever it is that oversees the mental health system in Texas).
-MS
December 16, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Isn’t it amazing, law enforcement would do their job?
December 16, 2010 at 11:52 am
I believe that we are almost at the bottom of a very slippery slope. But what is the answer? We can’t go back to the horrible insane asylums.
December 16, 2010 at 12:40 pm
We cannot go back to that PMM, but throwing entitlements at these people is not a way to go either.
December 16, 2010 at 6:17 pm
Agreed mcnorman- we can not keep throwing money at problems and expect the almighty dollar to cure everything.
There are severely mentally ill people who should be permanently hospitalized. But not drugged into zombie states to make it easy on the attendants.
I remember when MA kicked a lot of the mental patients out on the street. It got really sad and very dangerous for quite a while to walk in the area around Boston Common (in broad daylight- it was always dangerous at night.)
December 16, 2010 at 6:57 pm
this has also happened here in NC during previous recessions. there is a 335 acre mental facility in the capital (Dorothea Dix, named after the famed MA activist) that developers have coveted for many many years and they are about to get it; they claim the mentally ill will be relocated elsewhere…
doubtless the up to 200 year old plus oaks, pecans and one enormous ginkgo (one of the largest in the state with a 1.8m diameter trunk) will grace rich out of state f#ckers condos and offices where desired and be bulldozed where undesired.
http://www.friendsofdix.org/fact-sheet-friends-of-dorothea-dix-park/
http://raleighnature.com/2008/11/01/slow-fall-at-dix/
December 16, 2010 at 8:05 pm
Nom, where is the historical society on this? Truly historical societies in general can make it so difficult for any enterprise to take over such places. Of course, if their hands are being greased?
December 16, 2010 at 8:00 pm
Many are functional with supervision. The government does a crappy job taking care of these people. The other half of the problem is that the money to be made from entitlement is big money (I always called it sympathy $$$.) It funds all of the administrators, workers, and other necessities. It does not buy human compassion. This is our problem as a society. We are the “me” society. We are suffering the consequences of that. Don’t get me wrong…it has been long in the making.
I remember a time when the elders of the family were taken care of at home. They gave perspective to the family. I know it is hard, but as Americans go, we are easily prepared to pay someone else to take care of this problem for us. It is a disgrace.
People used to not “need” to have so many trinkets and family meant more. I find it terribly sad that we can’t suck it up so to speak and do what is correct. Like I said, throwing money at the problem is not the solution.
December 16, 2010 at 9:51 pm
“I remember a time when the elders of the family were taken care of at home.”
yes, but women rarely had jobs then: that elder care was probably principally accomplished by women.
December 17, 2010 at 5:06 am
Ah yes mcnorman. The days when elders stayed with the family until the end. Our Nana lived primarily with an Aunt but traveled around to all her children. She would come visit us for a month or so, then to another Aunt or Uncle. Geez, I can even remember her coming when my youngest brother was born.
My Mom lives with my oldest Sis. She doesn’t travel so much anymore- but lived out here with us for a long time and visited the others.
What was that called? The nuclear family? Nom is correct when she states that women did not have work outside the home in the numbers we have. But it is really only one generation gone since elders were with us until the end.
December 17, 2010 at 7:04 am
PMM, I have seen children move out of state and leave their lone relative in a fancy home dying. They come back every so often and have the audacity to tell me not to mention the different locations because heaven forbid that some semblance of sanity might strike and the person will figure out that they have been dumped. These children also are the first to bitch and sue when the caretakers are given substantial gifts from these people. What did they expect by leaving someone who doesn’t have any idea about what is going on? Sometimes, the caretakers are soaking them for every penny, jewelry, property etc. I realize that it is not always an answer to take in a parent. I’m just shocked at how easily that has become the answer. It seems that struggling in life is not a lesson, but a pain that must be thrown money at. Nom is right about yesteryear, but I see plenty of males raising children now while the female is earning a wage.
December 17, 2010 at 7:38 am
my great grandfather and my grandfather’s brother and I believe his children lived with my grandfather (they were both widowers from age and tb, respectively).
unfortunately they were apparently hateful parasites, and a great burden on my grandmother who had very poor health and 9 kids of her own and a husband to take care of already.
I wouldn’t go back to being the woman in that set up for any freaking thing.
It’s one’s own responsibility to maintain one’s health and upkeep. That’s the way I like it. I don’t want others taking care of me.
If children want to take care of their elders, that’s fine; there are families that are very close; but not all old people are nice people one would want in one’s home, either.
December 17, 2010 at 11:18 am
There are many instances where there is no choice. Personal responsibility does not include work accidents or other such events. It also does not preclude genetic problems which can manifest at anytime. I’m happy that you are fine, but what happens to you if you were left in a vegetative state?
Sorry about the relatives, we can’t pick them…that’s for sure. I can’t tell you that I would LOVE to take care of anyone other than myself Nom. If the economy slowed to Depression era and we all had to live under the same roof, I would have to do it.
December 17, 2010 at 2:44 pm
I’ve got a living will: no machine sh#t.
December 17, 2010 at 9:32 am
I agree with PMM, throwing money at problems never solve anything. It’s the same with education in the US. The unions keep demanding more money to “fix” the schools and education continues to decline in the US.
The question is, what to do with the patients who need help? Sticking them in the old insane asylums is absolutely out of the question. But I think what we have to do is quit treating mental illness as some kind of “family secret” that no one wants to discuss. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard of school counselors who are aware of kids who are mentally unstable and even dangerous, and they remain quiet. Even within families, the don’t talk about the family member who is mentally ill, but have no problems discussing a family member who is fighting cancer. Its time to take the stigma off of mental illness and bring it out into the open and treat it like any other illness.
December 17, 2010 at 10:50 am
“…and treat it like any other illness.”
But it’s not like any other illness. Mental illness is diagnosed by symptomology and the exclusion of known physical causes: it is by definition not a scientific diagnosis. There’s no such thing as a mental illness: it’s a construct. Physical ailments (including defects to the brain and its functions) can and do affect the brain, but there is and cannot by definition be any provable instance of a mental illness.
There’s a reason for this construct.
The label of mental illness has been used historically and is used today for political and other social repression (unsurprisingly its chiefest victims are women and minority cultures) across a spectrum of different cultures. It is also used for financial gain. The unscientific diagnosis of mental illness is a cornucopia for the insurance and chemical industries.
This is made possible only by the lack of provable criteria for a mental illness. It is possible to label pretty much anyone, and then either incarcerate one “for the common good” and or begin feeding one dangerous mind altering drugs. Then anything the person labeled says or does while under the influence of those drugs can be used to corroborate the “illness”.
So one is not going to see a removal of the stigma associated with the construct of mental illness until people recognize that it is a construct and refuse to accept diagnoses based on anything but facts and insist upon the heeling of the industries that profit from the labels.
December 17, 2010 at 11:33 am
I think that treating the illness is no different than any other Nom. I was in that field for a bit and unfortunately throwing pills at the problem doesn’t work either. It helps, but people have a choice to not take meds. This population should be cared for properly. It is VERY unfortunate that lawyers, psychiatrists and politicians have been the ones creating solutions. I understand why it happens, no one wants to take this on. It is the elephant in the room.
I have always believed that much labeling has been created for this population without much foresight. We absolutely must not return to the age of the lobotomy, but we must accept that society has continuously dumped on this population. Don’t get me wrong, I believe that much of what has been done to date has not been malignant, but throwing money at the problem with entitlement is not going to do much for those in need compared to those who will make money off their needs.
December 17, 2010 at 2:52 pm
“…throwing pills at the problem doesn’t work either. It helps, but people have a choice to not take meds.”
not everyone does have a choice and the drugs are not benign: especially when given to people who have nothing at all wrong with them but have been incarcerated in a mental ward by relatives who want them out of the way. I don’t think many people realize just how common this is: it’s hard to fabricate a serious enough criminal charge to get someone locked up but it isn’t difficult at all especially with a little payout to get someone locked up in a psych ward. Families do this to other family members all the freaking time.
http://psychrights.org/force_of_law.htm
December 17, 2010 at 3:20 pm
That is only one facet of this. I’ve seen families begin working on an insanity declaration years before they take the older person out of the loop.
December 17, 2010 at 3:28 pm
I don’t think that this is as much of a problem as the millions who are in the gray zone and can’t navigate their lives easily. It is those people that are at great risk without having learned coping skills.
December 19, 2010 at 5:25 pm
http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-genetic-basis-brain-diseases.html
this is fantastic: brain disease that’s provable or not, not “mental illness” that can’t be proven but can be affixed as a label.
December 19, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I will venture to say that neuroscience journals would take issue with some of these statements.
December 19, 2010 at 7:02 pm
I don’t mean now, of course, but this genetic analysis is definitely a first step, imo in the right direction
December 19, 2010 at 7:52 pm
We’ll see, time will tell.
December 17, 2010 at 11:25 am
It’s the land of PC Nunly. I think that much of what ails society today has quite a bit to do with the coping mechanisms set in place early on. That usually happens in the home if we are lucky. I had three severely retarded (yes, I use that term because that is what they were) cousins who died very young. Their lives were lived in cribs until they succumbed to death in their twenties. The entire family would take turns taking care of the children. One was able to learn the most rudimentary skills which was helpful. There was an enormous amount of family interaction. They were never hidden, but they didn’t function well in public. It is unfortunate that much of what happened eventually led to their demise ie they couldn’t exercise proper hygiene and of course that led to other problems. Add to that that they also had cerebral palsy. It was tough, but I can say that we all learned quite a bit from watching the family take care of them. The interaction is so important. They might never have lived as long as they did if they had been institutionalized which is what the pediatricians had wanted from the beginning.
December 17, 2010 at 8:32 pm
“I don’t think that this is as much of a problem as the millions who are in the gray zone and can’t navigate their lives easily. It is those people that are at great risk without having learned coping skills.”
I have a concern that the ultimate goal for these is not equalization but sameness. Natural variation is a good thing, a trait that is undesirable in one setting may be valuable elsewhere. Traits that are overwhelmingly bad are generally lethal before birth; in cases where they do not present until late (after maturity to breed) they can be noted as running in a family line or perhaps tested for where available and the members of that line or known possessors can choose not to breed. Not everything has to be “fixed”.
People don’t have any sense about what is valuable or not anyway. Look at corn. http://farmindustrynews.com/corn-hybids/shallow-gene-pool