![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 6 of 6. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by 64bowtie on November 12, 2004, at 22:23:07
Lar,
Thanx for the steady hand on the "Drugging Children" thread. However, we have a bigger problem here in California. An estimate of 70% to 80% of all prisoners (2 plus year sentences) are diagnosably "mentally ill". The prattle about is that, "Sure, someone who holds up a bank must be crazy!" ....end of intelligent discussion!
During the Reagan Administration as Governor, most all inpatient mental health was eliminated. Purpose was to save tax dollars. These abysmal institutions cost $3k to $4k per year per patient. Today, same folks go through the "crim-jus" system such that the first year is $100k, and each additional year is $40k per patient per year.
I'm not going to pretend to know if or how much therapy goes on in prison. What does happen is prisons are "incubators for craft crime". So, even when the "patients" get out, they cost society even more.
Some argue that new prisons are good for the communities they open near since the bring high paying jobs and a market for local products. The mindless expense for keeping the "bad-guys" outta sight and thus outta-mind, isn't worth the cost.
Now the State is planning three more State run men's prisons to be openned in the Central Valley. There are already 10 new men's prisons. And crime is increasing asymptotically. I submit that prisoner crime-skill levels getting better, is a large part of the increase.
I don't have a solution, exactly. I only ask the open-handed question, what do we do next?
Rod
Posted by gardenergirl on November 13, 2004, at 12:37:20
In reply to Larry Hoover, I see a bigger problem, posted by 64bowtie on November 12, 2004, at 22:23:07
Hi Rod,
Does your state have a Mental Health Courts demonstration project anywhere? Congress just passed the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act (S. 1194) offered jointly by Congressman Ted Strickland (D, OH) and Senator Mike Dewine (R, OH). The president signed this on 10-30-04. The purpose of this legislation is to provide mental health courts which route mentally ill offenders into treatment in lieu of or in conjunction with prison sentences.Rep. Strickland and Sen. Dewine initiated a demonstration project bill for this which was due to expire this year. They sought renewed funding, and Congress authorized a $50 million budget for this, as the demonstration projects were showing positive results to date.
Co-sponsors of this bill were
Sen Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] - 6/5/2003
Sen Domenici, Pete V. [R-NM] - 6/5/2003
Sen Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL] - 8/1/2003
Sen Grassley, Charles E. [R-IA] - 6/5/2003
Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] - 8/1/2003
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. [D-VT] - 6/5/2003
Sen Murray, Patty [D-WA] - 9/8/2004I think this is a good start. I've already sent emails thanking my legislators for their support of this bill. I noticed that the co-sponsors are both republicans and democrats. That also is nice to see.
Just to be advocational (is that a word?) ;)
gg
Posted by 64bowtie on November 13, 2004, at 14:47:01
In reply to Jumping in, posted by gardenergirl on November 13, 2004, at 12:37:20
> Just to be advocational (is that a word?) ;)
GG,
'tis now; you made it so!!! Sooon, in dictionaries around the World will be the adjective, "advocational", and next to it, your mug shot...
jus' teas'n'
Rod
Posted by gardenergirl on November 14, 2004, at 0:06:43
In reply to 'tis now... » gardenergirl, posted by 64bowtie on November 13, 2004, at 14:47:01
Thanks, I tend to make being advocational an avocation. ;)
I'll get off my soapbox for now.
gg
Posted by 64bowtie on November 14, 2004, at 0:48:13
In reply to Re: 'tis now... » 64bowtie, posted by gardenergirl on November 14, 2004, at 0:06:43
Posted by AuntieMel on November 16, 2004, at 8:21:32
In reply to Jumping in, posted by gardenergirl on November 13, 2004, at 12:37:20
The city I'm in, and I think the state, have a newly instituted "drug court." The idea is to get the people that commit petty drug related crimes into treatment instead of jail. They usually get deferred sentencing but are closely monitored for a considerable amount of time.
The cases are sent directly there, so it's not as spotty and dependent on which judge you get as the old system was.
It's been slow to get off the ground, but I think it's a HUGE step in the right direction.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.