[leftfieldto]

If someone is a danger to themselves and others they can be forced into treatment. But I'd be willing to bet that most mentally ill people would love to have counselling and prescriptions available.

Too often this conversation devolves into people being either bleeding hearts or completely heartless. The reality is somewhere in between. We need to have the services and housing available for people to be healthy and safe. At the same time, unstable people shouldn't be allowed to monopolize parks and put the public in danger. Those aren't opposing views. They're two sides of the same coin.


Institutionalization isn't a one size fits all solution, it's really only for extreme cases. But those extreme cases do exist.

Of course, most mentally ill people can live normal, independent (or semi-independent) lives with proper support and medication. The key is society actually being willing to pay for that.

I actually agree, with the caveat that those needed institutions are largely non-existent at this point, save for CAMH. So, for most, the only "option" is arrest and jail time. Which is a LOT more expensive than social services.

 

[Northern Light]

I actually agree, with the caveat that those needed institutions are largely non-existent at this point, save for CAMH. So, for most, the only "option" is arrest and jail time. Which is a LOT more expensive than social services.

We need to be urgently building additional institutional beds; some for short-term treatment (in-patient for 10 days or less); some for medium term treatment (4-8 months) and some for extended/perpetual care.

If government did the above, it would still take ~3 years to get significant new facilities up and running (very optimistically); and that presumes we have sufficient trained staff for that purpose.

Somewhere around 50% of Toronto's homeless suffer either from a mental illness, other than addition, or from addiction.

That would suggest a number of around 6,000 persons.

If even 1/4 of those required medium or longer-term care, that's 1,500 people, and probably no fewer than 750 net new beds required permanently.

 

[just east of the creek]

We need to be urgently building additional institutional beds; some for short-term treatment (in-patient for 10 days or less); some for medium term treatment (4-8 months) and some for extended/perpetual care.

If government did the above, it would still take ~3 years to get significant new facilities up and running (very optimistically); and that presumes we have sufficient trained staff for that purpose.

Somewhere around 50% of Toronto's homeless suffer either from a mental illness, other than addition, or from addiction.

That would suggest a number of around 6,000 persons.

If even 1/4 of those required medium or longer-term care, that's 1,500 people, and probably no fewer than 750 net new beds required permanently.

Before we get to carried away in generalizing about what people who struggle with mental illnesses wish, prefer or would like, it might be prudent to save those generalizations to those with qualifications that can speak to these challenges. I say this as my experience with family members with mental illnesses within a larger family group is very contrary to most of the assumptions made above.

Start with the fact that anyone involuntarily committed to treatment/assessment can be in this process for no more then 72 hours before release.

Make no mistake that mental illness in any form is a cruel, cruel, cruel punishment on anyone afflicted and those around them who love, care and would wish for so much better.

But yes, the city (and by extension, any city, region, town etc), the province could do so much more in terms of housing and treatment interaction to get people off the streets (if they will go, and there will be a % that will not) and into situations where they are safer, there is a chance for better continuing care and interaction with care workers, but also, the city is safer and interactions with other city residents could have a chance of being more positive.

 

[Northern Light]

Before we get to carried away in generalizing about what people who struggle with mental illnesses wish, prefer or would like, it might be prudent to save those generalizations to those with qualifications that can speak to these challenges. I say this as my experience with family members with mental illnesses within a larger family group is very contrary to most of the assumptions made above.

I don't know that I made a great deal of assumptions.

Here are my assumptions:

- We have significantly fewer beds now than we did 30 years ago.

- The population of Ontario has increased ~50% in those intervening years, meaning the bed count per 1000 residents is lower still.

- Currently in Ontario, there are significant waits for in-patient, addiction treatment, when professionally referred and consented to.

Start with the fact that anyone involuntarily committed to treatment/assessment can be in this process for no more then 72 hours before release.

^^ This can be changed, BC, under an NDP goverment is moving towards compulsory treatment in some cases.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/david-eby-involuntary-treatment-criticism-1.6664848

That is not to suggest this is the appropriate course of action in every case, or most cases; but it surely is in some.

Make no mistake that mental illness in any form is a cruel, cruel, cruel punishment on anyone afflicted and those around them who love, care and would wish for so much better.

I know.

But yes, the city (and by extension, any city, region, town etc), the province could do so much more in terms of housing and treatment interaction to get people off the streets (if they will go, and there will be a % that will not) and into situations where they are safer, there is a chance for better continuing care and interaction with care workers, but also, the city is safer and interactions with other city residents could have a chance of being more positive.

That's a perfectly reasonable statement, but any which way, more treatment capacity is required. Be that of any duration or type.

 

[just east of the creek]

I don't know that I made a great deal of assumptions.

Here are my assumptions:

- We have significantly fewer beds now than we did 30 years ago.

- The population of Ontario has increased ~50% in those intervening years, meaning the bed count per 1000 residents is lower still.

- Currently in Ontario, there are significant waits for in-patient, addiction treatment, when professionally referred and consented to.




^^ This can be changed, BC, under an NDP goverment is moving towards compulsory treatment in some cases.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/david-eby-involuntary-treatment-criticism-1.6664848

That is not to suggest this is the appropriate course of action in every case, or most cases; but it surely is in some.



I know.



That's a perfectly reasonable statement, but any which way, more treatment capacity is required. Be that of any duration or type.

My apologies NL, I should have been more specific when I used the word ‘assumptions’. There were a couple of previous posts that i felt strayed into larger assumptions, but I should have been specific.

Mental illness is a constant wearing, frustrating, expensive, often depressing and aggravating struggle for caregivers and loved ones who choose to remain in the struggle. That too often end up in conclusions that are tragic and very final.

Your observations are accurate and frustratingly so.