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.
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.
If they are actively violent and have committed a crime, hold them until their (expedited) court date (while providing them the option to explore support/therapy and/or access to spiritual counselors), record examinations by psychiatrists/perform them with outside/impartial observation, give the accused legal representation, and let publicly observable courts decide their fate. The option of a jury, witness/family/etc. testimony, and second opinions is imperative to their human rights.
If they have committed no crime (homelessness or being unable to provide for your needs is not a crime), are not violent, and are not a direct threat to themselves or others (and there is no concrete evidence that they will be) - there’s nothing you should be able to do to violate their will.
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.
“Let them die on the streets” is your answer, apparently.
If you read my initial comment in the thread, you would have seen me saying this:
Even in the comment you are responding to I said this:
I meant housing.
So what housing are they being given for free? There an overabundance of free government owned houses just sitting around in NYC to put severely mentally ill homeless people in?
Putting them in an institution until they get better is providing housing and services btw.
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.
If there are over a MILLION vacant houses, and 350k (or slighty more) homeless people, what the fuck are we doing?
Vacant does not mean government owned. Homeowners can do whatever they want with their homes, including leaving them vacant. So again, what free housing would be used to house all these people? Also the way you describe this, it would be ripe for abuse by people who just want a free house wouldn’t it? Just don’t pay your rent and get taken away to be given a free house and food and all your bills paid!
See above.
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.
Are you seriously arguing for renting and no social safety net? If rent was affordable and fair, it’d be another story.
Sure, if the people that own them wanted to sell them.
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?
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.
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.
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.