As an independent (the only logical position on the spectrum, IMHO) I'm glad to see Joe Klein ladle out blame on both wings, left and right. I disagree that Charlotte is a Trump diversionary plan. If it is, Epstein is the left's diversionary plan. But Joe's exegesis of the murder on the train is correct. Ever since my ex-brother-in-law threw a concrete block at me while he was in the throes of a prednisone psychosis, I have believed society made a horrible wrong term years ago, when psych patients were "streeted." This isn't about race; it's about crazy, to use the old and now dishonored term. The legacy media is horrified by the video and they should be. It points out the failure of society to figure out homelessness. The knife-wielder could have been white and produced the same result and the left knows their solutions to street psychos (to coin a term that is deliberately inflammatory) are what brought on the innocent death of a young woman. I am inflamed because the only difference between the victim and my granddaughter is my granddaughter has red hair and pale skin. She should be able to live her life in her favorite city, Washington D.C., without evil leering over her shoulder with death in his brain. The power of that image will not fade, even if the heirloom news sources do manage to keep it off their screens and headlines. That's why we have the alternative means now that we didn't have decades ago, when the mistakes started to compound into mayhem.
Dems should, by all means, add a 23 year old birthday card, to their Jan 6th repertoire, along with an "Orange Man Bad" refrain. No one in the US believes Trump is moral. They believe if anything damning about Trump was in the Epstein files, Dems would have released it long ago, with all the trappings of a Tom Cruise blockbuster.
The Koreans are a great example of US immigration laws being blatantly ignored by the US federal government for so long, multinational corporations no longer bother with the paperwork.
That Dems believe the murder of a 23 year old war refugee, recorded in real time like a horror flick, is only upsetting for Reps because the killer is Black, perhaps explains the crime gap more clearly than any think tank paper.
When someone is stabbed in the neck multiple times, while minding their own business on public transport, the skin hue of the attacker is not of premier importance. This woman was prey. 14 times the murderer stood before a judge, and 13 times he walked out, with only a short stint in prison for a bank robbery. His Mother asked the Court to commit him, after he beat his sister half to death. The Mother took the time and effort to make a legal, documented request. She swore the insane man was a threat to himself and others .
Yet in what can only be described as a South Park like Kangaroo Court, a 14th Judge let the madman walk out of yet another Court, after he pinky promised to see a therapist. Who could have possibly seen this tragedy coming?
Nor is the violence an oddity. The guy who lit a New York woman on fire and watched her burn to death, had a similar background. Ditto for the 2 illegal immigrants that tortured a Chicago man to death in his own basement, for the crime of being gay. The number of repeat child offenders, who get not just a 2nd or 3rd attempt at raping children, but a 4th and 5th, is mind blowing. Skin hue is about as relevant as the color of the shirt perpetrators are wearing when raping and murdering.
If Dems were smart they would demand the head of the Judge on a spike, as a warning to others who put Party above the safety of Americans, and in the process elect more Reps. Otherwise, Dems should remember 2 words. Willy Horton.
I seem to recall that Ronald Reagan played some role in the closure of many mental institutions. I hadn't realized that progressives were largely to blame. Is this alternate history?
Odd that this post pops up right after I posted a comment assigning blame to the other side. I lived through the years when decisions about main-lining psychiatric patients were being made. I don't recall that Reagan was in the forefront of proponents like Bazelon. And if he was, there's plenty of blame to go around for everybody involved. That social experiment deserves to be recognized as the disaster it is.
That “social experiment” was, in fact, never implemented. Mr. Klein is incorrect when he says the plan was to put people in halfway houses. The plan was to transfer mental health care to community mental health clinics for those who didn’t need higher level hospitalization. But it was never adequately funded, leaving many mentally ill persons to fall through the cracks and end up homeless on the street. That’s the tragedy, not the concept. I will also say that the criteria for involuntary admission:Danger to self, danger to others, and inability to care for self is often ignored and left to judges, not mental health professionals to decide who meet that criteria.
Not sure why the timing or content of my post is "odd", it merely reflects my limited knowledge of the subject. I'm sure that you must have more detailed experience and I will do more homework on the topic. Thanks.
Bruce, my "odd" was just a reflection of old battles. Right and left have argued over who was to blame for a long time. My take is that the impetus for change came from the left. The left, seeing now how it has played out, wants to blame Reagan. It was mutual, as most policy fuck-ups tend to be. By all means, head back into that era. It deserves several books. In my era (I am 82) we used to call the street folks "bums" or "hoboes." Those types have become cultural icons, guys riding the rails or driving their jalopies from Oklahoma to the Golden State. The reality is much more complex and the problems have grown exponentially. Someday I'll do a piece on the "hobo" who became the Phantom of Santa Ana Canyon. He lived out of garbage cans in Southern California, lived in hidden-holes in the brush, and popped up regularly to throw rocks at cars passing on the freeway. Then one day he dropped a piece of concrete rip-rap from an overpass and killed a woman whose car passed at the wrong time. I still remember the story as a preview of coming attractions. allbest, elm
At nearly 80, I'm in your age cohort. My only experience with mental institutions came during a freshman psychology class visit to the state mental hospital in Winfield, Kansas. It was truly a horrible place, clearly underfunded and a sobering reminder that Bedlam was not nearly as much ancient history as some would like to think. As an FDR liberal because my grandparents and parents were saved from penury by the New Deal, I can honestly say that my inclination was to close those kind of institutions down strictly from a humanitarian perspective, not so much from the progressive perspective. I wasn't smart enough then (or likely now) to envision a replacement for the horrors of places such as that, but there must be one. Our prison system isn't it but it is currently carrying and heavy load.
Politics, economics, and ideology all played a role in the decline of psychiatric hospitals, but probably the main factor was the introduction of effective antipsychotic drugs. The drugs even now are far from perfect, but they allow most former inmates of the loonie bin to manage themselves independently. But some still need involuntary commitment, and generally better a hospital than a prison.
I understand about Bedlam. My father was an alcoholic who sobered up with AA and then became a counselor to allies at a Minnesota state hospital specially aimed at using AA in institutional settings. I don't like Bedlam as a solution. On the other hand, take a look at the homeless encampments that have sprung up as the alternative. Take a look at the mentally-ill and addicted who are living rough outside of the cities. I'm not even sure that Bedlam was as horrible as we might have thought it was fifty years ago. There were gradations of the nightmare and when I see the huge encampment in the forest just off the main road in Lake Tahoe, I shake my head. It gets wintery yet there are folks who prefer it to living in the coastal cities where they get rousted more frequently. It is a horrible, horrible situation.
Reagan left office nearly 40 years ago, and has been dead for 2 decades. Whatever he did or did not do, Americans have had more than sufficient time to make any necessary policy changes.
Agreed. My comment was meant to challenge the notion that it was primarily a liberal effort to close down mental institutions that led America to its current situation. I'm sure that there is plenty of blame to go around. Our prisons have large percentages of people who need mental illness treatment, not incarceration but we still don't have an infrastructure to fill that need. As usual, it's a funding challenge that's a tough political sell.
Bruce--I think, if true--and I do vaguely remember it--this happened when Reagan was governor. But remember, he was for abortion then, too. Certainly, conservatives "saved" money by closing the institutions down, as I mention above. But if you read The Best Minds, it's pretty clear that the movement was led by the liberal academic elite.
A clear but sad vision of why Trump and Co. won. It will likely take one or two more elections, before a serious change is begun, alas. The economy might come through or provide the means for a whole new direction, which have even less faith in, as it is likely to be even more skewed towards a given point with little if any restraint.
Although details will vary by state, even today mentally ill people CAN be hospitalized, indefinitely (although no longer cheaply in horrible conditions), if there is "clear and convincing evidence" (Addington v. Texas) that they are dangerous. The Charlotte murderer had a violent past, but what was the evidence, prior to his horrific act, and known to authorities, that he was currently dangerous, or at least at serious risk of being violent in the foreseeable future? (There may well have been such evidence, which then should have been acted upon; but I have not yet seen it in reports about the case. And if there was no such evidence, what are the broader implications of this horrible event?)
His rap sheet was the evidence. There are too many cases like this. Once diagnosed as a violent schizophrenic, a person should be assumed dangerous and locked up--unless it can be proved otherwise.
It depends on the details of the rap sheet, including how recently he committed any serious violence (while not confined). And the notion that a once "violent schizophrenic" has to prove that he or she is no longer dangerous in order to be released flies in the face of a clear Supreme Court ruling...Addington v. Texas. (As Casey Stengel would say, "you can look it up".)
His mother went into Court requesting a Civil Commitment, after he seriously beat his sister. The Mother swore, based on her personal experience , he was a threat to himself and others. The sister's injuries were evidence of his propensity for violence.
The poor Mother did everything right. Many families know of the potential harm, but never warn anyone. They never go to Court and ask for someone to be committed. The Mother jumped thru complicated and expensive hoops to try and prevent harm, and the Court ignored her. Now a girl is dead . Some mistakes should never be allowed to happen, and they certainly should never have the opportunity to be repeated. The Judges who failed the victim, the Mother and the public at large, should not be allowed to continue in their jobs.
As an independent (the only logical position on the spectrum, IMHO) I'm glad to see Joe Klein ladle out blame on both wings, left and right. I disagree that Charlotte is a Trump diversionary plan. If it is, Epstein is the left's diversionary plan. But Joe's exegesis of the murder on the train is correct. Ever since my ex-brother-in-law threw a concrete block at me while he was in the throes of a prednisone psychosis, I have believed society made a horrible wrong term years ago, when psych patients were "streeted." This isn't about race; it's about crazy, to use the old and now dishonored term. The legacy media is horrified by the video and they should be. It points out the failure of society to figure out homelessness. The knife-wielder could have been white and produced the same result and the left knows their solutions to street psychos (to coin a term that is deliberately inflammatory) are what brought on the innocent death of a young woman. I am inflamed because the only difference between the victim and my granddaughter is my granddaughter has red hair and pale skin. She should be able to live her life in her favorite city, Washington D.C., without evil leering over her shoulder with death in his brain. The power of that image will not fade, even if the heirloom news sources do manage to keep it off their screens and headlines. That's why we have the alternative means now that we didn't have decades ago, when the mistakes started to compound into mayhem.
Dems should, by all means, add a 23 year old birthday card, to their Jan 6th repertoire, along with an "Orange Man Bad" refrain. No one in the US believes Trump is moral. They believe if anything damning about Trump was in the Epstein files, Dems would have released it long ago, with all the trappings of a Tom Cruise blockbuster.
The Koreans are a great example of US immigration laws being blatantly ignored by the US federal government for so long, multinational corporations no longer bother with the paperwork.
That Dems believe the murder of a 23 year old war refugee, recorded in real time like a horror flick, is only upsetting for Reps because the killer is Black, perhaps explains the crime gap more clearly than any think tank paper.
When someone is stabbed in the neck multiple times, while minding their own business on public transport, the skin hue of the attacker is not of premier importance. This woman was prey. 14 times the murderer stood before a judge, and 13 times he walked out, with only a short stint in prison for a bank robbery. His Mother asked the Court to commit him, after he beat his sister half to death. The Mother took the time and effort to make a legal, documented request. She swore the insane man was a threat to himself and others .
Yet in what can only be described as a South Park like Kangaroo Court, a 14th Judge let the madman walk out of yet another Court, after he pinky promised to see a therapist. Who could have possibly seen this tragedy coming?
Nor is the violence an oddity. The guy who lit a New York woman on fire and watched her burn to death, had a similar background. Ditto for the 2 illegal immigrants that tortured a Chicago man to death in his own basement, for the crime of being gay. The number of repeat child offenders, who get not just a 2nd or 3rd attempt at raping children, but a 4th and 5th, is mind blowing. Skin hue is about as relevant as the color of the shirt perpetrators are wearing when raping and murdering.
If Dems were smart they would demand the head of the Judge on a spike, as a warning to others who put Party above the safety of Americans, and in the process elect more Reps. Otherwise, Dems should remember 2 words. Willy Horton.
I seem to recall that Ronald Reagan played some role in the closure of many mental institutions. I hadn't realized that progressives were largely to blame. Is this alternate history?
Odd that this post pops up right after I posted a comment assigning blame to the other side. I lived through the years when decisions about main-lining psychiatric patients were being made. I don't recall that Reagan was in the forefront of proponents like Bazelon. And if he was, there's plenty of blame to go around for everybody involved. That social experiment deserves to be recognized as the disaster it is.
That “social experiment” was, in fact, never implemented. Mr. Klein is incorrect when he says the plan was to put people in halfway houses. The plan was to transfer mental health care to community mental health clinics for those who didn’t need higher level hospitalization. But it was never adequately funded, leaving many mentally ill persons to fall through the cracks and end up homeless on the street. That’s the tragedy, not the concept. I will also say that the criteria for involuntary admission:Danger to self, danger to others, and inability to care for self is often ignored and left to judges, not mental health professionals to decide who meet that criteria.
Not sure why the timing or content of my post is "odd", it merely reflects my limited knowledge of the subject. I'm sure that you must have more detailed experience and I will do more homework on the topic. Thanks.
Bruce, my "odd" was just a reflection of old battles. Right and left have argued over who was to blame for a long time. My take is that the impetus for change came from the left. The left, seeing now how it has played out, wants to blame Reagan. It was mutual, as most policy fuck-ups tend to be. By all means, head back into that era. It deserves several books. In my era (I am 82) we used to call the street folks "bums" or "hoboes." Those types have become cultural icons, guys riding the rails or driving their jalopies from Oklahoma to the Golden State. The reality is much more complex and the problems have grown exponentially. Someday I'll do a piece on the "hobo" who became the Phantom of Santa Ana Canyon. He lived out of garbage cans in Southern California, lived in hidden-holes in the brush, and popped up regularly to throw rocks at cars passing on the freeway. Then one day he dropped a piece of concrete rip-rap from an overpass and killed a woman whose car passed at the wrong time. I still remember the story as a preview of coming attractions. allbest, elm
At nearly 80, I'm in your age cohort. My only experience with mental institutions came during a freshman psychology class visit to the state mental hospital in Winfield, Kansas. It was truly a horrible place, clearly underfunded and a sobering reminder that Bedlam was not nearly as much ancient history as some would like to think. As an FDR liberal because my grandparents and parents were saved from penury by the New Deal, I can honestly say that my inclination was to close those kind of institutions down strictly from a humanitarian perspective, not so much from the progressive perspective. I wasn't smart enough then (or likely now) to envision a replacement for the horrors of places such as that, but there must be one. Our prison system isn't it but it is currently carrying and heavy load.
Politics, economics, and ideology all played a role in the decline of psychiatric hospitals, but probably the main factor was the introduction of effective antipsychotic drugs. The drugs even now are far from perfect, but they allow most former inmates of the loonie bin to manage themselves independently. But some still need involuntary commitment, and generally better a hospital than a prison.
I understand about Bedlam. My father was an alcoholic who sobered up with AA and then became a counselor to allies at a Minnesota state hospital specially aimed at using AA in institutional settings. I don't like Bedlam as a solution. On the other hand, take a look at the homeless encampments that have sprung up as the alternative. Take a look at the mentally-ill and addicted who are living rough outside of the cities. I'm not even sure that Bedlam was as horrible as we might have thought it was fifty years ago. There were gradations of the nightmare and when I see the huge encampment in the forest just off the main road in Lake Tahoe, I shake my head. It gets wintery yet there are folks who prefer it to living in the coastal cities where they get rousted more frequently. It is a horrible, horrible situation.
Reagan left office nearly 40 years ago, and has been dead for 2 decades. Whatever he did or did not do, Americans have had more than sufficient time to make any necessary policy changes.
Agreed. My comment was meant to challenge the notion that it was primarily a liberal effort to close down mental institutions that led America to its current situation. I'm sure that there is plenty of blame to go around. Our prisons have large percentages of people who need mental illness treatment, not incarceration but we still don't have an infrastructure to fill that need. As usual, it's a funding challenge that's a tough political sell.
Bruce--I think, if true--and I do vaguely remember it--this happened when Reagan was governor. But remember, he was for abortion then, too. Certainly, conservatives "saved" money by closing the institutions down, as I mention above. But if you read The Best Minds, it's pretty clear that the movement was led by the liberal academic elite.
Yes, I'm being schooled by other commenters. I have decided to look at the issue a bit deeper given the input so far. Thanks.
Joe: Your last two sentences sums things up perfectly. Great piece of writing. Thank you.
A clear but sad vision of why Trump and Co. won. It will likely take one or two more elections, before a serious change is begun, alas. The economy might come through or provide the means for a whole new direction, which have even less faith in, as it is likely to be even more skewed towards a given point with little if any restraint.
Brilliant!👍👍👍
Although details will vary by state, even today mentally ill people CAN be hospitalized, indefinitely (although no longer cheaply in horrible conditions), if there is "clear and convincing evidence" (Addington v. Texas) that they are dangerous. The Charlotte murderer had a violent past, but what was the evidence, prior to his horrific act, and known to authorities, that he was currently dangerous, or at least at serious risk of being violent in the foreseeable future? (There may well have been such evidence, which then should have been acted upon; but I have not yet seen it in reports about the case. And if there was no such evidence, what are the broader implications of this horrible event?)
His rap sheet was the evidence. There are too many cases like this. Once diagnosed as a violent schizophrenic, a person should be assumed dangerous and locked up--unless it can be proved otherwise.
It depends on the details of the rap sheet, including how recently he committed any serious violence (while not confined). And the notion that a once "violent schizophrenic" has to prove that he or she is no longer dangerous in order to be released flies in the face of a clear Supreme Court ruling...Addington v. Texas. (As Casey Stengel would say, "you can look it up".)
His mother went into Court requesting a Civil Commitment, after he seriously beat his sister. The Mother swore, based on her personal experience , he was a threat to himself and others. The sister's injuries were evidence of his propensity for violence.
The poor Mother did everything right. Many families know of the potential harm, but never warn anyone. They never go to Court and ask for someone to be committed. The Mother jumped thru complicated and expensive hoops to try and prevent harm, and the Court ignored her. Now a girl is dead . Some mistakes should never be allowed to happen, and they certainly should never have the opportunity to be repeated. The Judges who failed the victim, the Mother and the public at large, should not be allowed to continue in their jobs.