[Noisebridge-discuss] dealing with a troubled young lady? Discuss it on today's member meeting?

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 8/10/10 9:35 PM, Quinn Norton wrote:
> 
> On Aug 10, 2010, at 6:32 PM, Christie Dudley wrote:
> 
>> If the police are involved and they take her off, they have a
>> burden of proof of something specific.  Police can make her leave
>> our space, but they can't take her anywhere if she's not "a danger
>> to herself or others" according to state law.  This is the reason
>> there are so many crazy people on the streets of San Francisco.
> 
> well, no. state law in california has a competence clause. as in
> danger to self, others, or inability to take care of yourself. then
> it's a 72 hr hold. the main reasons there's so many crazy people on
> the street of sf is a lack of universal health insurance.
> 
>> The logic follows that if they take her back, and she's not being a
>> danger to anyone around her, then they have to be able to back up
>> their actions with a reasonably solid assessment that she's a
>> danger to herself.  After all, her right to personal liberty is
>> greater than any of society's views on wellness and inappropriate
>> behavior.  See
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_commitment#United_States.
>> 
> 
> here, try this:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5150_(Involuntary_psychiatric_hold)
> also, an 80s album by van halen! who doesn't remember 'why can't this
> be love'?!? me! anyway.
> 
>> I'm not trying to tell anyone how to deal with this, but I would
>> like to point out that by keeping her around the space, she's
>> unable to get the treatment it sounds like she needs.  Although I
>> do understand there's a good argument against the mental health
>> business as to what "needs" really entails and the merits of
>> "treatment".  Nevertheless, if she was on medication and she is no
>> longer on that medication, her relation to reality will continue to
>> slide.  Is this something people are willing to take responsibility
>> for?
> 
> 'keeping her' would be illegal. and if i hear of someone kidnapping
> an unmedicated schizophrenic and holding her captive at noisebridge i
> for one will be very angry. allowing mentally ill people to wander in
> and out of noisebridge freely i'm betting covers about 65% of people
> there, 99% if we include aspergers and ADD.
> 
> so exactly what do you want to do here? bar her for being
> incompetently mentally ill? that would be a fairly normal thing to
> do, but let's call it what it is.


“'But I don’t want to go among mad people,' Alice remarked.

'Oh, you can’t help that,' said the Cat. 'We’re all mad here. I’m mad.
You’re mad.'

'How do you know I’m mad?' said Alice.

'You must be,” said the Cat. 'or you wouldn’t have come here.'”

> q _______________________________________________ Noisebridge-discuss
> mailing list Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net 
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>