I think this is a really hard, really interesting debate taking place in Oregon right now. Historically, committing people to psychiatric help has shown a wide variety of outcomes, many of them unsuccessful. At the same time, a person who is repeatedly a danger to others (as well as to themselves) shouldn’t be afforded the freedom to do harm. Where do we draw the line? As someone with PTSD-affected relatives, living next door to a PTSD-affected neighbor, this issue hits close to home.
When homelessness and mental illness overlap, is forced treatment compassionate?
Democratic leaders in California and Oregon are becoming more open to using involuntary psychiatric commitment to combat homelessness, drug abuse and untreated mental illness.
npr.org