Did you know it costs more to put someone in prison than it does to treat their mental illness?

Question

This is in regards to the increased population of mentally unstable inmates, as a direct result of closing down mental institutions in the 80s. Was this a good conservative move, to save the costs on the hospitals, but increase the cost of the prisons? Not to mention overcrowding?

I am absolutely AMAZED at the number of people who claim to be pro life, but want to kill those who are sick. AMAZED. No matter what, you are paying for them, much more than you would if we were treating them.

emergency rooms are overloaded because of lack of healthcare in this country...emergency rooms can' turn people away. TOTALLY different topic

Answer 1

now that we have a better grasp on mental illness and how to treat it, we have a responsibility to use that knowledge and help improve our nation.

Answer 2

A lot of mentally unstable people, are so, because of drug and alcohol abuse. Another overlooked factor seems to be, there just aren't enough medical people to take care of them. It is great to want them in a hospital setting, but there is a shortage of doctors and nurses. Try going to an emergency room, and you will wait for an overloaded physician. The only other place seems to be in a secure setting where these unstable people can't continue to be a danger to others, when they go on a rampage. When a lot of these people were released in the 80's it was due to the advances in medications, and availability of foster care. The current population is not the same, and segregating is the only practical solution.

Answer 3

There'd be no need for either if their families took care of them. If they don't want to, why should I?

Yes, it would cost more to put a nut in jail instead of the loony bin, but not all nuts go to jail. Only those who get caught breaking the law go to jail. The homeless ones cost me nothing in taxes. Let them starve....problem solves itself. Mental institutes would have to cost pennies on the dollar compared to prisons to justify reopening them. (Hint: Don't try to justify a moral stance with cost analysis)

Let's also not forget the fact people were often forcefully placed in mental institutes without due process. The thought police are bad enough here on Y!A...I'll pass. At least I'd get my day in court through the judicial system.

Answer 4

Don't spread your ignorance here. More mental institutions were closed during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations than at any other time in the country's history, and neither Carter nor Clinton reopened them. Their idea was that no one should be locked up, and they wanted that money for social programs.

What you have is anger displacement. That could be treated by a psychiatrist without hospitalization.

To answer your question, as you noticed with so many other answers here, cost is not the sole deciding issue.

Answer 5

Sad, isn't it!

Here's another statistic for you....it costs MORE to execute the death penalty on a convict than it does to keep him in prison for life.

While costs vary from state to state, statistics show that it costs between 22,000 and 45,000 per year, per convict. To bring a prisoner to execution, with all the appeals, trial defense and other costs, it can run in the millions of dollars per convict.

Look at this, then Google:

http://www.mindspring.com/~phporter/econ.html

Answer 6

I work in a Mental Hospital, most of my Pt.s are not sick, they are criminals using the system.

There is a difference in Murdering an Innocent Baby, and putting to death a person who has committed a crime worthy of Death.

It was the Liberals who close down the Mental Hospitals in favor of "community Based Treatment". It doesn't work.

Answer 7

Yes , and you are making a very valid point. Build up mental health centers, get people the kind of help that they need.
Change some of the ways that we educate our children teach respect for ones self ,respect for others and healthy living.
Schools are having to do the parents job now because the parents are not capable or won't do their part. They are tuned out ,drunk or drugged up . Not fit to be parents.

Answer 8

i think of it truly is via fact drugs are unlawful that drug customers are hated a lot extra then say an alcoholic, even nonetheless alcoholics use in simple terms as many components to recuperate then drug customers and what approximately people who smoke? what proportion components do they might desire to apply to kick the dreaded nicotine. people anticipate that drug customers are criminals...regardless of the very shown fact that it form of feels to be ok to be blind inebriated and dedicate crimes!! If alcohol became unlawful might society advance an hatred for them to? I actual have a pal who's an alcoholic and has been for some years yet society would not look down on her, they see her habit as an ailment, had she been on drugs i think of it might have been a very distinctive tale! I had a drug habit for over 15 years, i became addicted to speed, I actual have been sparkling for 6 years now and have completely grew to become my existence around. i do no longer supply a stuff what others think of roughly my drug use as they weren't around to assist me %. up the products to my existence. sturdy on you for turning your existence around and a o.k. accomplished:)

Answer 9

So we should reward criminals with free psychiatric care now? You break the law you go to jail, end of story. I don't care if daddy abused you or mommy did crack while she was pregnant. Mentally ill or not you don't belong in society. I would rather pay more to know you are locked away than have some third-rate hack shrink say you are cured and can go back to raping and murdering children.

Overcrowding? Oh I'm so sorry you don't have a comfy private cell.

Answer 10

yes,,the same people who complain about higher taxes also want to cut benefits for the mentally ill, not knowing this FACT

Answer 11

Only if you give them endless appeals and do not carry out their sentences. How many times must these killers be found guilty for it to stick?