Brian Kilmeade Suggests that Homeless Should be Euthanized

I'll take a stab at it.
Kilmeade led his statement with the word "or," a conjunction connecting two phrases:
"or what?"
The black guy sitting next to him (I don't know his name because I do not watch Fox News), and whose sentence had preceded Kilmeade's had called for insane homeless people to be involuntarily committed and to receive involuntary psychological treatment. This is obviously the right policy. I would bet that the vast majority of the homeless people in the United States are insane, drug-addicted, or both.
De-institutionalization movement of the 1970s (with the impetus given by the film One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest) was a policy of criminal negligence and enormous cruelty. Millions of people unable to care for themselves were kicked out of shelter and told to fend for themselves. In the 1980s, I remember disheveled homeless people wandering the streets of downtown DC talking to Elvis. Obviously incapable of caring for themselves, but Saint Elizabeth's Mental Hospital had been closed and those deemed not to be dangerous to themselves or others were kicked out. Horrible policy.
So, back to the Fox Show in question, the black guy says we (society) should involuntarily commit the insane and Kilmeade suggested offering them euthanasia and an alternative, knowing no sane person would accept euthanasia as an alternative to commitment and mental health treatment.
What law would give him the power to summarily execute homeless people, or do you believe Kilmeade was suggesting some legislation on the subject?

It is at the very least tacky/ill-advised, especially in light of recent events.

Came here to say this and Tidewater has said it more eloquently than I could. The good news is that with more effective meds, many of those committed at the time of the deinstitutionalization movement can do quite well in the community. But we'd be far better off with the rest in a location that is safe for them and us as well. It was a disaster!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CrimsonJazz
I agree but ln light of today's situation in the whitehouse, how do we protect against someone who wants to be king forcibly institutionalizing someone for political decent? 🤷‍♂️
A serious consideration, to be sure
The Soviets, especially in Brezhnev Era, used insane asylums as less deadly gulags, so the precedent is there. I would recommend having disinterested mental health professionals make the determination.

De-institutionalization has not worked for these people (don't click on the link if you are easily disturbed).
.The fix is longer than Trump's term in office, however.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Padreruf
A serious consideration, to be sure
The Soviets, especially in Brezhnev Era, used insane asylums as less deadly gulags, so the precedent is there. I would recommend having disinterested mental health professionals make the determination.

De-institutionalization has not worked for these people (don't click on the link if you are easily disturbed).
.The fix is long than Trump's term in office, however.
One thing I think we can all agree on is that we absolutely do NOT want to see a return to the days when places like Willowbrook State Asylum could actually happen. (For those not familiar, there are some good videos on youtube. Be warned, however, this stuff is HARD to watch.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: arthurdawg
One thing I think we can all agree on is that we absolutely do NOT want to see a return to the days when places like Willowbrook State Asylum could actually happen. (For those not familiar, there are some good videos on youtube. Be warned, however, this stuff is HARD to watch.)
I have never heard of it, but I can imagine.
Still between Willowbrook and Kensington St. there should be some happy medium.
 
A serious consideration, to be sure
The Soviets, especially in Brezhnev Era, used insane asylums as less deadly gulags, so the precedent is there. I would recommend having disinterested mental health professionals make the determination.

De-institutionalization has not worked for these people (don't click on the link if you are easily disturbed).
.The fix is longer than Trump's term in office, however.
Good idea but how do we guard against a POTUS firing those on the panel 'with cause' and replacing them with sycophants.
Things that are happening today were never expected to happen but are.:oops:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 92tide
Good idea but how do we guard against a POTUS firing those on the panel 'with cause' and replacing them with sycophants.
Things that are happening today were never expected to happen but are.:oops:
True.
That is another reason the executive should be very careful in engaging in things like firing the Chief of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
  • The other side will use the same power or other similar powers in unexpected ways, and
  • It undermined public confidence in public institutions generally ("Are these guys telling the truth or are they just telling the Boss what he wats to hear in order to keep their jobs?")
 
Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads