“Elected leaders continue to proclaim mental health a top priority, spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to prove how committed they are, yet they have repeatedly failed to identify—let alone fix—the underlying problems.”
"LIBERALS JUDGE POLICY BY THEIR INTENTIONS NO MATTER HOW BAD THE RESULT." - Thomas Sowell
Sharon is right. We see the human tragedy on the streets EVERY SINGLE DAY. Many people in dense residential areas can't sleep at night for the screaming that we hear by poor souls who are not getting the care they need. Since this is getting even worse, it's contributing to the record numbers of people out-migrating from Portland and Oregon. The Census Bureau places Oregon among the top 10 fastest‑shrinking states. Oregon’s recent population loss is historically significant — the first in decades. Portland’s out‑migration is even more pronounced, driving much of the statewide decline and showing no signs of quick reversal! People are taking business and their tax dollars with this. This is no longer a human tragedy for solely the folks with mental illness -- it contributes to our region's spiraling decline and must be addressed with the measures that Sharon outlines.
This notification is symptomatic of how government has gotten away from the basics! I firmly believe that the first priority of government is to protect its population. As communities mature, their constituents seem to want more. But wait, we are a very generous people and we have learned through experience that government does not deliver the promises made by its elected leaders. I am thankful that I have no mental illness in my family. Nevertheless, I think we should petition The Oregonian to do an analysis of how our tax money is used. Compare and contrast us to other municipalities with similar demographics. My goal is to see how heavily we are taxed and also learn how many "services" we are receiving and how much they cost. My expectation is that we pay too much tax, our tax money is not spent in proportion to the actual services we need from government. Living expenses have gotten very high and public employees seem to have the most secure jobs with the best retirement packages. We need to trim services and reduce our total tax budget. Mental health services are essential because they are necessary for our mutual protection.
I strongly disagree with the solution proposed here which is predicated on society "controlling" the many severely mentally ill people in Portland. Your plan to count, track, manage, move, provide, encouraging, and give to the severely mentally ill is unrealistic and if we do all that something good will come of it. It is predicated upon the idea that every bad outcome, like what happened with Whitman, can be prevented, if only we have a system that will address tall problems comprehensively. What Whitman showed us, though, was, that no matter how involved people become, a single person is quite capable of finding a way to live out an obsession based on anger and hate and translate it into a devastating social consequence for many.
It is best to focus on two main areas. One is a criminal justice system that administers are reasonable punishment upon those that break public laws and holds to it. What Whitman did was criminal, and while his punishment was self-imposed, society should be careful about neglecting the significant suffering he has imposed upon us by his actions. We live in a world where there are no consequences often, and this cultural movement has to change. Reasonable conformity to public laws and behavior, something supported vigorously by law enforcement, is the direction Portland should take. More police officers and judges who will be unafraid to sentence criminals appropriately and such a criminal justice system with its jails and prisons should have adequate mental health staff to meet the needs of those with severe mental issues with timely medication if necessary administered involuntarily through a legal process that is timely and takes into consideration their liberty interests, as well as societies.
Your critique of our "lack of a system" won't fool voters who are sick of solutions that are put forward out of thin air. Portland is not an emergency room, where you can control almost every aspect of a situation or human being. It is a fantasy to think you can do this with free individuals, and no one would want to live in such a mental health police state like what you are proposing. So no, developing a system with a contingency for every individual who has severe mental health problems is not only unhinged and unrealistic, it promotes a world of exclusion of the mentally ill from the constraints placed upon all of us really, to live decently and with respect for others. It is not true that if Portland just gives enough, to the severely mentally ill, all will be well. Such a system you are focused on designing is unrealistic, implies huge expense, and will flail even more glaringly than the one we have now.
Portland should be focused on the underlying law that has crippled mental health treatment in Oregon. Civil commitment standards and procedures hold people involuntarily for years in state hospitals which often lead to deterioration in their illness and enormous public cost. The way forward is short term civil commitment with a max of six weeks, with a substituted judgement consent, and explicit balancing of liberty interests with societal needs for public safety, civility and beauty in the public square.
The underlying law surrounding civil commitment and competency to stand trial and involuntary administration of medication and the insanity defense, is impractical, untimely, and hasn't factored in the tremendous social cost of untreated severe mental illness. You cannot build a mental health system to treat severely mentally ill people without fundamentally changing laws that exclude public welfare from being considered. Not only that, but current laws create tremendous stigma as they put the severely mentally ill in categories that dehumanize them. The infrastructure of the mental health system for the severely mental health system is the law, and it is broken. Without significant change in laws, attempts to patch together something that fits every contingency will not only bankrupt taxpayers, but make the severely mentally ill only people that "must be controlled" rather than considered citizens with rights and liberty interests of their own. We must absolutely stop considering the severely mentally ill as a "protected group", not responsible for their behavior, but as people who like others, lose perspective, judgment, and control of their behavior. Hold them responsible but provide treatment.
Efforts like the ordinance to limit needle distribution around schools, as introduced by Commissioner Brim Edwards, can be a big step to finally bring some sense to public discussion of these problems. Practical and focused efforts to bring sense to our system of treatments, like this ordinance, supported by Mayor Wilson, is the way forward, rather than broad plans that overpromise a future that will never be reached.
Yea ! Brim Edwards weighs in with a solution: "limit needle distribution around schools".
All better. Problem solved, well, not until 2027.
I think integrating a strict libertarian mind set into a local government that has the legal responsibility to manage a mental health "system" is a bit tricky. I agree with much of your argument with emphasis on individual responsibility for aberrant behavior, but we are where we are because our local governments always wait to act until there is a raging crisis., so I will support someone (the ONLY one) who offers a systemic plan that includes prevention rather than no plan. Sitting commissioner Brim Edwards has no plan.
In addition, something that is lost on most people is the reason for the spike in mental illness. It's not "drug use". It's a specific kind of drug use. A short term civil commitment with a maximum of six weeks doesn't even come close to making an addict capable of standing for trial let alone re-entry into society. Reason: Fentanyl is a chemical drug and the substitute for heroin. P2P (Phenyl-2-propanone) is the other chemical drug people confuse with meth, and both now dominate that marketplace. The new chemically based drugs cause such physical damage to the brain that recovery for many is only a pipe dream. Actual recovery from these two monsters takes much longer, and we simply don't have enough money for that. Regardless, the answer is usually in prevention, and that is sorely missing in our current commission. Measure 110 was a predictable disaster, and "harm reduction" seems to now be the accepted alternative, which is also a fail.
Limiting needle distributions away from schools and closer to my parking lot is not a solution Commissioner Brim Edwards. It a campaign bumper sticker. At least Meieran is trying, and the idea of reducing the cost appeals to me more than, well, the endlss hand wringing and blaming the public.
Glad you agree with some of my arguments like Measure 110 failing and also the same for “harm reduction”, actually spreading the harm is more like it.
I fail to see any systemic plan of Meieran’s. What I see is obfuscation and unclarity backed up by lots of emotion and anger. It is a plan that is an empty vessel. The implementation of any kind of plan requires leadership, good will, tact, and political calculation. I think Brim Edwards has those qualities. She is likely headed to higher office after a term or two as chairwoman.
The assessment of brain damage from drugs is tricky. I agree it is likely that significant crippling effects of these drugs is a likely future for many on the street and elsewhere.
Rather than a “plan” you have to head in a proper direction and eat away at the rotten system we have for both the legal definitions and procedures of civil commitment, needle distribution, and the separation of the severely mentally ill into a separate category of human being. It really isn’t about fixing it, but about establishing a framework of intervention that both protects public safety, civility and beauty, and finding the right balance between it and severely mentally ill people’s liberty rights.
The silence of politicians around the state along with the public health departments in the wake of the Safe Schools ordinance is deafening. The ordinance is a populist movement that others have taken note of and likely it will continue as people insist on more common sense from governance. Portland has a thuggish element to it, and I am hoping people stick around town and beat down the bullies.
Government must prescribe boundaries, not try to be an eternally forgiving parent. Is this suggestion so shocking? Every person who goes through therapy comes out convinced that boundaries are necessary. Oregon is still on an endless indulgence trip. We have the wrong people in government.
Sharon, please run, but don't forsake Charter Reform for the County. It is more than just leadership. It is handing responsibility for all key decisions about public safety, behavioral health, homelessness, animal control and public health to an elected person with no managerial, medical, public safety, logistical or financial experience the role of CEO of the County. They hire and fire key staff, make critical decisions on priorities, do research on best practices, reward performance and keep the public informed of the County's performance and communicate and coordinate with other jurisdictions, all with no unique required skills save political ambition. We are paying the price in every aspect the County is responsible for. We rank poorly in virtually everything while the County/City have achieved record high tax rates. At what point do we recognize political and structural failure? When all the wealthy taxpayers leave? When we can't attract new businesses and the jobs they provide to our working people? When services are stripped to to only what Mitch Green and his team believes are the bare necessities?
Sharon is right. There is no behavioral health system. Dr. Dodson is also right. There is no accountability for those with behavioral health to seek treatment so they can become a meaningful and helpful part of society. We claim they have an illness, but we try to treat them as if they don't. We need to provide treatment options, not dependent on the desire of the ill person, but at the initiative of Society to help them and protect the rest of us from harm. We need to give them the support they need to recover and function in society without hurting others. To get there will take time and a loss of freedoms for those inflicted. As many times as it takes.
I, along with many others lived it. It can work if we just face reality.
Good column. Yeah Multnomah County has been a dumpster fire under JVP.
When you want to cite the poster-girl for incompetence and being disingenuous, one need look no further than JVP.
Run, Sharon, run!
To help “convince” her to run, I’d recommend a donation and an email of encouragement. https://multcosharon.com/about/
“Elected leaders continue to proclaim mental health a top priority, spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to prove how committed they are, yet they have repeatedly failed to identify—let alone fix—the underlying problems.”
"LIBERALS JUDGE POLICY BY THEIR INTENTIONS NO MATTER HOW BAD THE RESULT." - Thomas Sowell
Please run
Sharon is right. We see the human tragedy on the streets EVERY SINGLE DAY. Many people in dense residential areas can't sleep at night for the screaming that we hear by poor souls who are not getting the care they need. Since this is getting even worse, it's contributing to the record numbers of people out-migrating from Portland and Oregon. The Census Bureau places Oregon among the top 10 fastest‑shrinking states. Oregon’s recent population loss is historically significant — the first in decades. Portland’s out‑migration is even more pronounced, driving much of the statewide decline and showing no signs of quick reversal! People are taking business and their tax dollars with this. This is no longer a human tragedy for solely the folks with mental illness -- it contributes to our region's spiraling decline and must be addressed with the measures that Sharon outlines.
Who has to make this happen, so the public can hold him or her accountable?
Spot on and so germane.
I sense your moment is here.
This notification is symptomatic of how government has gotten away from the basics! I firmly believe that the first priority of government is to protect its population. As communities mature, their constituents seem to want more. But wait, we are a very generous people and we have learned through experience that government does not deliver the promises made by its elected leaders. I am thankful that I have no mental illness in my family. Nevertheless, I think we should petition The Oregonian to do an analysis of how our tax money is used. Compare and contrast us to other municipalities with similar demographics. My goal is to see how heavily we are taxed and also learn how many "services" we are receiving and how much they cost. My expectation is that we pay too much tax, our tax money is not spent in proportion to the actual services we need from government. Living expenses have gotten very high and public employees seem to have the most secure jobs with the best retirement packages. We need to trim services and reduce our total tax budget. Mental health services are essential because they are necessary for our mutual protection.
I strongly disagree with the solution proposed here which is predicated on society "controlling" the many severely mentally ill people in Portland. Your plan to count, track, manage, move, provide, encouraging, and give to the severely mentally ill is unrealistic and if we do all that something good will come of it. It is predicated upon the idea that every bad outcome, like what happened with Whitman, can be prevented, if only we have a system that will address tall problems comprehensively. What Whitman showed us, though, was, that no matter how involved people become, a single person is quite capable of finding a way to live out an obsession based on anger and hate and translate it into a devastating social consequence for many.
It is best to focus on two main areas. One is a criminal justice system that administers are reasonable punishment upon those that break public laws and holds to it. What Whitman did was criminal, and while his punishment was self-imposed, society should be careful about neglecting the significant suffering he has imposed upon us by his actions. We live in a world where there are no consequences often, and this cultural movement has to change. Reasonable conformity to public laws and behavior, something supported vigorously by law enforcement, is the direction Portland should take. More police officers and judges who will be unafraid to sentence criminals appropriately and such a criminal justice system with its jails and prisons should have adequate mental health staff to meet the needs of those with severe mental issues with timely medication if necessary administered involuntarily through a legal process that is timely and takes into consideration their liberty interests, as well as societies.
Your critique of our "lack of a system" won't fool voters who are sick of solutions that are put forward out of thin air. Portland is not an emergency room, where you can control almost every aspect of a situation or human being. It is a fantasy to think you can do this with free individuals, and no one would want to live in such a mental health police state like what you are proposing. So no, developing a system with a contingency for every individual who has severe mental health problems is not only unhinged and unrealistic, it promotes a world of exclusion of the mentally ill from the constraints placed upon all of us really, to live decently and with respect for others. It is not true that if Portland just gives enough, to the severely mentally ill, all will be well. Such a system you are focused on designing is unrealistic, implies huge expense, and will flail even more glaringly than the one we have now.
Portland should be focused on the underlying law that has crippled mental health treatment in Oregon. Civil commitment standards and procedures hold people involuntarily for years in state hospitals which often lead to deterioration in their illness and enormous public cost. The way forward is short term civil commitment with a max of six weeks, with a substituted judgement consent, and explicit balancing of liberty interests with societal needs for public safety, civility and beauty in the public square.
The underlying law surrounding civil commitment and competency to stand trial and involuntary administration of medication and the insanity defense, is impractical, untimely, and hasn't factored in the tremendous social cost of untreated severe mental illness. You cannot build a mental health system to treat severely mentally ill people without fundamentally changing laws that exclude public welfare from being considered. Not only that, but current laws create tremendous stigma as they put the severely mentally ill in categories that dehumanize them. The infrastructure of the mental health system for the severely mental health system is the law, and it is broken. Without significant change in laws, attempts to patch together something that fits every contingency will not only bankrupt taxpayers, but make the severely mentally ill only people that "must be controlled" rather than considered citizens with rights and liberty interests of their own. We must absolutely stop considering the severely mentally ill as a "protected group", not responsible for their behavior, but as people who like others, lose perspective, judgment, and control of their behavior. Hold them responsible but provide treatment.
Efforts like the ordinance to limit needle distribution around schools, as introduced by Commissioner Brim Edwards, can be a big step to finally bring some sense to public discussion of these problems. Practical and focused efforts to bring sense to our system of treatments, like this ordinance, supported by Mayor Wilson, is the way forward, rather than broad plans that overpromise a future that will never be reached.
Yea ! Brim Edwards weighs in with a solution: "limit needle distribution around schools".
All better. Problem solved, well, not until 2027.
I think integrating a strict libertarian mind set into a local government that has the legal responsibility to manage a mental health "system" is a bit tricky. I agree with much of your argument with emphasis on individual responsibility for aberrant behavior, but we are where we are because our local governments always wait to act until there is a raging crisis., so I will support someone (the ONLY one) who offers a systemic plan that includes prevention rather than no plan. Sitting commissioner Brim Edwards has no plan.
In addition, something that is lost on most people is the reason for the spike in mental illness. It's not "drug use". It's a specific kind of drug use. A short term civil commitment with a maximum of six weeks doesn't even come close to making an addict capable of standing for trial let alone re-entry into society. Reason: Fentanyl is a chemical drug and the substitute for heroin. P2P (Phenyl-2-propanone) is the other chemical drug people confuse with meth, and both now dominate that marketplace. The new chemically based drugs cause such physical damage to the brain that recovery for many is only a pipe dream. Actual recovery from these two monsters takes much longer, and we simply don't have enough money for that. Regardless, the answer is usually in prevention, and that is sorely missing in our current commission. Measure 110 was a predictable disaster, and "harm reduction" seems to now be the accepted alternative, which is also a fail.
Limiting needle distributions away from schools and closer to my parking lot is not a solution Commissioner Brim Edwards. It a campaign bumper sticker. At least Meieran is trying, and the idea of reducing the cost appeals to me more than, well, the endlss hand wringing and blaming the public.
Glad you agree with some of my arguments like Measure 110 failing and also the same for “harm reduction”, actually spreading the harm is more like it.
I fail to see any systemic plan of Meieran’s. What I see is obfuscation and unclarity backed up by lots of emotion and anger. It is a plan that is an empty vessel. The implementation of any kind of plan requires leadership, good will, tact, and political calculation. I think Brim Edwards has those qualities. She is likely headed to higher office after a term or two as chairwoman.
The assessment of brain damage from drugs is tricky. I agree it is likely that significant crippling effects of these drugs is a likely future for many on the street and elsewhere.
Rather than a “plan” you have to head in a proper direction and eat away at the rotten system we have for both the legal definitions and procedures of civil commitment, needle distribution, and the separation of the severely mentally ill into a separate category of human being. It really isn’t about fixing it, but about establishing a framework of intervention that both protects public safety, civility and beauty, and finding the right balance between it and severely mentally ill people’s liberty rights.
The silence of politicians around the state along with the public health departments in the wake of the Safe Schools ordinance is deafening. The ordinance is a populist movement that others have taken note of and likely it will continue as people insist on more common sense from governance. Portland has a thuggish element to it, and I am hoping people stick around town and beat down the bullies.
https://www.opb.org/article/2021/11/01/the-formulation-of-meth-has-changed-it-may-be-contributing-to-this-countrys-mental-health-crisis/
Thanks. Very helpful.
Government must prescribe boundaries, not try to be an eternally forgiving parent. Is this suggestion so shocking? Every person who goes through therapy comes out convinced that boundaries are necessary. Oregon is still on an endless indulgence trip. We have the wrong people in government.
Very courageous. Thank you.
Sharon, please run, but don't forsake Charter Reform for the County. It is more than just leadership. It is handing responsibility for all key decisions about public safety, behavioral health, homelessness, animal control and public health to an elected person with no managerial, medical, public safety, logistical or financial experience the role of CEO of the County. They hire and fire key staff, make critical decisions on priorities, do research on best practices, reward performance and keep the public informed of the County's performance and communicate and coordinate with other jurisdictions, all with no unique required skills save political ambition. We are paying the price in every aspect the County is responsible for. We rank poorly in virtually everything while the County/City have achieved record high tax rates. At what point do we recognize political and structural failure? When all the wealthy taxpayers leave? When we can't attract new businesses and the jobs they provide to our working people? When services are stripped to to only what Mitch Green and his team believes are the bare necessities?
Sharon is right. There is no behavioral health system. Dr. Dodson is also right. There is no accountability for those with behavioral health to seek treatment so they can become a meaningful and helpful part of society. We claim they have an illness, but we try to treat them as if they don't. We need to provide treatment options, not dependent on the desire of the ill person, but at the initiative of Society to help them and protect the rest of us from harm. We need to give them the support they need to recover and function in society without hurting others. To get there will take time and a loss of freedoms for those inflicted. As many times as it takes.
I, along with many others lived it. It can work if we just face reality.