politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
How does one organize to put pressure on the APA then….
I don’t understand how the troubled teen industry is allowed to exist. I don’t know if there needs to be some kind of regulation on licensing requirements or what.
The federal government doesn’t regulate; there’s so many ways for them to avoid state regulation. You’d think - the TTI typically traumatizes survivors in a way that leaves them opposed to all forms of mental health care - this needs to be a priority for investigation and research.
There also needs to be a serious push on protections and oversight of inpatient facilities. Especially with the way that the current administration is likely to use institutionalization as a tool for political purposes. I’m familiar with how inpatient facilities work in two states, and have both seen the long term damage and experienced it myself. Patient safety is a serious concern, especially considering that the most vulnerable cannot advocate for themselves.
It is probably how I’m going to get disappeared, so it is a very pressing concern.
Well practitioners who are members of the APA/ACA/etc have the most sway. Writing opeds, participation in meetings, submission to calls to action, becoming more involved in the organization. Like any political action really you have similar challenges: how do you organize members? Except here it’s a bit different; a great deal of membership is in agreement that conversion therapy is abhorrent. But like governmental political action leadership is often hesitant to make serious moves
The troubled teen industry is a different issue. The worst examples of these facilities often operate outside of regulation. The thing is there are regulatory concerns for certain facilities but then there are loopholes around this. If I open an inpatient residential facility I have regulatory guidelines to follow. If I open a “camp” for troubled teens the regulations are much more relaxed, basically nonexistent.
Inpatient facilities that operate properly are a different story. These are fairly heavily regulated in most states but the regulations can vary wildly. However even in states where regulations are more strict it is often cash starved on the side of regulatory oversight. Ie the bodies that exist to ensure regulatory compliance have little money. This is addition to the programs themselves being poorly funded (and often the funding being unfairly distributed)
The solution to mental health treatment is such a multifaceted problem. People don’t want this; they want a simple line. Increased funding would help, but it wouldn’t solve it. In many cases it would simply be absorbed into private equity and administrative salaries. Increased regulation would help but if you just do this it won’t do much because the programs cannot cope without the funding, training, and increased staffing. Additionally regulatory bodies would need the teeth to actually enforce. And this doesn’t even touch upon the health insurance component that is necessary to be reformed heavily so people can access these (absurdly expensive) services without being bankrupted
That last point is key. These services are absurdly expensive. Inpatient on the low end can be 10k per month and as much as 60k a month. People don’t want to pay for this and politicians know this is a class of people that can easily be erased for massive healthcare savings (at the benefit of funneling them into private prisons instead, which is absolutely disgusting, but politicians are scum)
Say one wanted a career change to mental health policy and advocacy - what kind of terminal degree would be taken seriously in these conversations? Or what are the avenues for laymen to be listened to?
I’ve experienced horrendous shit, advocated for people experiencing horrendous shit, seen shit…. My state does not give a flying fuck.
I just do not understand why so much mental health policy and practice seems counter to helping people.
Policy and advocacy? Maybe masters of public health
That said as someone who’s worked as a licensed counselor for over a decade one of my pet peeves is when someone gets an MPH and all of a sudden is an authority because they spent two years learning about “the issues”. It’s kind of like the MBA who comes into a company and is like “oh it’s pretty cool what you’re doing but I know everything because I learned that making more money is great!”
That said it does give you some cred. Ultimately the biggest thing is networking, like all things in life. Get to know people and play the game of “hey remember me from x! I’m doing x now and we’d love to x” it sucks but if you truly want to enact change you need people to know you and be on your side more than any letters
Pedigree and experience helps though. Just don’t get too bogged down in it. I’ve known people with my licensure (masters of counseling, lpc), that do work here. Plenty of psychologists, MDs and DOs, CRNPs, etc. they have the benefit of drawing on experience, which can be powerful.
I recently did some advocacy work and it involved writing an op-ed about my experience working in the residential inpatient system we are talking about here, for example. I have spoken to policy makers about what works and what doesn’t in this vein. I will admit it is unbelievably frustrating to speak to a politician who practices being super polite and nice to everyone. They hear you out and talk in empty platitudes, shake your hand, then vote for the insurance companies that you find out paid them $8,000 via open secrets. It’s disheartening but you keep trying, I guess