Discussion Affordable Housing with Mental Health Treatment Requirements

[Rogue Proxy]

Two days ago, I read a newspaper article about an old motel being converted into affordable housing units. Now, I strongly support repurposing defunct motels, hotels, and resorts into affordable housing units to help tackle rising housing costs, housing insecurity, and homelessness. But the catch is that the facility is run by a behavioral health center, and all tenants are required to undergo "active mental health treatment."

It's one thing for clients seeking out accessible mental health services in addition to housing services. However, forcing applicants to undergo psychiatric "treatment" to access affordable housing is problematic for various reasons. First, it creates another barrier in a gauntlet of housing requirements that further impedes, if not stifles, the basic need for shelter. Second, this demonstrates the program's goal isn't to improve housing security. Instead, their main motive is collecting "damaged goods", and reconstructing them into functional cogs for human servitude.

The third issue questions the effectuality of the "treatment". What happens if (and when) all "therapy" options are exhausted, and the tenant's mental health doesn't improve or deteriorates? What if the "treatments" intensify and/or create more mental health conditions? The fourth dilemma is the mental health industry causing the individual's downfall in the first place. For example, someone gets involuntarily institutionalized for attempting suicide. This results in them losing their job and in turn, their home. Not to mention the tens to hundreds of thousands in medical charges for the forced "treatment" slapped onto the wound. Related to the third and fourth points are clients who experience phobias, PTSD, and/or C-PTSD triggered by the abuse, neglect, incompetence, and/or maltreatment from mental health enforcers.

Finally, if more affordable housing programs implement the active mental health treatment requirement, this will exacerbate housing insecurity and homelessness due to the aforementioned first point.

 

[makethepainstop]

Two days ago, I read a newspaper article about an old motel being converted into affordable housing units. Now, I strongly support repurposing defunct motels, hotels, and resorts into affordable housing units to help tackle rising housing costs, housing insecurity, and homelessness. But the catch is that the facility is run by a behavioral health center, and all tenants are required to undergo "active mental health treatment."

It's one thing for clients seeking out accessible mental health services in addition to housing services. However, forcing applicants to undergo psychiatric "treatment" to access affordable housing is problematic for various reasons. First, it creates another barrier in a gauntlet of housing requirements that further impedes, if not stifles, the basic need for shelter. Second, this demonstrates the program's goal isn't to improve housing security. Instead, their main motive is collecting "damaged goods", and reconstructing them into functional cogs for human servitude.

The third issue questions the effectuality of the "treatment". What happens if (and when) all "therapy" options are exhausted, and the tenant's mental health doesn't improve or deteriorates? What if the "treatments" intensify and/or create more mental health conditions? The fourth dilemma is the mental health industry causing the individual's downfall in the first place. For example, someone gets involuntarily institutionalized for attempting suicide. This results in them losing their job and in turn, their home. Not to mention the tens to hundreds of thousands in medical charges for the forced "treatment" slap onto the wound. Related to the third and fourth points are clients who experience phobias, PTSD, and/or C-PTSD triggered by the abuse, neglect, incompetence, and/or maltreatment from mental health enforcers.

Finally, if more affordable housing programs implement the active mental health treatment requirement, this will exacerbate housing insecurity and homelessness due to the aforementioned first point.

They only help people with lots of strings attached to the help they offer.

 

[Maudlin]

If I were younger, and didn't have what I have...

I would hustle the shit outta that program. I'd milk those fools for dimes they didn't know they had to give.
The folks they round up off the streets into that program will do the same, if the the politicos want it to work.

That's a big "IF".

More likely you've got local politico grifters pocketing foundation $$ and city/state (or even federal) tax receipts. It'll be a half-assed deal from the start, and they'll close up shop before they get too many eyes on them. They might even close it up with an "accidental" fire or something that leaves the whole thing trashed, but the "need" will be that much more palpable... that way they can do it all over again in a year or two.

Many such cases.

Rarely does "government" and "housing" go together without their offspring- fraud.

What city was it in, OP?