[closetohome]

I think that was more or less the conclusion of the article. The "tough on crime" contingent wants to lock people up and get them out of sight, but the alternative - getting them mental health assistance - is hard to do because we lack the range and depth of resources needed to address their issues.

And since we're reasonably sure that increased incarceration isn't the answer, that leaves us in our current situation.

[AnimalMuppet]

Perhaps one more option: Lower the standard for involuntarily forcing them into mental health treatment.

Look, the standard needs to be fairly high. But don't these people need to be in treatment for long enough that it actually changes things for them? Is anything else going to work?

Or do we say that their right to not be forced into something they don't want supercedes both their need and the need of society?

[closetohome]

I think that's a good point, and for the most part I'd say I agree. If someone meets the criminal threshold of incarceration, it should be possible to divert them to treatment for at least the same length of time as a prison sentence. Along the same lines, maybe blur the lines between incarceration and treatment a little more. Incarceration should ideally be more therapeutic than punitive.