Aa
Aa
A
A
A
Close
Avatar universal

Who in the election will fight for our cause?

I didn't know how to title this post...  

Without getting into a big political debate, can someone tell me, which candidates, on each side, will best be helping the Hep C research funding?    It doesn't matter to me, whether you are saying Democrat/Republican/Indep., or whatever, I'm just curious if anybody knows from past history, researching this, or anything like that???   I'm not saying which party I'm affliated with, that doesn't matter in the general election anyway because you can vote across party lines in that election if you so choose.    Anyway, I'm really curious about this.  I'm also wondering if there's some website that might tell me where the various candidates stand in their past support of HIV, since I figure that if they have a good history with supporting HIV/AIDS research that they might care about HCV.  Anyway, any info would be appreciated.  I hope that this will not end up being a debate because that's not what I'm looking for.

Happy Holidays everyone.

Susan
340 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
131817 tn?1209529311
I was here too when the mental institutions were shut down and the mentally ill were let out. As someone who has a mentally ill child, it was heartbreaking to find that I could get no help in his teen years.  They would help for maybe 30 days. I can't tell you how awful it was to hear he was living on the street, had to pick him up once in Hawaii, where he threw his meds in the ocean.  It is a real problem that many don't want to take their meds. They weren't fun meds,  hopefully they have better stuff now.   When he started self medicating things got even worse.  He just got out of prison and denies that there is anything wrong with him.  A 72 hour hold is all we can do now, against their will, then they can leave.  

I can see your point about putting people in hospitals against their will to take their money etc. But what about those that roam the streets, not wanting their meds and causing our towns problems, besides the fact that they are not really having a good life themselves.  We need some programs, perhaps unwanted by these people so that they can find a med they can live with.  

Regan did do this, all a once. Not assessing who needed it and giving any assisitance once they were released, other than a bottle of pills many didn't like.  It was a really sad time and we are still reeling from it today.
Helpful - 0
131817 tn?1209529311
I was here too when the mental institutions were shut down and the mentally ill were let out. As someone who has a mentally ill child, it was heartbreaking to find that I could get no help in his teen years.  They would help for maybe 30 days. I can't tell you how awful it was to hear he was living on the street, had to pick him up once in Hawaii, where he threw his meds in the ocean.  It is a real problem that many don't want to take their meds. They weren't fun meds,  hopefully they have better stuff now.   When he started self medicating things got even worse.  He just got out of prison and denies that there is anything wrong with him.  A 72 hour hold is all we can do now, against their will, then they can leave.  

I can see your point about putting people in hospitals against their will to take their money etc. But what about those that roam the streets, not wanting their meds and causing our towns problems, besides the fact that they are not really having a good life themselves.  We need some programs, perhaps unwanted by these people so that they can find a med they can live with.  

Regan did do this, all a once. Not assessing who needed it and giving any assisitance once they were released, other than a bottle of pills many didn't like.  It was a really sad time and we are still reeling from it today.
Helpful - 0
86075 tn?1238115091
here is the url...

http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/reagan/section5.rhtml
Helpful - 0
86075 tn?1238115091
so much for your not debating me on this thread anymore...I don't agree with your assertions, having just looked up Reagan's legacy re this to refresh my memory, on a few sites besides this one, and having lived here in California when this was done....hearing the outcry of citizens at the time (and witnessing it for myself) when all of a sudden, people were walking the streets talking to themselves, being jailed for vagrancy, etc...I remember the outrage many of us felt at the time, if youre going to skimp on something to balance a budge, why this? I can post many others...This is from the Ronald Reagan history section in Sparknotes, from Barnes and Noble, the kid I take care of uses this site for looking up facts for her school papers, as do many other students....just so no one thinks I'm writing this, here is the following....

Reagan's two terms as governor of California were neither spectacular nor failures. Like many politicians, Reagan had to abandon many of his campaign pledges when faced with political reality. His first crisis came during his first term when the government suddenly had an enormous budget deficit. In order to save money, Reagan cut ten percent of the spending budget in each department of the government. Although this sounded reasonably simple and worked in certain departments, it also proved to be an inadequate solution. For example, because of budget cuts, many of the state mental institutions had to release unstable patients in order to save money. Reagan froze government spending and purchases and even sold the state jet. Finally, Governor Reagan rescinded on his promise to cut taxes when he increased the state income tax in order to make money.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
4cquote: "When we talk about Reagan closing down the mental institutions - you talk about how that was  "good" for the patients to be put out in the street with no where to go, because of all these questionable reasons...."

Actually deinstitutionalization for the mentally ill began decades earlier than Reagan's time in office and was especially spearheaded by JFK when he signed into law the "Community Mental Health Centers Act" just before he was assassinated in 1963. At the time many of the people held within mental institutions were being held against their will. And they were not true criminals nor were they a threat to themselves or to others. It was thought to be more humane and more "American" to release these people if they did not wish to be held within the institution (something I happen to agree with to a certain extent). Also, many people had been wrongly institutionalized against their will by relatives or legal guardians for less than benevolent reasons (i.e. for the purposes of seizing their money, property, inheritances etc). Plus better drugs for the treatment of common mental disorders were starting to be developed around that time which also contributed to this movement away from institutionalization. But unfortunately although the intent was good, the effect was to turn many of these people loose on our society causing the homeless population to boom, and for our prisons to swell all during the 60's and 70's (and up until the current day for that matter). Believe it or not, many mentally ill people who are not a threat to others or themselves do not want to take treatment or drugs and do not wish to be institutionalized. I've met and spoken to many homeless people when I used to live in the city (many of which were mentally ill).

I remember when I was a kid in the 70's we had an old run down asylum that had been closed for many years in our town. Me and my friends used to sneak into it and run around inside. Most of the old gurneys and equipment were still there, even things like these big chrome and glass hypodermic needles. It looked as if everyone had just walked out of the place sometime in the early 60's, and then the doors were simply locked behind them. It was eerie.

Anyway, of course the point is that the oft repeated bogus assertion that Reagan closed down all the mental institutions is just that - a bogus assertion.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
if as you claim,only 5% of wealth in this country is inherited(and i find that figure intuitively absurd)...who is getting the other 95% ?...i am not envious of anyone who has indeed earned their wealth&influence-heck,i did the samething-,but i do believe we have allowed too much of our nations wealth to accrue to a very small group of people(the majority of whom did inherit it)...which in turn has allowed them undue political influence...add to this the incredible sums lobbied into washington by corporations&their interest groups...and ordinary,working americans(you know,couples who just work 60 hrs aweek apiece and actually raise familys) are being sold down the river in the name of globalization and free markets and yes corporate welfare&malfesance...i am not trying to win anything-i just don't agree with your view of our world.....
  i am with Willy on this let's just get over the polemics-we don't agree,so what?
  i also must secound forsee on your incessant clams of "winning"...no one is winning here,but many are dying elsewhere..if we can ameliorate that situation in anyway ,then we really have a match,set,win...
Helpful - 0
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the Hepatitis Social Community

Top Hepatitis Answerers
317787 tn?1473358451
DC
683231 tn?1467323017
Auburn, WA
Learn About Top Answerers
Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.