2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Civil commitment is a fancy way of saying at least I don't have a criminal record or felony status, but the difference between being locked up in state hospital vs. a jail cell isn't much. The civil commitment process is for families or neighbors or society at large who do not want to manage and live with people who have mental illnesses. Send someone with a mental illness away, give a person a 180 day commitment to Blue Mt. Recovery Center in Pendleton, Lane Shelter Care in Eugene, or the state hospital in Salem. Then, give someone drugs and scare a person to death who has to go through a hearing in front of a judge and jury of psychiatrists. The care of the mentally ill in this country is still in a mess. Making the commitment process easier for people who supposedly care for "patients" is bogus. 

 I'm very sad that the young man was killed in a police shooting. I wish something more could have been done to protect him, but sending him away wouldn't have been a good way to help him in the long run.

posted 3 years ago
view in context

I think anyone who has a certified service or therapy dog should be allowed to bring that dog anywhere he or she goes. I have a serious problem with people who bring their pit bulls, rottweilers and poodles into businesses such as Safeway, Zupan's/Peet's coffee shop and on the MAX. I can't trust that the dogs are well trained or that the owners care one bit about how others who don't have dogs respond to dogs, such as allergies, genuine fear of dogs etc. Dogs that are owned by homeless people often come into stores with their owners who don't seem to care about community guidelines or store rules. It also seems that store security is often afraid to enforce their own rules and dogs that are clearly not services dogs are allowed in stores. It is an abuse of the system and as someone who eventually wants to have a certified service dog I am certain that people who bring their mutts into a business make it more difficult for people who truly need a dog as a life support.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context