> Some (not all) people are broken, unfixable, and dangerous.

Yes, in many cases because of their exposure to our prison system.

That still doesn’t negate dragonwriter’s very valid argument.

I agree that a human can be 'broken', but broken people should get psychiatric care, not prison.

We used to institutionalize people, then we defunded the entire psychiatric infrastructure.

While it sounds bad when you put it that way, the psychiatric infrastructure that existed before was evil. As bad as things are for those who need help, they are probably better living on the streets than in those institutions.

I knew someone who was in an orphanage (not the same as psychiatric, but similar problems existed there I just don't have anecdotes to share) in the 1920s. They would beat him with a chimney brush if he slept on his pillow. They got awards for how nice their beds looked (since the pillows were unused they always looked new). They used a chimney brush because the metal bristles would hurt without leaving large marks on the body.

While you could argue (and I would agree) that we can do better today I'm not convinced we actually would in practice.

The rise in American incarceration coincides with the de-institutionalization of psychiatric patients and subsequent defunding of community mental health programs. Perhaps they are linked, and prisons have now taken on the previous role of psychiatric institutions.

The fact is, I used to see mentally ill patients all the time and have no where to send them. Often, they would turn to crime just to survive or get off the streets.

While I agree there were abuses in the past, wholesale destruction of the old system is a very American response without any real thought to its replacement.

What you are stating is 100% morally wrong - that it’s better for a mentally ill individual to be left to starve on the streets rather than a society that can afford to care for these individuals in a controlled environment? Anecdotal support of your argument is a logical fallacy, and can’t be the basis of policy selection.

Things are more subtle than that. There are a few who starve to death, but the vast majority do find support in the current system and their lives are better than it would be. As always it is complex.

The infrastructure we had was partially disbanded/defunded because asylums frequently subjected patients to inhumane conditions and outright abuse. There were movements in the 70s by ex-patients and their families trying to get people out of the system and living in programs that try to help patients live more independently, because of this.

And prisons don’t? I would argue the modern American prison system has stepped into the role of the old asylum system and done an arguably worse job.

So let's shut it down too then. Maybe when we have literally nothing left, America can finally realize that people committing crimes need help, not vindictive punishment.

But this is the same America that regularly jokes about men getting raped in prison, and gleefully discuss how convicted pedophiles will likely die if they end up in general population

That the American prison system is worse at the job doesn't really excuse the behavior of the old asylum system. We shouldn't fall into the same traps. There needs to be significant reform of both. What mechanisms and techniques need to be in place, however, I am not in any way qualified to say.

I agree, but at the moment, our psychiatric ability isn't at the level to be able to do that. We have less trouble building tunnels than reforming prisoners.