Rough sleeper gives birth to twins outside wealthiest Cambridge college

Good post Joelsnan and based on your own experience. I'm afraid some posters on here simply put their heads in the sand and refuse to believe what people have seen with their own eyes if it doesn't match their own opinions.

immigration plays a part

How can anybody know this? It has nothing to do with being a Leftie btw.

It's almost as if the old " they come here and take our jobs/houses troupe" is being trotted out.... Surely not?

GracesGranMk3
Oh for goodness sake, what planet do you orbit?
I am not a liar.
Check out Storthes Hall Hospital, Huddersfield and Stansfield View hospital, Todmorden, Halifax.
And when you have read up on these hospitals, come back and apologise.

Joelsnan is right. I worked in a large psychiatric hospital in the 60s and many patients felt safe and protected there. Care in the community was a brilliant concept but did not have the funding to support it. With the best will in the world there are times when people who suffer from a mental illness need security and treatment in a hospital suited to their needs. Of course the large hospitals had problems but they were not as bad as they are often painted.

GGM3
Rather than making someone do what you want, why don't we ask them what they need?

If many of these people were in a position to know what they really needed they would not be in the position they find themselves in.
You seem to misunderstand educational, psychological or chemical mental issues which more often than not render the person incapable of making rational decisions, either for the short or long term.

First, lack of capacity can only be given by the Court of Protection. I know this from recent experience.
Secondly, everyone else, whatever their ability or problem is deemed to have the final say over what is done with their life unless the CoP has said they have no capacity for either (or both) health and finance.

So it not easy to say the problem could be solved by putting those with various problems in small residential home. If they say no they don't want to go, then they don't go and what happens then.

If people choose to live independently then the support and care should be provided but in these times of Council cuts that is not always possible. There is a demand for one bedroom homes with possible support being given by a warden who lives nearby and checks daily on the residents, this use to happen but no longer.

This lady who gave birth may well have been given a place to live that was totally unsuitable, I have seen first hand some of the places that are offered and believe me you would not want to spend even one night in them. The street is a far safer option.

I simply do not believe you or that this is true or something for which there is any proof Joelsnan. You need to be careful about what you agree with. Some posters are not known for being factual.

That is not to say there were no institutions - where young girls could be sent if they were thought to be in "moral danger" for instance but why are you still arguing a point which is clearly wrong? Your personal history is fascinating but irrelevant. "Anyone" with a diagnosed mental health issue was not institutionalised. Some people were.

Rather than making someone do what you want, why don't we ask them what they need?

GracesGranMk3
Anyone with diagnosed mental health issues used to be housed in institutions, sometimes for life, sometimes for extended periods etc.

That is simply not true

It actually is true. During nurse training I visited two large mental institutions. These were situated in Huddersfield and Halifax.
Later I lived near the Halifax institution. When it was closing, this would be late 1980s or early 1990s a small unit was built in the small town I lived to house the most needy, other patients were housed three or four to a terraced house. It was very sad to see these people wandering around totally lost with little or no structure to their lives. I befriended some and noticed how soon they seemed to die. In the institutions they had structure, they had small jobs (where possible), they had friends, they felt secure, were well fed and had rooms and warmth.
After this experience I do feel that this environment was a good place for some vulnerable people, far better than the little or nothing available now.

I’m sure I will be shot down for suggesting that HR could have an impact on how much help can be given.

Interesting Pamela. So do you believe you have the right to do what you want with your own resources when you want to? I don't know you but let's assume you have red hair and that I got into government and gained a great deal of power. And let's assume that I believe the worst of red-heads were feckless and stupid and I used that lowest common denominator to set up a law which took away the freedom of all red-heads and put them in an institution. That, while maybe helping one or two takes away the freedoms of far more.

There are circumstances where you can help someone against there wishes but you have to show a lack of capacity to make that decision and each decision after that. You would have to complete a lack of capacity test each time you took their rights away. If you are mentally ill you would have to be sectioned and that can only happen under the rules of the mental health act.

Personally, I am very glad that you can no longer get someone "committed" in order to get hold of their money, etc., as certainly did happen in days gone by. But perhaps you wouldn't mind.

How many are "very many" LG? What percentage of the population does it constitute or the percentage of those with disabilities? Why would you want to go back to those days? We like to try and get better care not worse, generally.

Flower apparently council housing had been given to the woman who had twins, and her partner, but it seems that for whatever reason, they were not using it.

I never said that all children with mental health problems were in residential schools, or institutions but very many were in the 1950’s and 1960’s.Certainly those deemed difficult to manage.
Quite a few blind children were put into residential care too, and also deaf ones.
It was a different time.Care in the community is often simply not good enough ,sadly.

If this isn’t contrived then I really hope all is well and the lady finds a decent home to help her darling bunnies bless them al

I don't know just how old you are LG but the (thankfully now discarded) phrase "educationally subnormal" was used in the 1944 education act which made it the duty of all Local Authorities to provide an appropriate education for all children. The provision of this took place in many ways and indeed, it still does but not all children by any means were only catered for in residential institutions. From that Act onwards schools have catered more for the child rather than expecting the child, whatever their challenges, to fit the school.

As for Autism, I believe this was not coined as a separate diagnosis until 1943 but that does not mean it did not exist! It could have come under an umbrella term such as idiocy, developmental retardation and even occasionally, mistakenly, schizophrenia.

Care in the community can work well but it has to be available and appropriate in order to do so.

It’s a point to consider Pamela because it’s almost certainly the case now.

Certainly it happened ‘in our liftime’ ( mental health/institutions) how many very autistic children does anyone remember from childhood for a start?
They were in residential schools, or for adults mental institutions.Anyone exhibiting out of the ordinary or dangerous actions either to themselves or others ( their families usually) were admitted, certainly for periods of time.
I wouldn’t want to go back to that, but equally ‘care in the community’ doesn’t always work well at all.

Have human rights got anything to do with impeding the help that can be given to the homeless?

I’m sure I will be shot down for suggesting that HR could have an impact on how much help can be given.
It’s just that it seems to me that authorities can’t do what they think is in the best interests of the individual if the individual says no.
If housing or shelter is offered and refused what more can be done? Sometimes this is because the homeless person has mental or addiction issues. I just can’t see how that person can be helped against his/her wishes.

I am putting this forward as a point to consider, not suggesting that the homeless are rounded up and put in an institution.

Actually, Far North, I meant that sentence to be a bit sarcastic.. (we need a 'sarcasm' font )

I'm pleased that it's working for your relative.

In the clearly mistaken belief that claimants might feel rather more empowered and 'in charge' by having responsibility for their money.

I think this is one of the areas in which we see the inflexibility of the current system. Some people, for some part of when they are receiving housing benefit, would prefer it paid directly; others don't. It very much the one size fits all approach, that has brought us a long way in the last 70 years but is now so inflexible that the resources for "help" are poured into the structures of helping.

*Paid directly to my relative, I meant.

In the clearly mistaken belief that claimants might feel rather more empowered and 'in charge' by having responsibility for their money

It may be mistaken in some cases but not in others, which we don't hear about of course.

A relative of mine is on housing benefit and is much happier to have it paid directly.
My relative is then aware of any 'hiccup' caused by the DWP and can sort it out without the landlord being troubled by it.
That means the landlord does not get the impression they have an unreliable tenant, due to a fault of the DWP.

Anyone with diagnosed mental health issues used to be housed in institutions, sometimes for life, sometimes for extended periods etc.

That is simply not true; certainly not in our lifetime. I do wonder about the experiences of life - or lack of them - that causes such wrongful information to be said with such conviction.

As Chestnut says, and immigration has played a part in this too, everyone has to be housed, and councils give priority to families ( rightly) and the demand in cities, particularly London has been excessive.
In London there is little room for more building, but where there is, councils should really be building one bedroomed flats, as well as houses.

Anyone with diagnosed mental health issues used to be housed in institutions, sometimes for life, sometimes for extended periods etc.
This included autism in the past.
Whilst not the best outcomes for anyone, child/teenager/adult it did provide a home with meals and treatments.This has mainly gone now, and we know that being in an institution isn’t good for anyone really, but living on your own in sad conditions or living on the street/homeless hostels isn’t better.
I believe we need modern enlightened small institutions for those with mental health problems of various kinds, who cannot cope on their own with life, staffed by well trained and
Caring individuals with experience.
For those who can cope with life, small council flats is the answer, build a lot! Some only need a leg up in life and a permanent address so that they can work.
Drug addicts are the hardest group to find an answer for, as, until they break their addiction there’s nothing you can do ( unless you believe in compelling them to rehabilitate.)
Those who became addicted because they lived on the street, may, in either their own flat or small institution be able to break that cycle.
Grammeretto yes, marriage breakdown sometimes forces
Teenagers or young adults to leave the home, particularly when the wife/ husband moves in with someone else.Or the husband loses the house, becomes depressed and enters a downward spiral.