Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Globe and Mail)   "You can't destroy a community like this. My heart goes out to kids with autism. But no one told me they'd be leaving the house"   (theglobeandmail.com ) divider line
    More: Dumbass, Doug Ford, implements  
•       •       •

12464 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 May 2014 at 1:07 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



144 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-05-18 09:17:04 AM  
HEY DOUG.  NOW YOU KNOW HOW ROB'S NEIGHBOURS FEEL.

He just doubled down on CP24 about the property values going down $100k.
img.fark.net
What an asshat.
 
2014-05-18 09:59:06 AM  
I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.
 
2014-05-18 10:05:31 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.


Believe it.
 
2014-05-18 10:18:47 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.


I blame American 'Reality' TV.
(not really)

The whole family is ugly, but Doug Ford takes it to a whole new level.  Rob at least has a thin veneer of charm, Doug never considered that a social grace worth adopting.
 
2014-05-18 12:36:00 PM  
It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.
 
2014-05-18 12:54:33 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


But the bad ones can go to the bad neighborhoods freely? NIMBY is crap. It doesn't matter location, it obviously matters what treatment and services these kids are getting. Sounds like they need more of both, and better supervision.
 
2014-05-18 01:04:40 PM  

unyon: Marcus Aurelius: I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Believe it.


Beliebe it.
 
2014-05-18 01:12:16 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.


You haven't been in the NHL playoff threads, have you.
 
2014-05-18 01:16:11 PM  

SecretAgentWoman: But the bad ones can go to the bad neighborhoods freely? NIMBY is crap. It doesn't matter location, it obviously matters what treatment and services these kids are getting. Sounds like they need more of both, and better supervision.


I was more thinking islands.
 
2014-05-18 01:16:35 PM  
You know the phrase "waste of skin" gets tossed around a lot these days, but when it comes to the Ford clan I don't think there is a single redeemable one of them.
 
2014-05-18 01:17:36 PM  
Ford is quoted as saying it was unacceptable to have emergency vehicles parked on the street outside the home

Ok well you can quote me saying the same thing. I can still remember every time I've seen that happen while I'm trying to sleep, and I'm sure it's unsettling if it happens during the day. Of course this is a bad idea.

I've never understood how NIMBY became a bad word.
 
2014-05-18 01:18:37 PM  
WTF is so very wrong with that family? Defective chromazone? Gypsy curse?
 
2014-05-18 01:21:27 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

I suppose you wouldn't be happy until all those kids were sent off to leper colonies.
 
2014-05-18 01:24:44 PM  

TV's Vinnie: WTF is so very wrong with that family? Defective chromazone? Gypsy curse?


i1.ytimg.com
 
2014-05-18 01:24:51 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


No, it's not.

I'm just going to leave this here, it is a Statement from a long time friend of the family that is also running for Mayor of Toronto...  (link goes to full statement.)
"Doug Ford's comments are deeply regrettable and from another age. For years, it was thought the best way to help people with disabilities, including those with autism, was to place them in large institutions - a kind of confinement away from the community...

Property values were as hurt by the ugly ass addition Doug put on his place as anything else in that neighbourhood. Period.  He lives on a nice-ish street but only just a few streets away is low income public housing with gangs and more drugs than his brother could ever consume.
 
2014-05-18 01:25:27 PM  

Fark like a Barsoomian: Ford is quoted as saying it was unacceptable to have emergency vehicles parked on the street outside the home

Ok well you can quote me saying the same thing. I can still remember every time I've seen that happen while I'm trying to sleep, and I'm sure it's unsettling if it happens during the day. Of course this is a bad idea.

I've never understood how NIMBY became a bad word.


Because it is. People want the benefits of modern infrastructure just as long as anything perceived as "negative" is "stuck where the poor/dark people are".

Oakville and Burlington are two of the Nimbiest of Nimby communities in Southern Ontario. Worse than GTA and Mississauga.
 
2014-05-18 01:26:22 PM  
TV's Vinnie:

This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

I suppose you wouldn't be happy until all those kids were sent off to leper colonies.


Holy shiat.  Someone lays out a completely rational argument about this issue and this is your response?

Not every kid with developmental issues is sweet and nice as they are portrayed on TV and internet glurge stories.  Some of these kids have serious, deep-rooted problems.  He is absolutely on the money that more mental health care is needed in North America.
 
2014-05-18 01:26:29 PM  

Katolu: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

Yeah, and the uppity blacks and dirty messicans messed up my neighborhood.


What do you have against gentrification?  You must be one of THOSE types of people.
 
2014-05-18 01:27:07 PM  

BizarreMan: unyon: Marcus Aurelius: I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Believe it.

Beliebe it.


His only redeeming quality is a face I want to mouth-fark. That's it. 

/Bieber, not Doug Ford
 
2014-05-18 01:28:00 PM  

sno man: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

No, it's not.

I'm just going to leave this here, it is a Statement from a long time friend of the family that is also running for Mayor of Toronto...  (link goes to full statement.)
"Doug Ford's comments are deeply regrettable and from another age. For years, it was thought the best way to help people with dis ...


The comment you are responding to is the poster's personal experiences with a treatment center in his own neighborhood, not Doug Ford's.
 
2014-05-18 01:28:10 PM  
Wow, that's some grade A deductive reasoning there. Strawman much?
 
2014-05-18 01:29:02 PM  

SecretAgentWoman: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

But the bad ones can go to the bad neighborhoods freely? NIMBY is crap. It doesn't matter location, it obviously matters what treatment and services these kids are getting. Sounds like they need more of both, and better supervision.


No, that's not my meaning and stop intentionally taking out of context.

Group homes are placed in quiet, peaceful neighbourhoods so that the kids can have that kind of environment to positively influence them.  Also to help them adapt to life in society at large rather than in an institution.  There should be more help for them to acclimate before they are thrown into a social situation they are unprepared for.  Even a nicer neighbourhood situation - it would be helpful to both sets of stakeholders, the kids and the neighbourhood.

Sure, IMBY.  As long as they don't rip off my stuff or otherwise act in unacceptable ways with impunity.
 
2014-05-18 01:33:16 PM  
Are there no workhouses?
 
2014-05-18 01:33:22 PM  

MattyFridays: sno man: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

No, it's not.

I'm just going to leave this here, it is a Statement from a long time friend of the family that is also running for Mayor of Toronto...  (link goes to full statement.)
"Doug Ford's comments are deeply regrettable and from another age. For years, it was thought the best way to help people ...


And in this case, the one from the article, Doug Ford's, no it is not more complicated.  I do agree that both counties need to do much more for mental health though.
 
2014-05-18 01:36:08 PM  
Ford, whose ward is in the west-end, is quoted as saying it was unacceptable to have emergency vehicles parked on the street outside the home and that the home should be relocated. "You've ruined the community," Ford is quoted by the Guardian as telling the facility's staff.

i.chzbgr.com
 
2014-05-18 01:38:29 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: No, that's not my meaning and stop intentionally taking out of context.Group homes are placed in quiet, peaceful neighbourhoods so that the kids can have that kind of environment to positively influence them. Also to help them adapt to life in society at large rather than in an institution. There should be more help for them to acclimate before they are thrown into a social situation they are unprepared for. Even a nicer neighbourhood situation - it would be helpful to both sets of stakeholders, the kids and the neighbourhood.Sure, IMBY. As long as they don't rip off my stuff or otherwise act in unacceptable ways with impunity.


I'm with you. People acting like it's a travesty to even bring up any negative impacts such a home has on a neighborhood are just as bad as Ford. If you want to have a dialog then everything needs to be on the table for discussion. The moment you start shouting people down for bringing up an uncomfortable fact it's no longer an honest discussion.
 
2014-05-18 01:39:22 PM  
Why did you have to move to Canada and make them look like shiat?
 
2014-05-18 01:40:33 PM  
Foot-in-mouth disease seems to run in this family.
 
2014-05-18 01:43:03 PM  
It would be best for the ford bros if THEY were in a group home of some sort
 
2014-05-18 01:45:33 PM  
I'm sure there is more to this story than we are hearing.

The kids parents farktards since they let him get autism so who knows what else is going on with that family.
 
2014-05-18 01:46:13 PM  
I know where these people live.  Ford lives on Edenbridge Dr, just south of Scarlett and Eglinton.  It is a very nice neighborhood, what with James Gardens and all, but there is not a single nice neighborhood in Toronto that is far enough bad neighborhoods for crime and break-ins to not be a problem.  For them, it is the Dixon/Islington area, which ironically is where the house that the first Ford crack video was shot.
 
2014-05-18 01:46:15 PM  
sigh
 
2014-05-18 01:47:21 PM  
It does seem like this ford guy is atleast familiar with mental instability
 
2014-05-18 01:48:55 PM  
I live two blocks from a homeless shelter. We receive maybe 3-5 sex offender notices per week. I'll trade you.
 
2014-05-18 01:50:01 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


I thought we were talking about a house for 5 autistic kids, not a group home for troubled teens?
 
2014-05-18 01:53:56 PM  
I usually don't advocate for savage, vigilante street justice a la a Jean Claude Van Dam Movie.

Usually.
 
2014-05-18 01:55:47 PM  

SecretAgentWoman: But the bad ones can go to the bad neighborhoods freely? NIMBY is crap. It doesn't matter location, it obviously matters what treatment and services these kids are getting. Sounds like they need more of both, and better supervision.


Until it's your back yard.
 
2014-05-18 01:58:16 PM  

Ghastly: Fark like a Barsoomian: Ford is quoted as saying it was unacceptable to have emergency vehicles parked on the street outside the home

Ok well you can quote me saying the same thing. I can still remember every time I've seen that happen while I'm trying to sleep, and I'm sure it's unsettling if it happens during the day. Of course this is a bad idea.

I've never understood how NIMBY became a bad word.

Because it is. People want the benefits of modern infrastructure just as long as anything perceived as "negative" is "stuck where the poor/dark people are".

Oakville and Burlington are two of the Nimbiest of Nimby communities in Southern Ontario. Worse than GTA and Mississauga.


Guelph looks down from it's place atop the NIMBY throne and laughs at that comment.
 
2014-05-18 02:00:06 PM  
We have one of these homes being built in our neighborhood currently.  Being we live on an emergency access road for fire, police, and medical with a firestation at the end of the block, and no sidewalks on the road, this could get entertainingly bloody.
 
2014-05-18 02:00:42 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


The problem is, severely troubled kids who are non-violent end up getting treated the same way as the violent cases, who earn "free time" for good behavior, just want to go to the corner store to get a pop and candy bar and have to deal with being treated like crap by the community at large because of things they'd never do..


Then when the kid gets frustrated because even though they're trying, they still get treated like crap.. so they might start acting out on their own... yeah.


Our race really sucks at leaving one another the fark alone.
 
2014-05-18 02:01:43 PM  
You know what I don't want in my neighbourhood? Violent, racist, drunk-driving crackheads. Sadly, I live in Toronto.
 
2014-05-18 02:02:50 PM  

moeburn: I thought we were talking about a house for 5 autistic kids, not a group home for troubled teens?


Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

They're not all Rain Man.
 
2014-05-18 02:05:22 PM  
I know how to solve this: let's put these kids in purpose-built facilities, we'll call them "camps". Then to make sure they can't bother the neighbors, let's put up a barrier, we'll call it a "fence". To keep them from escaping we can put people, we'll call them "guards", in taller structures so they can see what's going on, those we will call "guard-towers".
 
2014-05-18 02:06:11 PM  

moeburn: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

I thought we were talking about a house for 5 autistic kids, not a group home for troubled teens?


It's a "multi-treatment facility" per TFA.
 
2014-05-18 02:11:40 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.


I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.
 
2014-05-18 02:23:51 PM  

hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.


You both have a point. When you're used to being around autistic or handicapped people, especially the same individuals, you become much more accustomed to behavioral cues. Having said that, I did almost lose an eye to an autistic adult because there was a line for snacks. But I still don't mind the residential assistance facility that moved in next to my parent's house. Of course they're adults with minimal behavior issues.
 
2014-05-18 02:27:40 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: moeburn: I thought we were talking about a house for 5 autistic kids, not a group home for troubled teens?

Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

They're not all Rain Man.


So they get bitey? ZOMBIE AUTISTICS! So if an autistic kid becomes a zombie I wonder if the autism will negate some of the zombie symptoms. You still get a zombie and all but possibly articulate and not as jerky.
 
2014-05-18 02:27:41 PM  
 
2014-05-18 02:28:01 PM  

MattyFridays: TV's Vinnie:

This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

I suppose you wouldn't be happy until all those kids were sent off to leper colonies.

Holy shiat.  Someone lays out a completely rational argument about this issue and this is your response?

Not every kid with developmental issues is sweet and nice as they are portrayed on TV and internet glurge stories.  Some of these kids have serious, deep-rooted problems.  He is absolutely on the money that more mental health care is needed in North America.


And by "more mental care", they mean "go back to warehousing em all into nuthouses and leave them to rot".
 
2014-05-18 02:28:51 PM  
THERE'S TWO OF THEM?!!

/Ford's, I mean
 
2014-05-18 02:30:00 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: SecretAgentWoman: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

But the bad ones can go to the bad neighborhoods freely? NIMBY is crap. It doesn't matter location, it obviously matters what treatment and services these kids are getting. Sounds like they need more of both, and better supervision.

No, that's not my meaning and stop intentionally taking out ...


I'll back you up on this.  I got what you were saying the first time around.  There are some kids who are prepared to be part of a particular community, and others who, through no fault of their own, are not yet ready.  It doesn't matter what country we're talking about, be it Canada, The Netherlands, or the USA, mental health services are woefully lacking in resources and far too often people are placed into a situation, in your case a neighborhood, where they aren't prepared to function as a normal member of society.  We need more facilities for a wider range of treatment options, rather than just taking a bunch of kids and sticking them in a house where they aren't capable of being members of the community.
 
2014-05-18 02:31:58 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.



And yet, the group home that was 5 houses down the block from me was peaceful and calm while I was growing up. I've been around for 40 years, and there's never been any trouble with that house or in the neighborhood.

Almost as if it's not the kids that are the problem, but the quality of care that causes situations like that.
 
2014-05-18 02:34:25 PM  
what a jackass.    Also of course he defends his bnrother as he knows as soon as his brother is out of office he is going to be out of his cushy job.
 
2014-05-18 02:35:08 PM  

hardinparamedic: They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.


So you're saying that some don't go into fits of rage. That's cool. Now if you're claiming that none go into fits of rage I'm going to ask you to fark the fark off.
 
2014-05-18 02:35:11 PM  

Eirik: TV's Vinnie: This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/lind a_ taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villa in.html


So of course, the Reagan solution was "cut off welfare for EVERYBODY, even the innocent!".
 
2014-05-18 02:39:22 PM  

TV's Vinnie: WTF is so very wrong with that family? Defective chromazone? Gypsy curse?


It sure wasn't thinner.
 
2014-05-18 02:42:30 PM  
i've worked in several group homes, including one for retarded sex offenders. i don't think the neighbors knew about that part. some were perfectly accepted parts of the community, and never caused problems. however, on my first day at a new group home i forgot to lock the front door with my key when I came in, and as soon as I walked away a big, very engergetic, severely retarded guy bolted to the middle of the street. people were around gawking, and me and my coworker had to resort to wrapping him in a blanket so we could carry him inside.

i image that if potential homebuyers near there knew that that kind of thing happened in the area, they might want to pay less for their house than they might otherwise, and might be apprehensive about letting their children play outside.
 
2014-05-18 02:43:22 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Eirik: TV's Vinnie: This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/lind a_ taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villa in.html

So of course, the Reagan solution was "cut off welfare for EVERYBODY, even the innocent!".


http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1970_2019USb_15s2 li 111mcn_40t_40_Welfare_Spending_Chart#view

Hey, you're right.  According to this chart of federal welfare spending I found over the last 40 years, Welfare spending was slashed from $95.4 billion in 1980 (the last year of the Carter Administration) down to a paltry $146.69 in 1988.

Must be the new math.
 
2014-05-18 02:45:52 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: So you're saying that some don't go into fits of rage. That's cool. Now if you're claiming that none go into fits of rage I'm going to ask you to fark the fark off.


YMMV, but every one I've ever had with a psychotic break have had other comorbidities, such as schizophrenia or ODD/BPD.

Of course, my threshold for knocking someone out is much lower than residential treatment facilities can get away with. While I can fight with them, I really don't care to.

/I've come to love Haldol and Geodon far, far more since I started working with kids.
 
2014-05-18 02:52:28 PM  
FFS THERE'S ANOTHER ONE!?!?
 
2014-05-18 02:56:45 PM  
I recall there's a similar type of center in Connecticut called Chapel Haven, a few blocks away from Yale's main campus. They've got dorm-style rooms and also bought out some houses in the area for their more higher-functioning autistics. No criminally insane folks, but certainly some that need supervision. They're taught to use the bus system to get around and are tolerated by the locals. TLC was actually thinking of doing a reality show over there, but the kids the director picked were so articulate and well-adjusted that the producers didn't think they were "Aspergery" enough and the series was canned in development.

But yeah, this thing here smells of insensitivity and intolerance all around.
 
2014-05-18 02:58:00 PM  

Eirik: TV's Vinnie: Eirik: TV's Vinnie: This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/lind a_ taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villa in.html

So of course, the Reagan solution was "cut off welfare for EVERYBODY, even the innocent!".

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1970_2019USb_15s2 li 111mcn_40t_40_Welfare_Spending_Chart#view

Hey, you're right.  According to this chart of federal welfare spending I found over the last 40 years, Welfare spending was slashed from $95.4 billion in 1980 (the last year of the Carter Administration) down to a paltry $146.69 in 1988.

Must be the new math.


Because prices in 2014 are the same as they were in 1980 (rolls eyes).
 
2014-05-18 02:58:35 PM  

Eirik: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1970_2019USb_15s2 li 111mcn_40t_40_Welfare_Spending_Chart#view

Hey, you're right.  According to this chart of federal welfare spending I found over the last 40 years, Welfare spending was slashed from $95.4 billion in 1980 (the last year of the Carter Administration) down to a paltry $146.69 in 1988.

Must be the new math.


Time value of money and per capita spending, HOW DOES IT WORK.
 
2014-05-18 03:01:44 PM  
I think a lot depends on the groups running it. There are some that are handled very well, have adequate caretakers, appropriate safeguards, carefully screen who will be staying there, and are genuinely in it for the benefit of the mentally ill and the surrounding neighbors.

Then there are those that are in it for the Medicare and Medicaid benefits and do just the bare minimum to get it. There are also those who really want to help but have no clue what they're doing.

Unfortunately, you basically only hear about the bad ones. There's been one case in the news here for the past 6 months or so where a caretaker took some kids to the park, wasn't paying attention, and one of them stabbed a jogger to death. The victim's family isn't as mad at the kid as they are at the company that runs the home where he's staying because apparently there have been other problems as well, just nothing this tragic.
 
2014-05-18 03:04:29 PM  

Eirik: TV's Vinnie: This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/lind a_ taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villa in.html


Black woman in the ghetto games the welfare system: OMG WELFARE QUEEN! MOOCHERS! LEECHES! SHUT DOWN ALL WELFARE AND TOSS EVERYONE OUT! EVEN THE INNOCENT!!

Fat Rich White CEO games the stock market and makes billions: What a wonderful job creator you are. here, have some more tax cuts and a government subsidy.
 
2014-05-18 03:07:52 PM  

thismomentinblackhistory: I live two blocks from a homeless shelter. We receive maybe 3-5 sex offender notices per week. I'll trade you.


Depends on whether, for the most part, they're child molesters, rapists, once solicited a prostitute, or were arrested for urinating in public.
 
2014-05-18 03:10:51 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: Eirik: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1970_2019USb_15s2 li 111mcn_40t_40_Welfare_Spending_Chart#view

Hey, you're right.  According to this chart of federal welfare spending I found over the last 40 years, Welfare spending was slashed from $95.4 billion in 1980 (the last year of the Carter Administration) down to a paltry $146.69 in 1988.

Must be the new math.

Time value of money and per capita spending, HOW DOES IT WORK.


Yeah, did you notice he picked nominal dollars for his chart? I tried switching to 2009 dollars per capita, and it came out more or less flat through the Reagan years.

I also don't remember Reagan actually getting any big welfare cuts through during his time in office - the fulmination against so-called "welfare queens" took until Clinton (and a Republican Congress) to bear fruit. It still doesn't change the fact that "welfare queen" rhetoric is fundamentally dishonest by representing a radically atypical case as the norm.
 
2014-05-18 03:11:58 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Eirik: TV's Vinnie: Eirik: TV's Vinnie: This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/lind a_ taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villa in.html

So of course, the Reagan solution was "cut off welfare for EVERYBODY, even the innocent!".

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1970_2019USb_15s2 li 111mcn_40t_40_Welfare_Spending_Chart#view

Hey, you're right.  According to this chart of federal welfare spending I found over the last 40 years, Welfare spending was slashed from $95.4 billion in 1980 (the last year of the Carter Administration) down to a paltry $146.69 in 1988.

Must be the new math.

Because prices in 2014 are the same as they were in 1980 (rolls eyes).


Reading is hard. He quoted 1980 and 1988, the eight years of Reagan's presidency. Not 1980 and 2014, which would be irrelevant.
 
2014-05-18 03:12:13 PM  
Has anyone thought about giving the group home a supply of Haribo sugar free gummy bears?

That'd keep the kids under control.
 
2014-05-18 03:12:55 PM  

Paris1127: thismomentinblackhistory: I live two blocks from a homeless shelter. We receive maybe 3-5 sex offender notices per week. I'll trade you.

Depends on whether, for the most part, they're child molesters, rapists, once solicited a prostitute, or were arrested for urinating in public.


The last one was rape on his girlfriend's grandchildren. It specifies whether the victim is a minor, the offender's picture, height, weight, tattoos, etc. We don't have kids and we choose to live downtown.

I've thought about saving them but they're kind of like coupons for a store I never go to.
 
2014-05-18 03:25:50 PM  

thismomentinblackhistory: Paris1127: thismomentinblackhistory: I live two blocks from a homeless shelter. We receive maybe 3-5 sex offender notices per week. I'll trade you.

Depends on whether, for the most part, they're child molesters, rapists, once solicited a prostitute, or were arrested for urinating in public.

The last one was rape on his girlfriend's grandchildren. It specifies whether the victim is a minor, the offender's picture, height, weight, tattoos, etc. We don't have kids and we choose to live downtown.

I've thought about saving them but they're kind of like coupons for a store I never go to.


Cheap (creepy) wallpaper? I'm moving into a somewhat depressed neighborhood soon, so I'm wondering if this is what I get to look forward to... I hope not...
 
2014-05-18 03:28:29 PM  

Paris1127: thismomentinblackhistory: Paris1127: thismomentinblackhistory: I live two blocks from a homeless shelter. We receive maybe 3-5 sex offender notices per week. I'll trade you.

Depends on whether, for the most part, they're child molesters, rapists, once solicited a prostitute, or were arrested for urinating in public.

The last one was rape on his girlfriend's grandchildren. It specifies whether the victim is a minor, the offender's picture, height, weight, tattoos, etc. We don't have kids and we choose to live downtown.

I've thought about saving them but they're kind of like coupons for a store I never go to.

Cheap (creepy) wallpaper? I'm moving into a somewhat depressed neighborhood soon, so I'm wondering if this is what I get to look forward to... I hope not...


I was thinking offbeat Christmas cards....
 
2014-05-18 03:29:46 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: moeburn: I thought we were talking about a house for 5 autistic kids, not a group home for troubled teens?

Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

They're not all Rain Man.


True. I'm guessing these are higher functioning kids on the spectrum.

They aren't usually known for criminal activity unless it is computer hacking. They will also have personal support workers to help them adapt to suburban living.
 
2014-05-18 03:29:53 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.


ROWSDOWER!
 
2014-05-18 03:32:47 PM  

hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: So you're saying that some don't go into fits of rage. That's cool. Now if you're claiming that none go into fits of rage I'm going to ask you to fark the fark off.

YMMV, but every one I've ever had with a psychotic break have had other comorbidities, such as schizophrenia or ODD/BPD.

Of course, my threshold for knocking someone out is much lower than residential treatment facilities can get away with. While I can fight with them, I really don't care to.

/I've come to love Haldol and Geodon far, far more since I started working with kids.


Haldol, take me away!
 
2014-05-18 03:37:57 PM  
Clean your house Canada.

/like you too much to see you live with that
 
2014-05-18 03:47:28 PM  

lindalouwho: THERE'S TWO OF THEM?!!

/Ford's, I mean


sure haven't: FFS THERE'S ANOTHER ONE!?!?


At the moment they are the only two in public life, although they are grooming their sister's kid Mikey...

There is another brother too, but he has the good sense to stick to the family business and keep the rest under his hat.  And I suppose dear old (dead) dad is largely to blame for the lot, with his dabbling in Provincial (think State level) politics for one term a while ago*

*The Premier at the time, Mike Harris, a proto tea bagger, reduced the number of ridings (to better align with the federal ridings) to the expense of Doug Sr.'s seat, making a point to not parachute him in elsewhere largely because he was too right wing...
 
2014-05-18 03:55:05 PM  

hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.


But the drugs don't always work as advertised or over the long term. We are still looking for the magic cocktail for our son. ERs will give us a couple mgs of Ativan and send us home. Pediatric in-patient psych wards are typically "at acuity" or only accept sexually violent, suicidal or abused kids. We struggled with months of violence and destruction on the atypical antipsychotics and worst of all - LEXAPRO!

My son in a group home would be at risk of elopement (running in the street, maybe entering a neighbor's house uninvited), public indecency (taking his clothes off outside) and he's generally loud (vocalizing) which is why he is in a residential home. He is safe and supported there paid for by the school district, not the state. We consider ourselves lucky to have found placement for him.

Anyway...I'm assuming these are medically stable kids who have the necessary supports to live in a community. AND Ford is a jerk.
 
2014-05-18 04:01:27 PM  
"My brother is getting attention from the whole world, I should say something stupid as well."  Yeah that is the ticket.
 
2014-05-18 04:04:30 PM  
If the grouphome has appropriate supervision and the residents are able to function safely in a low to no security environment then go ahead and open one on my block. There's a huge difference between people whose impairments mean they need extra behavioral guidance or physical assistance and people with dangerous behavioral problems. If someone needs to be kept under lock and key to prevent them from harming others, a residential home is probably not the place to do that.

We shouldn't be institutionalizing everyone, but at a certain point public safety and the care needs of the individual are better served in an institution.

/Ford sounds like a terrible human being.
 
2014-05-18 04:05:52 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: moeburn: I thought we were talking about a house for 5 autistic kids, not a group home for troubled teens?

Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

They're not all Rain Man.


Yeah, autistic people can lash out when they panic.  But you were talking about "break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... " -that doesn't sound like autistic people.  Autistic people have been known to break in to things they are obsessed with, like that kid who kept breaking into new york subway trains because he loved driving them.  But keying cars?  Fighting in alleyways?  Terrorizing the neighbourhood?  That isn't autistic kids, that's bored, pissed off, desperate kids.
 
2014-05-18 04:06:47 PM  
From how I understand it, if you leave an autistic person alone, they will leave you alone.  They don't like people.
 
2014-05-18 04:12:39 PM  

Madame Ovary: hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.

But the drugs don't always work as advertised or over the long term. We are still looking for the magic cocktail for our son. ERs will give us a couple mgs of Ativan and send us home. Pediatric in-patient psych wards are typically "at acuity" or only accept sexually violent, suicidal or abused kids. We struggled with months of violence and destruction on the atypical antipsychotics and worst of all - LEXAPRO!

My son in a group home would be at risk of elopement (running in the street, maybe entering a neighbor's house uninvited), public indecency (taking his clothes off outside) and he's generally loud (vocalizing) which is why he is in a residential home. He is safe and supported there paid for by the school district, not the state. We consider ourselves lucky to have found placement for him.

Anyway...I'm assuming these are medically stable kids who have the necessary supports to live in a community. AND Ford is a jerk.


It may or may not be helpful, but I heard about a rhythmic light and sound treatment they have been experimenting with with results comparable to Ritalin.  (without any meds at all, it could maybe be used in concert with some something for even better results)
 
2014-05-18 04:31:07 PM  

moeburn: From how I understand it, if you leave an autistic person alone, they will leave you alone.  They don't like people.


This may be true in some cases but if there is a sensory component to an individual's disorder (noise, light,etc) that could set them off. In the case if my son, he needs support for all personal care which forces caregivers into his zone.
 
2014-05-18 05:07:30 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: And yet, the group home that was 5 houses down the block from me was peaceful and calm while I was growing up. I've been around for 40 years, and there's never been any trouble with that house or in the neighborhood.

Almost as if it's not the kids that are the problem, but the quality of care that causes situations like that.



Bingo.

You can't simply drop a bunch of autistic kids (or autistic adults) into a neighborhood with a couple of caregivers and expect them to manage by themselves. Hell, you can't drop a bunch of so-called "normal" teenagers into a neighborhood and expect them to manage--look at the chaos in an off-campus residential area.

So if you want to have a multi-care facility in a nice neighborhood for the benefit of the kids, you need highly skilled caregivers, you need the support and full knowledge of the neighborhood, and constant monitoring from the regional center that is responsible for the kids. At minimum.
 
2014-05-18 05:15:09 PM  
I have worked with children and adults with both cognitive impairment and all sorts of mental health/developmental disorders for about 20 years now.  I am a special education teacher (severe disabilities) and work in group homes for adults with cognitive impairment.  As others have noted, some group homes are invisible in the community and some are well-known sources of entertainment (if counting emergency response vehicles roaring through your neighborhood is entertaining to you).  How successful a group home is depends on who is running it (are they in it for the residents or for the money?), who is staffing it (are they well-trained and competent to provide appropriate supports?), and who is living there (do they have all the supports they need in place to be successful? Do they even want to be there?).  I have seen people with some pretty severely maladaptive behaviors fit in beautifully into a community residence and I have seen some who just didn't.  Depends on the mix of people and the competence of those running the program.

Either way, a knee-jerk "Those people are going to destroy property values if the neighbors see them outside!!" is not helpful.

Once I figure out a way to get around those pesky "controlled substance" laws, I have a plan to market a Valium air spray--just a quick spritz and everyone gets nice and calm.  No needles, no pills, just peace and quiet.  Ahhhhhhhh......
 
2014-05-18 05:23:48 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


All of this. Also, a medical establishment doesn't really belong in a neighborhood anyway, especially with emergency vehicles there all hours of the day and night. There's no reason these sorts of places can't be near other medical establishments or industrial areas instead of neighborhoods.
 
2014-05-18 05:38:22 PM  

hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.


Bull. My nephew the 200 pound kid would attack his 110 pound mother. They had to constantly have men around just in case. They found the right drugs but it took years. My friend's son would fight at her and she'd come in with bruises. denial helps nobody.
 
2014-05-18 05:44:28 PM  

addy2: hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.

Bull. My nephew the 200 pound kid would attack his 110 pound mother. They had to constantly have men around just in case. They found the right drugs but it took years. My friend's son would fight at her and she'd come in with bruises. denial helps nobody.


Yes, your one nephew is EXACTLY like all the kids on the spectrum.
 
2014-05-18 05:46:09 PM  

sno man: addy2: hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.

Bull. My nephew the 200 pound kid would attack his 110 pound mother. They had to constantly have men around just in case. They found the right drugs but it took years. My friend's son would fight at her and she'd come in with bruises. denial helps nobody.

Yes, your one nephew is EXACTLY like all the kids on the spectrum.


Point is it happens, genius. And needs to be considered.
 
2014-05-18 05:46:20 PM  

ukexpat: I know how to solve this: let's put these kids in purpose-built facilities, we'll call them "camps". Then to make sure they can't bother the neighbors, let's put up a barrier, we'll call it a "fence". To keep them from escaping we can put people, we'll call them "guards", in taller structures so they can see what's going on, those we will call "guard-towers".


Try to concentrate.
 
2014-05-18 05:48:14 PM  
Why can't they just build like a big compound near a major industrial centre, convenient to rail transport? By concentrating the patients into one geographic area, and applying the right methods containment and waste disposal, the local population might not be bothered by the solution. They'd probably deny knowledge of it existing at all.
 
2014-05-18 06:00:24 PM  
I'd rather have a known quantity like a home for disabled or troubled teens, than have a family move in and have to discover the parents have no intention of actually doing their duty as parents.  Especially in the nicer neighborhoods, it seems the bored teens are the ones most likely to do property damage and vandalism.  I'll take the well-known and identified violent or acting out sexually teens over the well groomed sociopath student athlete any day.
 
2014-05-18 06:07:11 PM  

moeburn: From how I understand it, if you leave an autistic person alone, they will leave you alone.  They don't like people.


Depends on the level of functionality, but generally that's the case.. they really just don't want to be bothered and a lot of that has to do with them being picked on by others growing up.. all could be a potential threat so they  really want to keep their distance from strangers.
 
2014-05-18 06:09:04 PM  

cherryl taggart: I'll take the well-known and identified violent or acting out sexually teens over the well groomed sociopath student athlete any day.


yes, because the well-known and identified violent or acting out sexually teens won't completely ignore you passing in the hall on the way to algebra even though you laid out sunning in the back garden with your straps deliciously yet demurely untied for a solid week over summer break
 
2014-05-18 06:32:25 PM  

moeburn: From how I understand it, if you leave an autistic person alone, they will leave you alone.  They don't like people.


Their vision is based upon motion. It's important that you keep absolutely still.
 
2014-05-18 06:33:24 PM  
 
2014-05-18 06:39:06 PM  

Vector R: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

All of this. Also, a medical establishment doesn't really belong in a neighborhood anyway, especially with emergency vehicles there all hours of the day and night. There's no reason these sorts of places can't be near other medical establishments or industrial areas instead of neighborhoods.


In my neck of the woods they're not medical establishments. They're run by social service agencies, usually non-profits.
 
2014-05-18 06:42:01 PM  

addy2: hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.

Bull. My nephew the 200 pound kid would attack his 110 pound mother. They had to constantly have men around just in case. They found the right drugs but it took years. My friend's son would fight at her and she'd come in with bruises. denial helps nobody.


This.

Science is far from being able to medicate all conditions, much less all of the time.
 
2014-05-18 06:42:58 PM  
We had one of those autistic kids next at the table next to us at breakfast this morning. He had the arm brace crutches, and the big shoes, and the bib, the whole deal. I feel bad for his condition, but he really did ruin our enjoyment of the crepes.
 
2014-05-18 07:01:37 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Because prices in 2014 are the same as they were in 1980 (rolls eyes).


Not only can I not read, but I'm very, very sympathetic to the plight of the poor! Look how I white knight (some of) them! *refuses to tip*
 
2014-05-18 07:10:13 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: I had no idea that there were Canadians that were utterly horrible people without any redeeming qualities whatsoever.


And yet Celine Dion will make $120K tonight in Vegas.
 
2014-05-18 07:24:39 PM  

moeburn: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

I thought we were talking about a house for 5 autistic kids, not a group home for troubled teens?


Pish posh. Don't you realize that autistic people are as destructive as juvenile delinquents...or worse?!

/this is sarcasm, fyi
 
2014-05-18 07:30:15 PM  

lindalouwho: Vector R: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

All of this. Also, a medical establishment doesn't really belong in a neighborhood anyway, especially with emergency vehicles there all hours of the day and night. There's no reason these sorts of places can't be near other medical establishments or industrial areas instead of neighborhoods.

In my ne ...


True. Placement is for "the least restrictive environment" based on agreement of parents, school district and state funding agencies.
 
2014-05-18 07:30:54 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility". It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood. Very suburban. Then, we got a group home. What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out. Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood. The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff. So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed. Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding". But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe. And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in. The behaviours didn't change.


Yeah, there's a very good reason not to want such a place around.  This was for autistics, though--they're not going to be a problem.

Benevolent Misanthrope: SecretAgentWoman: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

But the bad ones can go to the bad neighborhoods freely? NIMBY is crap. It doesn't matter location, it obviously matters what treatment and services these kids are getting. Sounds like they need more of both, and better supervision.

No, that's not my meaning and stop intentionally taking out ...


What he's saying is that they were doing bad things.
 
2014-05-18 07:56:21 PM  

Madame Ovary: lindalouwho: Vector R: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

All of this. Also, a medical establishment doesn't really belong in a neighborhood anyway, especially with emergency vehicles there all hours of the day and night. There's no reason these sorts of places can't be near other medical establishments or industrial areas instead of neighborhoods.

In my ne ...

True. Placement is for "the least restrictive environment" based on agreement of parents, school district and state funding agencies.


Just want to point out that this is in response to VectorR, as my post isn't included. And I'm not in agreement/on the same page as VectorR.
 
2014-05-18 08:05:19 PM  

BigJake: TV's Vinnie: Because prices in 2014 are the same as they were in 1980 (rolls eyes).

Not only can I not read, but I'm very, very sympathetic to the plight of the poor! Look how I white knight (some of) them! *refuses to tip*


www.mrmediatraining.com
 
2014-05-18 08:42:33 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values. You are going to get roasted for not being "tolerant" enough. But don't feel bad because the crowd on here that comes out to beat on you won't ever own property anyway, so you're far ahead of them from that standpoint.

That said, I used to work for a non-profit that held level 4 & 5 juvenile offenders. We actually had a group home in a residential neighborhood for a time, but had to move the kids out because of incidents like you describe. Everyone wants to put these kids in a residential setting when, at times, it just isn't appropriate. We had sex offenders in our group home and the final straw happened when one of our kids was arrested after trying to molest a younger neighborhood boy.

I know, there will be people who will attack me for this post as well, but I think if it happened to be your kid who was on the receiving end, you might think differently. And yes, our social workers thought our kids were mainly just misunderstood. In some cases they were right. Most of our kids were victims of abuse themselves and the stories about them were heartbreaking. Even so, they didn't need to live in a neighborhood setting.
 
2014-05-18 08:45:26 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

I suppose you wouldn't be happy until all those kids were sent off to leper colonies.


Yep, that's exactly what the post said. You sir, are king of the douches.
 
2014-05-18 08:58:55 PM  
As one of the people in the type of neighbourhood where these home are *usually* located, I can't feel too much sympathy for errm. Mr. Ford and his constituents. I guess our paying for our home in a less expensive (read less desirable) neighbourhood means that we are just not rich enough to avoid having *all* these facilities being placed in our part of town? We do have a number of group homes and halfway house facilities around here. We are also in the part of the city that is waaaayyyy above average in the per capita number of sex offenders.

That being said, I have experienced absolutely zero crime in the 3 years I have lived here in the 'hood. It was far worse in our slightly better neighbourhood in Toronto, where things were constantly stolen, broken into and so forth. Not here. Not with all the group homes and halfway houses and various other social service agencies. Weird that.
 
2014-05-18 09:10:33 PM  
I'm gonna dispel a few myths, a few rumors. First off, autistics don't rule the night. They don't rule it. Nobody does. And they don't run in packs. And while they may not be as strong as apes, don't lock eyes with 'em, don't do it. Puts 'em on edge. They might go into berzerker mode; come at you like a whirling dervish, all fists and elbows. You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.
 
2014-05-18 09:12:19 PM  
I will tolerate the tards, we need testers for new drugs. So we can stop animal testing. Can we get input from PETA?
 
2014-05-18 09:27:58 PM  

Big_Doofus: TV's Vinnie: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

I suppose you wouldn't be happy until all those kids were sent off to leper colonies.

Yep, that's exactly what the post said. You sir, are king of the douches.


Well, if he's talking about improved mental health services for juveniles, then he's the one who's REALLY missing the facts. So long as there is still a republican out there drawing breath, there will never, ever be an improvement on any services.
 
2014-05-18 09:37:11 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


Hey look, everyone.  It's one of those paid Republican operatives.  Hi paid Republican operative?  Are you sleeping OK at night, doing the appalling thing that you do for a living?
 
2014-05-18 09:42:54 PM  

Eirik: TV's Vinnie: This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/12/lind a_ taylor_welfare_queen_ronald_reagan_made_her_a_notorious_american_villa in.html


Interesting link; thanks for posting that.
 
2014-05-18 09:50:29 PM  

addy2: sno man: addy2: hardinparamedic: Monkeyhouse Zendo: Ever been attacked by an autistic kid? My friends kid is autistic and pretty okay most of the time but one time when the mom was visiting he went from zero the feral in about two seconds. Full on primate biting, scratching, feral rage. He also got thrown out of the local school's special ed program when he bit one of the handlers so hard the woman had to go to the hospital for stitches.

I deal with Autistic children every day. A good deal of the ill and injured children I transport are autistic.

They are not as violent or as hard to handle as you claim they are.

/and there are drugs for that.

Bull. My nephew the 200 pound kid would attack his 110 pound mother. They had to constantly have men around just in case. They found the right drugs but it took years. My friend's son would fight at her and she'd come in with bruises. denial helps nobody.

Yes, your one nephew is EXACTLY like all the kids on the spectrum.

Point is it happens, genius. And needs to be considered.


Point is, you only hear about the violent ones, like you only hear about violent, uncontrollable schizophrenics, not the 98% of those who live quietly at home or locked in non-violent delusions. And it USED to be considered until two things happened:

1. One side discovered that state homes could be closed at a great benefit to the state.

2. The other side began being concerned about the civil rights of the mentally ill and began advocating for them all to be treated exactly the same as those who were in full control of their faculties.

As a result, state group homes and developmental centers began to be closed and the residents shipped back to their communities without regard to whether or if they were ready to go, or if they understood what was waiting for them, or if there were facilities that could accept them or support them. In 95% of cases, they were able to go. In 5%, they were not, and those are the ones out on the streets or living in these substandard facilities today.

Even today, well-meaning civil rights advocates will INSIST that severely autistic, mentally ill, or profoundly retarded people (like your nephew) should be living in "least restrictive environments" by which they mean homes or unsecured facilities and they will do anything they can to block returning such individuals to more secure facilities. At the same time, states lack money and cut funding to "unnecessary" locked facilities because we have the drugs to keep "those people" under control. Except sometimes we don't and even if we do, they need constant maintenance.

It's just not as simple as either let'emallout or lock'emallup, no matter how badly people want to think it is. There is no one size fits all: We need a case-by-case fit for each and every person out there. Costs more up front, but the savings will come at the back end when they all don't have to be warehoused in prisons and mental wards for the rest of their lives.
 
2014-05-18 09:51:27 PM  

Big_Doofus: This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values. You are going to get roasted for not being "tolerant" enough. But don't feel bad because the crowd on here that comes out to beat on you won't ever own property anyway, so you're far ahead of them f ...


Yes, this is Fark, where people who are so ignorant and/or have led lives so sheltered that they cannot tell the difference between autistic teenagers, mentally ill teenagers and juvenile sex offenders conflate the groups in sanctimonious posts unsullied by any actual facts.

You, and he, and everyone else on this thread doing that, and Doug Ford, are idiots.

I don't believe any of you have any evidence whatsoever of a correlation between autism group homes and declining property values.  I certainly haven't observed any in my little nook of suburbia.  If you have any, post it or STFU.

/owns property
 
2014-05-18 10:14:53 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Even today, well-meaning civil rights advocates will INSIST that severely autistic, mentally ill, or profoundly retarded people (like your nephew) should be living in "least restrictive environments" by which they mean homes or unsecured facilities and they will do anything they can to block returning such individuals to more secure facilities.


As a parent of one of those profoundly developmentally disabled people, and a strong advocate for least restrictive environment (which has the added benefit of being the law where education is concerned, at least in the USA), I've had different experiences.  The advocates I talk to understand perfectly well that some individuals require more restrictive environments than others, and that a range of solutions is necessary.  There are, however, a lot of service providers and policy makers who don't, largely because the budget numbers work out better if you ignore the severe end of the bell curve.  So I think you're oversimplifying things here, and blaming the wrong entity.

In the autism world, if you want to understand the situation, follow the money.  Growth in autism diagnoses in the last decade has mostly been mild and moderate cases (fueled in part by over diagnosis - fact is that many of the mild cases are really just "Lego kids" who would not have been diagnosed as autistic a generation ago), where unrestrictive environments are appropriate.  It is therefore no accident that service providers concentrate on least restrictive solutions, and politicians glom onto them so they can appear effective with limited funds.  And I can't really blame them (that's politics), except that solutions appropriate to my kid seem always to be left out of consideration.

It should also be pointed out that many, if not most of the historic large-scale, restrictive residential facilities that are being replaced by group homes and home-based services (at least in my state) were basically patronage-driven cost sinks and/or snake pits and needed to be shut down on efficiency, anti-corruption and/or humanitarian grounds.
 
2014-05-18 10:42:25 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Big_Doofus: TV's Vinnie: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

This story smells a lot like Reagan's "Welfare Queen" bullsh*t.

I suppose you wouldn't be happy until all those kids were sent off to leper colonies.

Yep, that's exactly what the post said. You sir, are king of the douches.

Well, if he's talking about improved mental health services ...


Wow, overgeneralize much?
 
2014-05-18 10:47:04 PM  

Autistic Hiker: Big_Doofus: This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values. You are going to get roasted for not being "tolerant" enough. But don't feel bad because the crowd on here that comes out to beat on you won't ever own property anyway, so you're far ahead of them f ...

Yes, this is Fark, where people who are so ignorant and/or have led lives so sheltered that they cannot tell the difference between autistic teenagers, mentally ill teenagers and juvenile sex offenders conflate the groups in sanctimonious posts unsullied by any actual facts.

You, and he, and everyone else on this thread doing that, and Doug Ford, are idiots.

I don't believe any of you have any evidence whatsoever of a correlation between autism group homes and declining property values.  I certainly haven't observed any in my little nook of suburbia.  If you have any, post it or STFU.

/owns property


I don't know about autism group homes being a problem.  I was just referring to group homes in general that can sometimes be a problem. Not all group homes are bad, some work very well and are a vital link to helping people function in society.  Some don't work as well and can damage a neighborhood.  And no, I won't STFU just because someone like you wants to make this completely black and white.  There's plenty of grey in between.
 
2014-05-18 10:48:39 PM  

Autistic Hiker: Gyrfalcon: Even today, well-meaning civil rights advocates will INSIST that severely autistic, mentally ill, or profoundly retarded people (like your nephew) should be living in "least restrictive environments" by which they mean homes or unsecured facilities and they will do anything they can to block returning such individuals to more secure facilities.

As a parent of one of those profoundly developmentally disabled people, and a strong advocate for least restrictive environment (which has the added benefit of being the law where education is concerned, at least in the USA), I've had different experiences.  The advocates I talk to understand perfectly well that some individuals require more restrictive environments than others, and that a range of solutions is necessary.  There are, however, a lot of service providers and policy makers who don't, largely because the budget numbers work out better if you ignore the severe end of the bell curve.  So I think you're oversimplifying things here, and blaming the wrong entity.

In the autism world, if you want to understand the situation, follow the money.  Growth in autism diagnoses in the last decade has mostly been mild and moderate cases (fueled in part by over diagnosis - fact is that many of the mild cases are really just "Lego kids" who would not have been diagnosed as autistic a generation ago), where unrestrictive environments are appropriate.  It is therefore no accident that service providers concentrate on least restrictive solutions, and politicians glom onto them so they can appear effective with limited funds.  And I can't really blame them (that's politics), except that solutions appropriate to my kid seem always to be left out of consideration.

It should also be pointed out that many, if not most of the historic large-scale, restrictive residential facilities that are being replaced by group homes and home-based services (at least in my state) were basically patronage-driven cost sinks and/or snake pit ...


Also, you don't have any skin in the game or any biases, do you? How about you STFU?
 
2014-05-18 11:08:08 PM  

Big_Doofus: Wow, overgeneralize much?


Wow, can't shut up much?
 
2014-05-18 11:12:23 PM  

Big_Doofus: Autistic Hiker: Big_Doofus: This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values. You are going to get roasted for not being "tolerant" enough. But don't feel bad because the crowd on here that comes out to beat on you won't ever own property anyway, so you're far ahead of them f ...

Yes, this is Fark, where people who are so ignorant and/or have led lives so sheltered that they cannot tell the difference between autistic teenagers, mentally ill teenagers and juvenile sex offenders conflate the groups in sanctimonious posts unsullied by any actual facts.

You, and he, and everyone else on this thread doing that, and Doug Ford, are idiots.

I don't believe any of you have any evidence whatsoever of a correlation between autism group homes and declining property values.  I certainly haven't observed any in my little nook of suburbia.  If you have any, post it or STFU.

/owns property

I don't know about autism group homes being a problem.  I was just referring to group homes in general that can sometimes be a problem. Not all group homes are bad, some work very well and are a vital link to helping people function in society.  Some don't work as well and can damage a neighborhood.  And no, I won't STFU just because someone like you wants to make this completely black and white.  There's plenty of grey in between.



In response to Benevolent Misanthrope's posting "...it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value...", you wrote, "This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values."  Neither of you know what you are talking about, and I am calling you on it.

I see that you have not posted any actual facts in response to that challenge.  I think this is because the facts do not support you, but just in case your Google is broken, here are some relatively recent roundups of studies by state agencies that may inform you on the matter:

http://www.nj.gov/humanservices/clients/disability/goodneighbors/fa q.h tml

"There is an overwhelming volume of evidence that homes for people with disabilities do not significantly impact property values."

http://mn.gov/mnddc/parallels2/pdf/80s/85/85-EGH-CSR.pdf

"The results support the notion that group homes do not adversely affect neighborhood property values."

Perhaps I overqualified my challenge in terms of autism alone, which was the focus of Doug Ford's remarks in TFA and to which, in response, Benevolent Misanthrope and many others have attempted the aforementioned conflation of other irrelevant groups.  No matter, you still haven't posted any evidence supporting what you now claim you were saying about 'group homes in general', and until you do, I'm gonna stick with 'you don't know what you are talking about' as my response.  Frankly, I'm starting to wonder whether you really do own property.
 
2014-05-18 11:18:52 PM  

Big_Doofus: Also, you don't have any skin in the game or any biases, do you? How about you STFU?


Ya got me, obviously having an interest in matters of public policy that affect me and my family directly disqualifies me from any kind of rational discussion.  It's a good thing I own property or nobody would ever listen to me.
 
2014-05-18 11:21:39 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Big_Doofus: Wow, overgeneralize much?

Wow, can't shut up much?


Nice response.  About what I expected.
 
2014-05-18 11:23:58 PM  

moeburn: From how I understand it, if you leave an autistic person alone, they will leave you alone.  They don't like people.


Although they have difficulties with communication and appropriate social behavior, that doesn't necessarily mean they dislike human contact.
 
2014-05-18 11:28:27 PM  

Autistic Hiker: Big_Doofus: Autistic Hiker: Big_Doofus: This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values. You are going to get roasted for not being "tolerant" enough. But don't feel bad because the crowd on here that comes out to beat on you won't ever own property anyway, so you're far ahead of them f ...

Yes, this is Fark, where people who are so ignorant and/or have led lives so sheltered that they cannot tell the difference between autistic teenagers, mentally ill teenagers and juvenile sex offenders conflate the groups in sanctimonious posts unsullied by any actual facts.

You, and he, and everyone else on this thread doing that, and Doug Ford, are idiots.

I don't believe any of you have any evidence whatsoever of a correlation between autism group homes and declining property values.  I certainly haven't observed any in my little nook of suburbia.  If you have any, post it or STFU.

/owns property

I don't know about autism group homes being a problem.  I was just referring to group homes in general that can sometimes be a problem. Not all group homes are bad, some work very well and are a vital link to helping people function in society.  Some don't work as well and can damage a neighborhood.  And no, I won't STFU just because someone like you wants to make this completely black and white.  There's plenty of grey in between.


In response to Benevolent Misanthrope's posting "...it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value...", you wrote, "This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values."  Neither of you know what you are talking about, and I am calling you on it.

I see that you have not posted any actual facts in response to that challenge.  I think this is because the facts do not support you, but just in case your Google is broken, here are some relatively recent roundups of studies by state agencies that may inform you on ...



The Effect of Group Homes on Neighborhood Property Values
Peter F. Colwell, Carolyn A. Dehring, and Nicholas A. Lash
"In our study  of seven group homes neighborhoods in DuPageCounty, Illinois, we find that properties which areproximate to group homes experience a decline in value following the announcement of a group home's pending establishment."

There you go.

Am I against group homes?  Nope.  As I stated earlier, I think they can do a lot of good for people who need to be reintegrated into society.  They just have to be run well and have to be used when appropriate.

You can disagree withBenevolent Misanthrope's post,but you didn't live there and experience what he/she did so I find that to be somewhatdisingenuous.
 
2014-05-18 11:39:01 PM  

Big_Doofus: TV's Vinnie: Big_Doofus: Wow, overgeneralize much?

Wow, can't shut up much?

Nice response.  About what I expected.


Glad that I delivered.
 
2014-05-18 11:41:22 PM  

Big_Doofus: "In our study  of seven group homes neighborhoods in DuPageCounty, Illinois, we find that properties which are proximate to group homes experience a decline in value following the announcement of a group home's pending establishment."


LOL, did you read the line in the abstract that directly precedes it?  "The majority of studies examining the impact of group homes on neighborhood property values have found that group homes do not adversely effect property values. "

Or pretty much anything else that came up in your Google search that contradicts your view?  As in, pretty much everything else?

You're not fooling anybody, kiddo.  Better luck next time.
 
2014-05-18 11:44:24 PM  
For the Farkers living in fear of folks with mental health, chew on this fact:

People with mental health issues are disproportionally the victims of crime rather than the perpetrators of crime.
 
2014-05-18 11:49:00 PM  

Big_Doofus: That said, I used to work for a non-profit that held level 4 & 5 juvenile offenders. We actually had a group home in a residential neighborhood for a time, but had to move the kids out because of incidents like you describe. Everyone wants to put these kids in a residential setting when, at times, it just isn't appropriate. We had sex offenders in our group home and the final straw happened when one of our kids was arrested after trying to molest a younger neighborhood boy.

I know, there will be people who will attack me for this post as well, but I think if it happened to be your kid who was on the receiving end, you might think differently. And yes, our social workers thought our kids were mainly just misunderstood. In some cases they were right. Most of our kids were victims of abuse themselves and the stories about them were heartbreaking. Even so, they didn't need to live in a neighborhood setting.


Yeah, just because they were victims doesn't mean they weren't also perpetrators.
 
2014-05-18 11:52:19 PM  

Big_Doofus: The Effect of Group Homes on Neighborhood Property Values
Peter F. Colwell, Carolyn A. Dehring, and Nicholas A. Lash
"In our study  of seven group homes neighborhoods in DuPageCounty, Illinois, we find that properties which areproximate to group homes experience a decline in value following the announcement of a group home's pending establishment."

There you go.


If you're going to link a study to support your opinion, don't cherry pick that story. You might have wanted to complete that sentence.

The Effect of Group Homes on Neighborhood Property Values

This is from page 636 of the 2000 Study published in the journal of Land Economics.

img.fark.net
 
2014-05-18 11:54:04 PM  
And before you ask, no, I didn't pay 17 bucks to prove you wrong. My hospital has an institutional account with JSTOR
 
2014-05-19 12:02:27 AM  

Autistic Hiker: Big_Doofus: "In our study  of seven group homes neighborhoods in DuPageCounty, Illinois, we find that properties which are proximate to group homes experience a decline in value following the announcement of a group home's pending establishment."

LOL, did you read the line in the abstract that directly precedes it?  "The majority of studies examining the impact of group homes on neighborhood property values have found that group homes do not adversely effect property values. "

Or pretty much anything else that came up in your Google search that contradicts your view?  As in, pretty much everything else?

You're not fooling anybody, kiddo.  Better luck next time.


You didn't read the entire study.  They take a look at several of the prior studies and show their flaws.  They take a different statistical look.  "In our analysis,observations across time and space are incorporatedinto a format that is similar to an eventstudy. Our model is the first in this literature toaccommodate different price levels and appreciationrates across neighborhoods."

Sothere you go kiddo.
 
2014-05-19 12:04:15 AM  

hardinparamedic: And before you ask, no, I didn't pay 17 bucks to prove you wrong. My hospital has an institutional account with JSTOR


Guess what? So does the health care institution where I work!  And you didn't prove me wrong.  Read the whole thing.

By they way, how are you?  At least we haven't gotten each other banned recently!  That's gotta be worth something.
 
2014-05-19 03:30:18 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


Yep, people love to demonize anyone who says the non-politically-correct thing, but they seriously fail to consider the honest truth of the situation: group homes are where serious offenders are sent after serving time, or sent in lieu of serving time. No homeowner is going to want a place like that in their neighborhood if they know what truly comes with it.
 
2014-05-19 07:40:12 AM  

Evil Canadian: As one of the people in the type of neighbourhood where these home are *usually* located, I can't feel too much sympathy for errm. Mr. Ford and his constituents. I guess our paying for our home in a less expensive (read less desirable) neighbourhood means that we are just not rich enough to avoid having *all* these facilities being placed in our part of town? We do have a number of group homes and halfway house facilities around here. We are also in the part of the city that is waaaayyyy above average in the per capita number of sex offenders.

That being said, I have experienced absolutely zero crime in the 3 years I have lived here in the 'hood. It was far worse in our slightly better neighbourhood in Toronto, where things were constantly stolen, broken into and so forth. Not here. Not with all the group homes and halfway houses and various other social service agencies. Weird that.


If you hadn't mentioned Toronto I would think you were a neighbor of mine.

Have lived here a year and a half. There were 3 massive sweeps of the drug dealers who were doing some shooting in the first 8 months, and now the neighborhood is on the upswing. A theater and a music venue have opened; I'm happy here.
 
2014-05-19 09:32:59 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.


This.

The rural neighborhood I grew up in where kids could play outside unattended, etc., had a house purchased by the state for use as a home for troubled kids. The kids are brought there from the city and they are supposed to live in a family environment and get a fresh start, except that it took no time at all for the place to be over-whelmed and under-staffed. Now it's about a dozen teenage kids, some of whom have babies themselves and only a rotating staff about 4 adults. Not long ago one of the kids in that home lured a 5 year old neighborhood boy inside with the promise of playing video games and then proceeded to molest and beat him. A staff member EVENTUALLY showed up but the situation could easily have been much more horrific.

Now, that neighborhood's whole character and existence is defined by the presence of that one group home. That's too bad.
 
2014-05-19 09:36:47 AM  

lindalouwho: THERE'S TWO OF THEM?!!

/Ford's, I mean


four of them. Don't forget big bro Randy and sister Kathy.
 
2014-05-19 09:46:35 AM  

gshepnyc: Benevolent Misanthrope: It's a little more complicated than that,  subby.

I watched the neighbourhood I grew up in completely changed by a "multi-treatment facility".  It was a quiet place, people were nice, we kids could play outside, nobody got broken in on... nice neighbourhood.  Very suburban.  Then, we got a group home.  What can I say - mentally ill teenagers act out.  Within 3 months, there were break-ins, cars keyed, fights in the alleyway, teenage kids on "free time" terrorizing the kids from the neighbourhood, cops being called day and night, ambulances pulling up day and night... it did ruin the neighbourhood.  The first argument from the workers was that everyone were just prejudiced against the mentally ill, and no one could prove it was "their" kids doing that stuff.  So some neighbours got security cameras and caught the little bastards red-handed.  Then the tune changed to "need for tolerance and understanding".  But it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value and your family no longer feel safe.  And even if the kid got sent to juvie, another one came in.  The behaviours didn't change.

So, yes - if I'd spent 30 years paying off a mortgage on a house in a nice neighbourhood, and those kinds of behaviours started happening because a group home came in, I'd be pissed off, too.

That said, there is a need for better mental health services, especially for juveniles.  I'd like to see a tiered approach by which more levels are added, so that the kids who are placed in group homes in nicer neighbourhoods are ready to function socially there.  But maybe we should concentrate on actually offering mental health services first.

This.

The rural neighborhood I grew up in where kids could play outside unattended, etc., had a house purchased by the state for use as a home for troubled kids. The kids are brought there from the city and they are supposed to live in a family environment and get a fresh start, except that it took no time at ...


But but but....Autistic Hiker says these group homes never adversely affect neighborhoods and anyone who complains about them is an unfeeling animal!

See? I can generalize too!
 
2014-05-19 01:28:57 PM  

Loren: Yeah, just because they were victims doesn't mean they weren't also perpetrators.


Greylight: People with mental health issues are disproportionally the victims of crime rather than the perpetrators of crime.


Or maybe, just maybe, the big scary brush of "mental illness" is too broad to be useful for anything. Except as a rhetorical device, of course: it's great for playing to people's fears. Just not for actually doing anything.
 
2014-05-19 04:47:37 PM  
The phrase "mental health" is NOT a rhetorical device.  What a strange idea.  Just because you see a butter knife as a screwdriver does not change the meaning of butter knife.  For the record autism is seen as a developmental rather than mental health issue.
 
2014-05-19 06:09:22 PM  

Autistic Hiker: Big_Doofus: Autistic Hiker: Big_Doofus: This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values. You are going to get roasted for not being "tolerant" enough. But don't feel bad because the crowd on here that comes out to beat on you won't ever own property anyway, so you're far ahead of them f ...

Yes, this is Fark, where people who are so ignorant and/or have led lives so sheltered that they cannot tell the difference between autistic teenagers, mentally ill teenagers and juvenile sex offenders conflate the groups in sanctimonious posts unsullied by any actual facts.

You, and he, and everyone else on this thread doing that, and Doug Ford, are idiots.

I don't believe any of you have any evidence whatsoever of a correlation between autism group homes and declining property values.  I certainly haven't observed any in my little nook of suburbia.  If you have any, post it or STFU.

/owns property

I don't know about autism group homes being a problem.  I was just referring to group homes in general that can sometimes be a problem. Not all group homes are bad, some work very well and are a vital link to helping people function in society.  Some don't work as well and can damage a neighborhood.  And no, I won't STFU just because someone like you wants to make this completely black and white.  There's plenty of grey in between.


In response to Benevolent Misanthrope's posting "...it's hard to be tolerant when your home has lost thousands in value...", you wrote, "This is fark where very few people own homes or have any idea what things like this will do to property values."  Neither of you know what you are talking about, and I am calling you on it.

I see that you have not posted any actual facts in response to that challenge.  I think this is because the facts do not support you, but just in case your Google is broken, here are some relatively recent roundups of studies by state agencies that may inform you on ...


You are now faved.
 
2014-05-19 06:12:39 PM  
Cerebral Ballsy
Yep, people love to demonize anyone who says the non-politically-correct thing, but they seriously fail to consider the honest truth of the situation: group homes are where serious offenders are sent after serving time, or sent in lieu of serving time. No homeowner is going to want a place like that in their n ...

These aren't offenders. These are autistic people who have done other than be autistic.

Is that an offense in your eyes?
 
Displayed 144 of 144 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report