Deinstitutionalization is Madness

Homeless man (Photo credit: Matthew Woitunski)

Homeless man (Photo credit: Matthew Woitunski)

The definition of deinstitutionalization is simple. It is taking mentally ill patients from mental institutions and placing them on your street corner and/or in local jails.

Ever wondered where all those mentally ill “homeless” people came from? Blame it on “deinstitutionalization.”

Now, I realize there are millions of Americans who see or hear the word “deinstitutionalization” and have no clue what it means nor to what it is referring.

Ted Cruz 2016


So let’s see if we can shed a little light on it.

First we must understand the Law of Unintended Consequences. “The law of unintended consequences, often cited but rarely defined, is this: that actions of people—and especially of government—always have effects that are unanticipated or
unintended.” SOURCE

So what makes the law of unintended consequences work? Well, the “Wise Geek” says the following: “The two top reasons why the law of unintended consequences works, according to Merton, is that the framers of a social change are either ignorant of possible far reaching effects of the law or make errors when they develop a change that don’t have the effects they desired. Other reasons why we sometimes see changes occur after any type of event, new scientific development, or treaty is passed may have to do with “self interest,” so much so that a person who desperately wants to see a change doesn’t evaluate the ultimate effects of that change.” SOURCE

Woodrow Wilcox


Deinstitutionalization is a clear result of the law of unintended consequences. They go together like bread and butter.

The idea behind deinstitutionalization was this — that patients fare much better when they are looked after in a supportive and loving environment than when they are placed in a human warehouse, as mental institutions were sometimes referred to in the 1950’s and 1960’s.

So, America closed down many of its mental institutions without making sure the community supports were in place ad ready to receive the former mental patients. As a result, the mentally ill wound up on our streets, in our jails, and in unprepared homes where they created much discord and, in some cases, even committed heinous crimes that tore those families apart.

To understand what happened and the grievous error our government made by releasing much of the country’s mentally ill onto society, we have to go back to the 1960’s. (Surprise! Surprise!) Since, roughly, 1960 it has become almost impossible to hospitalize a person with a serious mental illness.

Deinstitutionalization is a clear case in which the “do-gooders” have managed to bollocks things up to a fair-the-well.

Civil Rights was the battle cry of the political left of the sixties and it was their actions at the time that led, eventually, to the mess we have now with the insane roaming the streets of America as “homeless” people. It was their actions that led to the courts placing a limit on involuntary institutionalization and on the courts setting minimum standards for care in institutions. Read more here.

Unfortunately, as the mentally ill were invited OUT of the mental hospitals they found few services or support waiting for them outside. In many cases, it fell to their families to take care of them, most often, those families were not prepared and were overwhelmed. Far too many of the formerly institutionalized mentally ill eventually wound up on the streets of America as homeless people and/or in the nation’s jails.

Clayton E. Cramer, in a piece entitled: ‘Deinstitutionalization’: Mass Murder and Untreated Madness, which was published at PJMedia says the following: “For those of you under 40 — it used to be startling indeed to see people begging in the streets or obviously insane in public. Homelessness and various forms of urban degradation were byproducts of deinstitutionalization.” SOURCE

In Mr. Cramer’s book: “My Brother Ron: A Personal and Social History of the Deinstitutionalization of the Mentally Ill.” Mr. Cramer says: “… for centuries the connection between mental illness and violence was considered sufficiently obvious that the legal system provided various ways to hospitalize the severely mentally ill when they first provided clear indications that they were a hazard to themselves or others. Only in the 1960s and 1970s did our society decide that this system was unfair. It then embarked on a policy of “deinstitutionalization.” The idea: standards for long-term, involuntary commitment of the mentally ill should be just a bit less demanding than the standards of proof for criminal conviction.

Unsurprisingly, emptying out the mental hospitals and making it difficult to hospitalize people with serious mental illness problems meant that society as a whole became a bit more like a low-grade mental hospital.”

There is a compelling argument that those supporting gun control in America are missing the importance of treatment for our mentally ill. Consider the role of mental illness in all the recent mass shootings all across the country. ”

Mr. Cramer says: “Supporters of gun control argue that we need stricter laws because ordinary, law-abiding people just ‘snap’ and go on rampages. There are people who indeed snap and go on rampages (and not just with guns) — but they are seldom ordinary. Often, they are people with long histories of mental illness who in 1960 would have been hospitalized before they killed someone.” SOURCE

Deinstitutionalization is not working. It is not going to work. It is far too late to even consider “fixing” it.

America needs Congress to step up on this problem and make the necessary changes to existing laws and/or pass new laws that will allow us to gather the mentally ill from our streets and prisons and from families that are at their wit’s end, and place them in institutions in which they will be cared for, and locked away from society — for their sake AND for ours.

Deinstitutionalization was a “feel good” project. In action it has been worse than a train wreck.

When one considers all the harm to individuals, to families, and to the country as a whole, it is difficult to determine which is more insane – the patient,or the deinstitutionalization policy.

This article is printed with the permission of the author(s). Opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the article’s author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of American Clarion or Dakota Voice LLC.

Comment Rules: Please confine comments to salient ones that add to the topic; Profanity is not allowed and will be deleted; Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will be deleted.

Similar Posts:

J.D. Longstreet is a conservative Southern American (A native sandlapper and an adopted Tar Heel) with a deep passion for the history, heritage, and culture of the southern states of America. At the same time he is a deeply loyal American believing strongly in “America First”. He is a thirty-year veteran of the broadcasting business, as an “in the field” and “on-air” news reporter (contributing to radio, TV, and newspapers) and a conservative broadcast commentator. Longstreet is a veteran of the US Army and US Army Reserve. He is a member of the American Legion and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. A lifelong Christian, Longstreet subscribes to “old Lutheranism” to express and exercise his faith.
JD Longstreet
View all articles by JD Longstreet
Print Friendly


  • thisoldspouse

    I have to disagree with the author. Easy institutionalization lays the groundwork for a campaign of political pogroms against an undesireable group, depending who is in power. And the determiners of “mental illness” these days are firmly on the extreme political Left.

    To be sure, it was much more objectively determinable who was dangerously mentally ill prior to the 60’s because we were a saner country with a moral underpinning then. But that foundation has been eroded almost entirely away, now. I don’t want the “experts” of today determining that 2nd Amendment supporters or someone who defends marriage are a danger to society.

    • Bob Ellis

      I think this one is a tough one.

      Many if not most of the homeless on the streets, and more than a few who are committing crimes, would have once been institutionalized. It’s sad, but there are a lot of people who simply aren’t mentally capable of living without some dedicated assistance. And in an age where (a) family responsibility is almost forgotten, and (b) training of children in morality and responsibility is being forgotten, too, without SOMEONE (i.e. an institution) to control mentally unstable people, society at large is left to deal with the problem.

      But on the other hand, ‘Spouse rightly points out that we currently have a government that is ALREADY “saber rattling” that its political enemies (i.e. conservatives who don’t agree their lawless agenda) are mentally unsound, terrorists, etc. We are such a short step from political enemies (i.e. conservatives) being locked up “for public safety”-and even the leaders of the Republican Party are more in step with the Leftists than they are the base of their own party, so don’t go looking to the GOP to stand up and defend the people against such a development.

      So many societal problems would go away if America returned to being the moral and religious people we were just a few decades ago.

      Again, I am reminded of what founder Benjamin Rush said:

      I lament that we waste so much time and money in punishing crimes and take so little pains to prevent them. We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government; that is, the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by means of the Bible; for this divine book, above all others, favors that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws, and all those sober and frugal virtues which constitute the soul of republicanism.

      • thisoldspouse

        I cannot count the number of times that I have heard someone from the Left say or write that “homophobia” is a serious “mental illness,” along with the implied remedy of forcible “treatment.” They may be just spouting wishful thinking now, but those wishes are implementable by the increasingly disconnected, hostile politicians and unelected judges.

        Now, a baker in Colorado is being threatened with stiff fines/jail time for his “homophobia.” It’s not just a short step to this Fascist reality, we are virtually there.