You'd think that means we like the alternative that's left, since we chose it in everything but name, but few bothered to think that far into the future.
It's what happens when you legislate by trials. Nobody seriously goes to court to improve things for everybody; it's a convenient fiction to cover the fact that those who litigate go to court to improve things primarily for themselves.
So family members could have somebody committed. All well and good, there were supposed safeguards in place to prevent abuse but bribes and such could bypass the safeguards. So we disposed of them.
Doctors could do the same. But they often were bribed or acted out of self-interest. They often made bad decisions that were later all but irreversible. So we disposed of that "intake system."
We like the idea of a mentally ill person committing themselves. "Hi, doc, I think I'm mentally ill. Please lock me up, declare me incompetent and strip me of many of my civil rights, and drug me against my will if I change my mind. Evaluate me from time to time and discharge me, taking a reduction in your income, should I be of sound mind again." Only a crazy person would do that. Fortunately, most have too much sanity. 
That leaves police.
Community groups might work, but just like with an HOA, they're probably better in theory than in practice.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read