I know we're all tied up with national stuff right now, but is anyone paying attention to what's happening with that juvenile jail NSI in Wyoming, where kids are fleeing and terrified and the state decided that "the market would decide" if their "therapeutic" techniques are good?
This is a facility that was nearly shut down in Michigan for causing the death of a young man. A chain of kid jails that is currently being investigated. And the state of Wyoming thinks the market will decide if this is a problem?
I'm sorry... kids are not widgets. They're not for sale and their treatment and care should not be decided by whether or not people *purchase the services* of a child prison.
It's easy to lose sight of the issues destroying individual lives locally when we're in crisis. But we can't. People-- in this case kids-- are depending on it.
I heard about this on @WYPublicRadio this morning, and if they could send a link to their very thorough story that would be great. In the mean time...
Here is local coverage of the runaways. Because everything is awful this is treated as a nuisance rather than a crisis in how we are treating traumatized children. So here is some really bad local coverage for starts. thesheridanpress.com/news/local/nei…
The public radio story discussed the national investigation beginning in Michigan, and I'm wondering if that's the same investigation as the Lakeside Academy? Whether these institutions and share a parent organization?
That was what @WYPublicRadio reported and I'd also be v happy for a link
So to summarize, a chain of juvenile jails across the country is harming kids, and the kids in the WY facility had been found running away, and the adults who are supposedly in charge think this is a nuisance rather than a serious sign that we are putting children's lives at risk
I think the part that hit me the hardest was that there was this kind of moving story about a rancher finding a scared kid on his land and bringing him home for a hot breakfast, and...the takeaway wasn't that this kid had run from something bad...(cont)
The takeaway seemed to be that the rancher, like many people in Wyoming, carries a gun, and if the kid had not been compliant the rancher would have shot him, and that would have been sad.
So to b clear: concern is *not* a nationally-investigated abusive nightmare factory (cont)
It's that locals will be sad if they feel compelled to shoot the runaway children.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A short thread on what refusal to comply can look like, with specifics, examples, and ideas for what the future may hold.
Actually IDK if it's gonna be short, but it's gonna be specific, so read on if you're curious.
When people think of protest, or actions against authoritarian governments, they often think of people in streets yelling stuff and holding signs. And that's important, protest is a powerful way to show where the people stand! But
As a person who operates in systems that are extremely authoritarian (prisons, jails, criminal courts) let me tell you that many of the systems in which we operate simply *do not care* about protest.
As long as it costs them little, they can ignore it.
Just a reminder that $10 billion has been poured into this election, much of it in ads that line the pockets of media and social media companies. Changing the rules of campaign finance would also eliminate the financial incentive for media companies to drive us nuts every 4 years
Over a billion of this went to Pennsylvania alone. How much do Pennsylvania media companies benefit directly from both-sidesing elections and ensuring their state stays a key swing state?
And on a national scale, how much do all of our media companies quite literally profit from making the election seem like a non-stop horse race with higher and higher stress and drama?
It's the weekly video. For World Mental Health Day, let's talk about something you might not know---how health insurance providers may actually drive up mass incarceration.
Some context: here is the original law, from 2008, where the government tried to get insurers to provide the same level of coverage for mental and physical health. propublica.org/article/biden-…
But they...didn't. Sometimes, they might restrict what medicines they include in their formulary...
1. This is an awful tone to take, as a leader, when talking about government action to forcibly, sometimes violently, remove people from a place where they are seeking stability.
This tone is bad because it treats the circumstance of homelessness as if it were an overt, intentional action by the unhoused person. "No more excuses"? You think people saying "homelessness is not a crime, please don't treat it as such" are giving EXCUSES?
2. It's especially bad when you consider what sweeps do. Sweeps result in arrests, and displacement, but also strip people of all their worldly possessions.
The thing about the Trump immunity case is that yeah, to an extent it creates "King President" but tbh it much more creates "King SCOTUS." This is because what is an "official" act of the prez will of course be litigated and...
...who is waiting at the end of the road on all that litigation? King SCOTUS of course, who will get to decide what's official, what *evidence* is sufficiently tied to official acts to come in or not come in, and basically whether a case lives or dies.
And one more thing.
This whole idea of a job being so important that you get to be above the law? Yeah, that idea comes *straight* from the absolute mess of absolute and qualified immunity in policing and prosecution.