Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Yeah, that's not what this bill does. Nice try though. It's always refreshing to see members visibly reading talking points while shooting a video. Rep. Bakeberg (R-Jordan) sets the record straight (during a committee hearing on the actual bill, not in a scripted video): "This is not a voucher...

31,225 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Right to Recovery Treatment evidence sessions in Scottish Parliament with Third Sector With You and The Salvation Army. What wording should replace “addiction” in the Bill to ensure people can access treatment without requiring a formal diagnosis? @GraemeCall78170 instead of answering his reply focuses on systemic access issues and the limitations of the Bill’s scope. Dr Sandesh Gulhane reminds him that the bill has narrow scope due to it not being a government bill and has to ask again about the use of the word addiction. Director of Addictions of The Salvation Armysays, "I think to give it a word or a title, it’s a really difficult thing". (Yes, its like a scene from the Ministry of Funny Walks) only none of this is funny, but deadly serious. Dr Sandesh Gulhane "Just on the point of addiction being used as a diagnosis, we heard from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, it was clear that perhaps the word addiction is not the right word to be used, and I'm sure that Douglas Ross, who is he member in charge of the bill, would be looking into that. So if we were to amend this because we need to say that you have something, not necessarily a diagnosis, but what is it that we should be saying in, in your opinion, as a way to have the right to have a treatment. Is it simply you would like to receive treatment or what exactly would you suggest?" @GraemeCall78170 "I think it for us, it's always been about access, right, so treatment is there. We recognise as an organisation we have a full clinical offer in England, not in Scotland, so we understand the importance of clinical process processes and in certain circumstances diagnosis is absolutely critical because there are other things that are going on, underlying mental health, underlying physical problems, so we completely recognise that. But the reality of the system is that people can't get access to the system, it's not about treatment. So services like ours here, all we do is we try and find ways to navigate the system to try and get people to where they need to be. But a lot of people that we engage with don't need a medical intervention, they dont. They just some mutual aid, some support, they need some practical stuff around their housing. So I think it's the disappointing thing as I read the bill as it was presented, it did feel narrow to me. I can't deny that. And I think it didn't reflect the experiences that we have as organisation." Dr Sandesh Gulhane "Being a member's bill it does need to be very narrow. It's not a government bill. If it was a government bill, that that's fair enough that this really does need to have enough scope. But my question was, what wording would you use in instead of a diagnosis of addiction? What wording would you like to see for people who do want to access treatment?" Lee Ball [Director of Addictions, Salvation Army] "For me, I think it's the person's right to want treatment. I think to give it a word or a title, it’s a really difficult thing. I don't envy your job trying to come up with a word for this because there are so many words that have so many different meanings."

FAVORUK 💜

22,503 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨School Choice or Not?🚨 I was up late last night, trying to think about what to say regarding HB3, the "School Choice" bill in Texas. I know this video of Hollie Plemons' testimony is 10 minutes long, but if you want to truly understand why HB3 is a horrible bill and why it will HARM Texas, you MUST listen. This testimony is 🔥. HB3 is NOT conservative. It grows government. It is a vendor bill. It is fiscally irresponsible. It is not a school choice bill; it removes choice. This is EXACTLY why paid voucher pushers in Texas refused to debate Hollie or give her a platform. Because she speaks the truth. HB3 (and the Senate bill) is in direct violation of the Republican Party of Texas Platform. And if this is happening in Texas, it's happening elsewhere. So what's going to happen now? I do not know, but I have a feeling that cowardice runs deep in the Texas House. Governor Abbott made it clear during the primaries that if a candidate did not support his school choice initiative, he would not endorse or financially support them. This was a form of extortion. So now, out of fear of losing their positions as House Representatives and Senators, they will vote for any school choice bill, even if it does not support conservative values or violates our platform. It’s also important to note that those who spoke the loudest as paid propagandists for this bill, didn’t even bother to show up to testify. This is WRONG. This is unfair to Texas parents. And I hope that every Texas voter speaks their mind at the ballot box if this bill passes.

Sarah Fields

22,782 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr