http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ollection.html
I do not find it sad. It is a fire hazard and she lives in rented accomodations. Any firefighter would tell you that it is a fire hazard and they would not be able to rescue her in case of fire. It may be clean but dangerous all the same.
Oh, I totally understand that it is a fire hazard. And I support that they pull her and her sons out of there, and clean that place out.Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetana3
But I think what she said in the article is probably true. It'll kill her. She'll die from the mental and emotional trauma.
She said "I am nothing without my things..."
That part I agree is pretty sad.
And it is the core of the problem, I think.
I think in situations like that the hoarders who are being separated from their hoards need 24/7 medical surveillance.
And on some level, I do get it. When something is your passion and drive, when you put all your energy into the care and maintenance of something and then "they" decide it should be taken from you, that's got to induce a cocktail of miserable emotions; grief, rage, powerlessness, loss of identity, loss of purpose, loss of accomplishment, emptiness, resentment, maybe shame. In the case of hoarding which often seems linked to a sense of security or wealth-conservation, add in terror. Hoarding misplaces that passion and drive onto material objects in unhealthy and potentially dangerous ways, but I doubt that changes the feelings associated with losing your creation.
I wonder if there is an emergency protocol for when emergency workers (EMTs, etc.) know they will have to separate a hoarder from their hoard...Quote:
Originally Posted by kib
The hoarder probably needs to be sedated, maybe physically restrained so they don't jump in front of a bulldozer or something. Maybe they remove the hoarder from the property entirely too?
Amazing...Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
Obviously I am speculating. But my speculation is based on the massive amount of reading I have done on the subject. And on personal experience with my parents and grandma.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
I know that if "they" were going to separate my mom from her hoard, then she'd definitely need sedated or to have some kind of team of mental health pros right there. Otherwise, she'd totally lose it and probably do something dangerous and self-destructive.
Hoarders who have had their hoards disposed of by the powers that be have been known to attempt suicide.
I'm not a psychologist, but it's amazing how inseparable one's things can be from their identity and life itself:
"I do have a lot of things, but they aren't junk. They are my life. How can anybody say my life is junk?"
So, yes, her getting rid of her stuff will be like amputating a limb or worse--more like separating Siamese twins. I agree with UA--it will probably kill her.
It seems like people who can't live for today, or are not happy with today, or who look back nostalgically on what they no longer have, are more vulnerable to hoarding. It's like they want to keep the past alive.
This is true, these folks are called "sentimental hoarders." My mom is a sentimental hoarder.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
I'm not. I'm a first responder. And have some experience and training in the legal, medical, law-enforcement, and use-of-force angles of such situations.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
Hint: it's trickier than your breathlessly lurid speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
Please explain in detail.
Ask your county or city's Medical Director to show you the protocols.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
(I end up helping pharmacologically restrain people with some frequency to aid law enforcement. This often involves "almost" killing them. It's not a light-hearted thing to do, to "sedate" someone in the field when they are upset. Using force of any sort is serious business, and presents the distinct possibility of life-altering damage. Doing so to separate a hoarder from their hoard seems ill-advised except in some exceptional circumstances. But then again, I am in general opposed to initiating the use of force against others to impose my will or lifestyle upon them. YMMV. )
Thanks for being one of the good guys, Bae. If I ever get sick, I am going to pray someone like you shows up.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
And can I say that twice in my life, first responders have saved my life.
You guys are my heroes.
Thank you.
Did you see the pics? It looks like letting her and her sons stay in that hoard is a major fire hazard -- one that could put first responders or neighbors in risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
But again, I'm just a humble fisherman. I don't know much about this emergency medical stuff.
The photos make me nervous and anxious and make we want to go home and toss everything not vital!
I get a similar feeling...Quote:
Originally Posted by Float On
Do you know why you feel that way? Any reflections on it?
I don't have a family history of that sort by any means.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
I think my urge for simplicity came from my summer of living in a army tent on a wood platform in the wilds of W. VA. in '84. 3 months with 2 jeans, 3 shirts, hiking shoes, tennis shoes, 1 skirt, 1 dress shirt, 1 pair of sandals, 1 notebook, 1 small bible, 2 pens. I collected memories but not stuff.
Sounds amazing! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Float On
Often in cases of hoarding people have a "trigger." The death of a loved one, an illness, a traumatic event of some kind, and so forth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Float On
I think that people who live simply have triggers too. This time in your life probably qualifies! :)
I have seen a lot worse. Seems like the stuff she has is rather organized. It may be the place is attached to other rented property so that if a fire were to start it would create a hazard to other non hoarders and those non hoarders might be penalized by their insurers because of a known situation that makes fire more likely.
It is unfortunate nobody has been able to negotiate removal of some of the stuff to another location, provide some free storage, and solve the problem. No one wants to be known as the people who pushed the little old lady around. I think that's what private charities and some governmental agencies exist for, provide resources people don't have.
This lady has slipped through the cracks. There is a legitimate government concern and a legitimate privacy right also. Somewhere between handcuffing her and dragging her out while you put it all in the dumpster and standing back and begging her to do something about it...........is an answer.
I bet you were one of the good ones :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
It is possible that she would refuse to move the stuff somewhere else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
And it begs the question, if about 2% to 5% of people in the US (I know this woman is not from the US) have Compulsive Hoarding Disorder, then endlessly accommodating their equally endless hoarding would mean a lot of charities and governments dedicating funds and time to do so.
Can we afford to pay "Nanny G" to do that?
I think mental health services might be a good place to start, though those are pricey too.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
This poor old thing is 87 years old for heavens sake. I realize it is a delicate issue but i think the village counsel should take some time to really get it right. Say, 5 or 6 years to really think about it. KWIM?
Seems more prudent than using a take-down team and chemical restraints...Quote:
Originally Posted by peggy
#Elderly_lives_matter
I always wonder why they do an article like this. Kind of a freak show for the pleasure of gawkers? "There but for the grace of God", or "Thank God I am not like other men?" Poor woman, and how cruel to take those pictures, and how cruel to end your life that way, the fodder for gawking.Quote:
Originally Posted by bae
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by rodeosweetheart
Not really sure why Williamsmith thinks someone should provide free storage?
There are three people living there, and from what I caught of the article, ALL of them are collectors.
Move two out and their stuff and see how organized it could be.
Have the two sons pay for a climate controlled storage facility, as they are also going to be the one to transport her there, since her memories seem to be tactile, instead of a more normal memory function (in the head).
As far as the free storage goes........the answer is compassion and efficiency.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomuchStuff
Your way seems to adopt a heavy handed approach that should be used as a last resort. You compound the problem by citing exigency circumstances to force three people to accept change when it could be done while only impacting one. Be glad society sees "normal" by your understanding but believe me there will come a day when "normal" will seem unacceptable and be thankful a compassionate person takes charge and not an indifferent government official.
I think one of the main problems we face in dealing with hoarders and the dangerous environments they live in is that we don't deal with the problem until the last possible minute.
We need to get out in front of this problem with mental health services and others who can help deal with these issues.
This woman is 87 years old! This ain't a new problem with her.
When we wait until their houses are tinderboxes then bold, heavy-handed moves might be all we've got left to maintain public safety.
This could happen: http://www.kpho.com/story/30581393/h...-kingman-house
So them facing eviction, isn't time for the last resort? Instead, someone else should foot the bill for their bad behavior?Quote:
Originally Posted by Williamsmith
I agree. This went on for too long, and since they didn't own the house, why did the landlord not start earlier?Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
"Public safety". A convenient hammer.Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraliteAngler
Might want to go read the Fire Code, and the relevant local legislation. This is a private person, in her home, not a commercial enterprise open to the public. This is America, we have decided as a society that in general your rights to privacy trump theoretical claims of "public safety" when it comes to your home.
I do fire inspections all the time. I can inspect a business, cite them for violations, and require compliance, and I have the full power of the State behind me. Yes, that means if they resist my inspection or my order to remedy the situation, eventually men with guns will show up and shoot them dead if they continue to resist.
Private homes, not so much. I do those inspections too. They are entirely voluntary, at the request of the resident, and I cannot issue citations, only friendly recommendations.
Does it matter if you are the owner or a renter? If she lives in council housing it most likely is an afforable living situation and the laws applying to landlord/renter in England apply. My motherinlaw has pretty stiff restrictions on her use of the rented property and can be evicted for not abiding by the lease contract.
IANAL (I am not a lawyer), or a barrister in England, so I don't know their laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetana3
In my state, a landlord does bare responsibility for unsafe conditions. If the tenant creates them, then you start falling into grey area's. (has the landlord followed notifying procedures, etc.)
Also, the landlords have entrance, maintenance and inspection rights. Where as an owner of the property, without a warrant, generally only those invited in may enter.
And generally those have notification requirements, the landlord can't just barge in on the tenants willy-nilly, they have the right to "quiet enjoyment" of their home.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomuchStuff
I did however once recently use my inspection clause to make entry to a rented unit belonging to my mother that we suspected was Going South, and gathered enough information there to allow law enforcement to get a warrant. Horrible thing, a perfectly nice family descended into Meth Hell in about 3 months.
In this case, they have worked with her for over 2 years trying to get her to help find a solution. She has been to court twice over this issue. Her supporters apparently are stating that the stuff is a museum and should be allowed to stay. Now they are trying to get the public involved because she has lost the legal issue.
Again, I would say two years ago is not out in front of this issue. I think mental health services need to be in there a the first sign of hoarding.Quote:
Originally Posted by sweetana3
But ultimately, as unfashionable as this is to say: This is a public safety issue. That place could go up like a dried out Xmas tree! She is in there. Her sons are in there. Her neighbors are at risk.
So something, unfortunately for the little old lady, has to be done and it will have to be drastic.
Such is the case with many hoarders.
Nobody wants this happening!
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...blaze-1.901507
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...rette-1.992301