This paper explores the custody and removal of homeless individuals as well as their rights and ability to defend themselves from unwanted psychiatric assessments and involuntary hospitalization. Involuntary hospitalization, a form of detention, is contextualized in public policy concerning housing and the social determinants of health, individual rights, the city’s shelter system and the right to shelter, and the racism and discrimination inherent in the distribution of homelessness. Involuntary psychiatric care dismisses personal views on psychiatry and medicine. Some adults who are homeless in New York City are at risk due to policies and practices that Mayor Adams suggests were meant to support adults who are experiencing homelessness and “appear” to have severe mental illness. As housing is a social determinant of health, a proper housing system very well may decrease the societal burden of mental illness. Individuals must not be subjected to nonconsensual psychiatric assessments or care due primarily to their lack of housing. Consensual care may be beneficent and its availability ethically appropriate. Beneficence is not an appropriate justification for involuntary hospitalization, so the additional ethical justification of preventing imminent danger is needed.

本文探讨了无家可归者的监护和转移，以及他们保护自己免受不必要的精神病评估和非自愿住院治疗的权利和能力。非自愿住院是拘留的一种形式，它涉及有关住房和健康的社会决定因素、个人权利、城市住房系统和住房权以及无家可归者分布中固有的种族主义和歧视的公共政策。非自愿精神科护理驳斥了个人对精神病学和医学的看法。纽约市的一些无家可归的成年人面临风险，因为市长亚当斯建议的政策和做法旨在支持无家可归和“似乎”患有严重精神疾病的成年人。由于住房是健康的社会决定因素，适当的住房制度很可能会减轻精神疾病的社会负担。个人不得因缺乏住房而接受未经同意的精神评估或护理。自愿护理可能是有益的，并且其可用性在道德上是适当的。慈善并不是非自愿住院的适当理由，因此需要防止迫在眉睫的危险的额外道德理由。