Similar question begging and unwarranted generalizations are found in the following statements. “The patient population • includes those who most clinicians would agree require a 24-hour inpatient stay.” It is well known that clinicians' threshold for both admitting patients and keeping them in hospital varies significantly both within countries and between countries. It partly depends on the availability of community-based alternatives and also on clinicians' willingness to use those alternatives. Dr. Glick and colleagues also state that “for most patients in an acute psychiatric crisis, hospital stays are the only option.” The reference they cite to support this claim has nothing to do with the statement (2). It refers to a simple patient satisfaction study that compared patients in inpatient wards with those in residential alternatives and found that the latter were more satisfied. Ironically, the supplement of the British Journal of Psychiatry that featured this article consists of seven reports all describing research on residential alternatives to inpatient care, the general tenor of which is cautiously affirmative that residential alternatives to acute admission should be part of the spectrum of acute services. For example, a comparison of hospitalized patients with those in six residential alternatives found no significant differences in these patients' risk of intentional or unintentional self-harm, social functioning, social problems, and recent self-harm. One residence even treated involuntarily detained patients (3).