dakota44

It was by no means an extreme characterization. Believe me I am aware of the issues that you raise, but in my opinion it does not excuse permitting people in need of treatment going without. Rather, it calls for a process that protects both. Surely a nation that claims to be so capable in so many things can find a process that will ensure a fair and just means to determine who honestly needs the help and who is being railroaded. After all, this IS the 21st century. Surely we have progressed to some degree and need not live in a past of abuses.

kimilseung

Rosenhan's experiment suggests not (though I hope lesson have been learnt)

dakota44

An experiment in 1973 that used pseudopatients to fool hospital staff. Sorry, but I don't relate that to effective diagnosis of truly ill patients. Anyone can convincingly pretend to be insane and, in doing so, might then find it rather difficult to prove they are not, especially in an environment filled with mentally ill patients and overworked staff. But the truly insane don't find it so easy to pretend to be sane. This character in Arizona had ALL the classic symptoms and could not hide them.

kimilseung

The point was in relation to chartreuses fear of the sane being deprived of their freedom.

dakota44

OK, I understand that. There are ways to protect against that kind of abuse. It only requires the will and the legislation.

chartreuse

Are they effective? Or just a sop so's folks can sleep well at night?

Once upon a time being gay was evidence of insanity. As was falling pregnant out of wedlock.

Michael

What is insanity? Is being strange or out of the ordinary the definition of insanity? That was the problem in the 1950s/1960s where over a 1/2 million people were forcibly committed.

The problem is that the vast majority of the mentally insane are not violent much like the population as a whole. So how can a psychiatrist determine which will be violent. Most psychiatrists won't make that call because they will likely be wrong.

Of all the US assassination attempts or terrorist attacks, I can only name 3 that could be considered mentally insane. Just because a person has paranoid delusions does not mean they will carry out their fantasies.

dakota44

Isn't it time we stopped living in the past? I don't live in the realm of what happened 50 years ago. I care what is possible today. I will admit that it is an issue fraught with disagreement.

chartreuse

Is that code for "let's forget the mistakes of the past, so's we can have a damn good crack at repeating them"?

dakota44

I would never proclaim that Psychiatry is remotely perfect. It never will be. But we certainly have a better handle today on what constitutes Paranoid personality - Schizoid Personality - and many others. Agreed that not all people who suffer from many of these issues is a danger to others, although certainly potentially a danger to themselves in many cases. I also do not support automatic incarceration in a mental institution except for severe cases, and they are not so difficult to spot.

The sad truth is, we cannot even ensure that someone who is suffering a mental illness accepts medication to alleviate their symptoms. In the majority of cases, that is all that would be needed and they would lead a much better life. We live in this belief that a person who is irrational and in the throes of suffering some of these issues is somehow rational enough to decide if they should have treatment, or more accurately that they have the freedom to choose, even when they lack the rationality to do so. I just find it cruel to let people suffer who do not need to. Had this kid received sufficient outpatient care and supervised medication, some innocent people might be alive to day.

dakota44

What are we, children who refuse to learn from their mistakes? Sad commentary on humanity if we are. There have been horrendous things done in the name of medical research (like infecting black men with syphilis, among others) but we haven't stopped medical research, thank heaven. We just work hard to make sure such atrocities are not repeated. If we decided that we should do nothing that someone else ****ed up in the past, we would still be living in the dark ages.

chartreuse

Mate, this is such an easy shot. From what you've said; Yes. You are.

You think it might be a good idea to make sure we've got effective mechanisms in place* to prevent such things before we start sticking random folks in the Gulag?

I just can't. It's too easy.


ETA: * Assuming such a thing were even possible.

cluedweasel

Oh go on. You know you really want to.

dakota44

Oh come on. The first comment is just plain silly. The second, of course I think there should be a mechanism and a reasonable process...and I never said to start shoving people in asylums tomorrow. I also made it clear that for the vast majority of these individuals, medication and not hospitalization would be the answer.

As for the last comment, it seems that the argument I hear most often is that "this happened before, so no". So why can we not learn from those mistakes and put in place those mechanisms that you speak of, and yes they are possible, and get help to people who need it.

Sorry if you fail to see any validity to my argument. I'm someone who does not like to see mentally disturbed people suffer those torments needlessly. I must be terribly warped to be so concerned.

Sally Redux

I don't know how this works in the USA, would the patient have to pay for this themselves?