The Medical Thread

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Cheerful-

Are you asking all these questions because you saw the Charlie Bartlett trailer?

lol lol lol lol

No, I just wanna read other opinions. I do wanna see that movie though. Does anyone know when it starts?

I just want to mention one more thing. Back to the DSM manual....o.k. I promise I won't bring up the the DSM anymore...lol.

I just wanted to mention something about the vaccines. There may be an overlooked alternative explanantion for this epidemic. Over time the the criteria for a diagnosis of autism have loosened, resulting in the labeling of substantially more mildly afflicted individuals as autistic. The 1980 version of the DSM required individuals to meet six of six criteria for an autism diagnosis, In contrast to that, the 1994 version, which is the version we're currently using requires individuals to meet any 8 of 16 criteria. The 1980 version contained only two diagnosis relevant to autism, DSM IV contains five including Asperger's syndrome which most researchers regard as a high functioning variant of autism.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

lol lol lol lol

No, I just wanna read other opinions. I do wanna see that movie though. Does anyone know when it starts?

I just want to mention one more thing. Back to the DSM manual....o.k. I promise I won't bring up the the DSM anymore...lol.

I just wanted to mention something about the vaccines. There may be an overlooked alternative explanantion for this epidemic. Over time the the criteria for a diagnosis of autism have loosened, resulting in the labeling of substantially more mildly afflicted individuals as autistic. The 1980 version of the DSM required individuals to meet six of six criteria for an autism diagnosis, In contrast to that, the 1994 version, which is the version we're currently using requires individuals to meet any 8 of 16 criteria. The 1980 version contained only two diagnosis relevant to autism, DSM IV contains five including Asperger's syndrome which most researchers regard as a high functioning variant of autism.

The genetics of autism just came out... I posted it somewhere in the News and Views thread.

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

The genetics of autism just came out... I posted it somewhere in the News and Views thread.

Thanks, I'll find it.

[AKA_Monet]

Back to mental illness treated by medication:

Do you the "mentally ill treated with meds" should have restricted freedoms in the US due to the "possibility" being a detriment to themselves or others?

What would/would not be the medical relevancy for that?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Back to mental illness treated by medication:

Do you the "mentally ill treated with meds" should have restricted freedoms in the US due to the "possibility" being a detriment to themselves or others?

What would/would not be the medical relevancy for that?

This is a really good question. I guess I would have to say yes. I was talking about something similar to this in another thread regarding athletes. Well, it wasn't that similar, but is was related to testosterone and how it effects human behavior.

When doctors prescribe medication to mentally ill patients, there are some restrictions that the patient is put under by the doctor, to keep them from endangering themselves or others, rather it be driving a car, cooking, ect ect. Personally, I think mentally ill patients should be forced into treatment even if they're not an imminent threat to themselves or others. The government estimates that there are about 2 million people in the United States who have been forced into mental institutions, and under federal law are banned from owning any kind of firearm.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

This is a really good question. I guess I would have to say yes. I was talking about something similar to this in another thread regarding athletes. Well, it wasn't that similar, but is was related to testosterone and how it effects human behavior.

When doctors prescribe medication to mentally ill patients, there are some restrictions that the patient is put under by the doctor, to keep them from endangering themselves or others, rather it be driving a car, cooking, ect ect. Personally, I think mentally ill patients should be forced into treatment even if they're not an imminent threat to themselves or others. The government estimates that there are about 2 million people in the United States who have been forced into mental institutions, and under federal law are banned from owning any kind of firearm.

A person not inflicting harm on others or him/herself cannot be legally "forced" into treatment. In fact, it is against the law to do place them in "hospital" (sanitarium). They have to be willing to go and sign themselves in for treatment. Now, if they get arrested, usually for hurting someone or him/herself, they can be placed in the psych ward. If they accept treatment options, and rarely they do, they let them out at a defined period of time.

The second issue is I do not want any law enforcement official diagnosing anyone. That is NOT their job, nor in their contracts. Of course, they do make a call whether to simply arrest for criminality vs. psychotic behavior. But, I can tell you, many cops do NOT want the make the diagnosis. Only a trained healthcare professional should make that determination. And I also know that psych evaluation is a high stress job and the money is not that great to give full effort into it...

A psychologist or psychiatrist has it rather nicely, but the length in time to be trained is what deters people from pursuing those positions. They have to be dedicated. Same with a Social Worker (license clinical and/or Masters level) and with them they suffer burn out relatively easily.

One can only go as far as the patient is willing to let them go...

Sadly, the onus is on the patient with these particular diseases: There is no overt pathology, there is not a blood diagnostic test, there is barely a DNA microarray on the illness and the drugs have severe side-effects that does not directly affect the target organ and moreover takes 2-3 weeks for quasi-stability with short pharmakinetics of ~6 hours... Who would want to be a drooling, headachy, dud for 12 hours out the day when alcohol and weed are cheaper?

[SoEnchanting]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

A person not inflicting harm on others or him/herself cannot be legally "forced" into treatment. In fact, it is against the law to do place them in "hospital" (sanitarium). They have to be willing to go and sign themselves in for treatment. Now, if they get arrested, usually for hurting someone or him/herself, they can be placed in the psych ward. If they accept treatment options, and rarely they do, they let them out at a defined period of time.

The second issue is I do not want any law enforcement official diagnosing anyone. That is NOT their job, nor in their contracts. Of course, they do make a call whether to simply arrest for criminality vs. psychotic behavior. But, I can tell you, many cops do NOT want the make the diagnosis. Only a trained healthcare professional should make that determination. And I also know that psych evaluation is a high stress job and the money is not that great to give full effort into it...

A psychologist or psychiatrist has it rather nicely, but the length in time to be trained is what deters people from pursuing those positions. They have to be dedicated. Same with a Social Worker (license clinical and/or Masters level) and with them they suffer burn out relatively easily.

One can only go as far as the patient is willing to let them go...

Sadly, the onus is on the patient with these particular diseases: There is no overt pathology, there is not a blood diagnostic test, there is barely a DNA microarray on the illness and the drugs have severe side-effects that does not directly affect the target organ and moreover takes 2-3 weeks for quasi-stability with short pharmakinetics of ~6 hours... Who would want to be a drooling, headachy, dud for 12 hours out the day when alcohol and weed are cheaper?

I was about to respond here and say that you can in fact hospitalize someone with a mental illness involuntarily, but then I went online and found out the Baker Act is only a Florida statute and not everywhere! Guess you learn something every day...

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

A person not inflicting harm on others or him/herself cannot be legally "forced" into treatment. In fact, it is against the law to do place them in "hospital" (sanitarium). They have to be willing to go and sign themselves in for treatment. Now, if they get arrested, usually for hurting someone or him/herself, they can be placed in the psych ward. If they accept treatment options, and rarely they do, they let them out at a defined period of time.

The second issue is I do not want any law enforcement official diagnosing anyone. That is NOT their job, nor in their contracts. Of course, they do make a call whether to simply arrest for criminality vs. psychotic behavior. But, I can tell you, many cops do NOT want the make the diagnosis. Only a trained healthcare professional should make that determination. And I also know that psych evaluation is a high stress job and the money is not that great to give full effort into it...

A psychologist or psychiatrist has it rather nicely, but the length in time to be trained is what deters people from pursuing those positions. They have to be dedicated. Same with a Social Worker (license clinical and/or Masters level) and with them they suffer burn out relatively easily.

One can only go as far as the patient is willing to let them go...

Sadly, the onus is on the patient with these particular diseases: There is no overt pathology, there is not a blood diagnostic test, there is barely a DNA microarray on the illness and the drugs have severe side-effects that does not directly affect the target organ and moreover takes 2-3 weeks for quasi-stability with short pharmakinetics of ~6 hours... Who would want to be a drooling, headachy, dud for 12 hours out the day when alcohol and weed are cheaper?

lol lol lol My God did this give me the giggles.

Despite a few publicized cases, of people with a serious mental illness committing violent crimes, patients with psychosis are responsible for a small amount of the violence in our society. Recent studies show that people with a psychotic illness have a modest increase in the odds of violent behavior. But other factors, including drug abuse and poverty are much stronger contributors to violence. I know people with mild cases of mental illness can't be forced into treatment, I was just saying that I think they should. For example, look at the Virginia shootings. The killer was treated for severe anxiety disorder and continued receiving therapy throughout his younger years in highschool, but then he was taken off of the therapy and whatever special education he was receiving. When he got to college he was stalking women, and professors even suggested that he get counseling. None of this would have happened if he would have been getting some kind of special education along with threapy. Though, in his case, this was a severe mental illness, but I honestly think the mild case patients should be forced into treatment too.