The Medical Thread

[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...

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by SoEnchanting

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...

Here is an interesting article...

The thing is, one cannot be forced psych ward hospital "INVOLUNTARILY"---UNLESS there is a severe crisis, such as those incidents that engage law enforcement and healthcare emergency...

[SoEnchanting]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Here is an interesting article...

The thing is, one cannot be forced psych ward hospital "INVOLUNTARILY"---UNLESS there is a severe crisis, such as those incidents that engage law enforcement and healthcare emergency...

http://www.psychlaws.org/PressRoom/faqonbakeract.htm

[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.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

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.

If you could give me some of the references for that I would greatly appreciate it!

Well, that is the issue about college... People do not HAVE TO GO TO college for special treatments, because ultimately, it is a choice to go. Where as PUBLIC EDUCATION is not a choice for young people under 18 years old... I do agree that all universities and colleges should improve their student services and do better outreach for the success of the student. But, there are nearly 20,000+ or more with commuters, and not everyone can be watched, nor do the colleges want to get into the business of that. Otherwise, it is just as institutional as prisons.

The VT killer should have been at a place were he could obtain support that he needed to be optimal for his successful function... But that still lays it squarely on the sufferer which also does not help the grieving families...

Do you think a "one size fits all" can help in these kinds of cases?

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

If you could give me some of the references for that I would greatly appreciate it!

Well, that is the issue about college... People do not HAVE TO GO TO college for special treatments, because ultimately, it is a choice to go. Where as PUBLIC EDUCATION is not a choice for young people under 18 years old... I do agree that all universities and colleges should improve their student services and do better outreach for the success of the student. But, there are nearly 20,000+ or more with commuters, and not everyone can be watched, nor do the colleges want to get into the business of that. Otherwise, it is just as institutional as prisons.

The VT killer should have been at a place were he could obtain support that he needed to be optimal for his successful function... But that still lays it squarely on the sufferer which also does not help the grieving families...

Do you think a "one size fits all" can help in these kinds of cases?

References? lol. wow AKA_Monet, you are so detailed. I watched this on CNN shortly after the shootings.

What do you mean when you say "one size fits all?"

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

References? lol. wow AKA_Monet, you are so detailed. I watched this on CNN shortly after the shootings.

What do you mean when you say "one size fits all?"

The VT shooter is obviously a different person than the NIU shooter. They may have had similar diagnoses - I don't know? I think like you said, the VT was "severely emotionally disturbed", there are rules in place upto high school. You said the universities should have these rules in place. I said it would be nice, but going to college is still an option for people... One can pursue military, one can persue voctech school, one can get certificates, so on and so forth. How did these gentlemen get admitted into college with all its pressures and flip out like they did? Were they antagonized? What?

Chit, I was hella humiliated in my graduate school program with racism and sexism, angry to scratch the wall off, but NEVER did it run through my mind to physically hurt someone, even after my boss stinky breath yelled at me on a daily basis... Never. What I endured, no student should have to endure. I did because of insane reasons. But, it seems plausible that these gentlemen could not endure if their circumstances were as bad as folks say they were...

Of course now, it is water under the bridge...

I think I heard or read somewhere that the NIU lunatic stopped taking his meds because it made him a zombie. Very few psychotropic meds do that - chiefly the anti-psychotics - putting him at risk of possible traumatic experiences, or schizophrenia. All I am saying is, once those drug effects "wore off", if it was schizophrenia, the hallucinations, if he had them, restarted; but that's pure speculation.

So, ceremoniously saying the all folks with mental illness have restricted freedoms is a "one size fits all", when that is not the case.

But, there are firearm restrictions on the mentally ill that is by honor system only. Like there is a box or bubble you select to answer the question, have you ever been institutionalized in mental healthcare system? Homie at NIU marked "NO"... So he lied...

[cheerfulgreek]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

The VT shooter is obviously a different person than the NIU shooter. They may have had similar diagnoses - I don't know? I think like you said, the VT was "severely emotionally disturbed", there are rules in place upto high school. You said the universities should have these rules in place. I said it would be nice, but going to college is still an option for people... One can pursue military, one can persue voctech school, one can get certificates, so on and so forth. How did these gentlemen get admitted into college with all its pressures and flip out like they did? Were they antagonized? What?

Chit, I was hella humiliated in my graduate school program with racism and sexism, angry to scratch the wall off, but NEVER did it run through my mind to physically hurt someone, even after my boss stinky breath yelled at me on a daily basis... Never. What I endured, no student should have to endure. I did because of insane reasons. But, it seems plausible that these gentlemen could not endure if their circumstances were as bad as folks say they were...

Of course now, it is water under the bridge...

I think I heard or read somewhere that the NIU lunatic stopped taking his meds because it made him a zombie. Very few psychotropic meds do that - chiefly the anti-psychotics - putting him at risk of possible traumatic experiences, or schizophrenia. All I am saying is, once those drug effects "wore off", if it was schizophrenia, the hallucinations, if he had them, restarted; but that's pure speculation.

So, ceremoniously saying the all folks with mental illness have restricted freedoms is a "one size fits all", when that is not the case.

But, there are firearm restrictions on the mentally ill that is by honor system only. Like there is a box or bubble you select to answer the question, have you ever been institutionalized in mental healthcare system? Homie at NIU marked "NO"... So he lied...

Then I guess I think one size fits all. Yes, anyone can lie, but for those who have been treated, then there should be restrictions.