Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We might be talking about two different things. I would agree with you on manic depression. I am talking about schizophrenia where some one has no connection with reality and has delusions that include hearing voices. There is no way to define that as normal.
My family member has actually received much better care in the state system than he ever did with private insurance. While I am categorically opposed to universal, state-run health care (a topic for another thread) private insurance may not be equipped to deal with such a serious, long-term illness. My family member was diagnosed in his late teens and has otherwise good genes. He could live with this horrible disease for over 50 years!
Hoping you remember/realize that not all schizophrenics are as you describe - as with most mental health diagnosis - there are varying degrees of how they present in one individual to another. I have a dear friend who's son is schizophrenic & while he certainly is unable to maintain employment or function well within the mainstream of society, he is incredibly intelligent, articulate, & engaging much of the time. He refuses his meds most of the time & he self-medicates with a variety of illegal drugs. Those are clear issues. But, he is not violent & isn't harming anyone (except maybe himself with the drugs he is taking). Certainly not ideal - but I would be outraged if ever I found out that someone was forcing him to live any differently than he chooses for himself. He has lucid thoughts, we wish for him to go clean - and he has for extended periods of time. But, none of us would ever wish for him to be force-fed medications.
I think that VA tech killer had something more seriously wrong than depression(although depression is serious in its own way) I had a family member who was clinically depressed and was untreated for several years (lousy healthcare in the rural area where she lived), but she was never violent.
Unfortunately how much treatment a person gets is dependent on how good their insurance is. Just one more reason that socialized medicine is a good idea.
I have seen people with very poor medical insurance get bounced when they were still a danger.
Let me preface my comments by saying that I don't know if bipolar and schizophrenia need to be addressed in the same way. My experience with mental illness comes from a family member who is schizophrenic.
I am sure that the mentally ill can be victims of crimes. However, many of the shooting rampages of late were done by mentally ill shooters. The media picks up on these because shooting 5, 10, or more people is a big news story and not because they have an agenda against mental illness. I don't necessarily blame the shooter. If you notice in the news stories there is often a paragraph about how the shooter stopped taking his medication a couple of weeks earlier.
The whole mental health system is broken. And not just the medical side of it but the legal side of it too. People with very serious mental conditions like schizophrenia are very rarely lucid enough to make their on-going medical decisions. I don't think that schizophrenics know what is in their best interests. They don't have that mental capacity for a long period of time. I understand the the meds are a drag. I also know that many schizophrenics believe (and I know this happens with bi-polar too) that when they are doing well on the meds that they don't need them anymore and stop taking them. As I noted in a previous post, we don't let people who are not in suitable state of mind modify their wills, why do we let the mentally ill make their own decisions when it comes to medication related to their condition?
I absolutely believe their should be a legal remedy to force the seriously mentally ill to take their medications or be off the streets (yes, in a locked facility). The treatments that we have available now are so far ahead of the treatment options from even 20 years ago. It is not fair to use the problems of the institutions of previous eras as a reason for not using locked facilities more widely today.
It is true that a mentally ill person can be held against their will for a period of time. It starts with 72 hours then can be extended with the approval of a judge. But at some point there is pressure to get the patient out of the facility because of lack of space. Time and time again I have seen my family member released way before he was ready to be out again where no one was "forcing" him to take meds. Without fail he was back in within a few weeks. And each time his actions just prior to hospitalization were a little more violent and disturbing. I fear it might only be a matter of time before he does something that will be harmful or deadly to another person. And I will blame the system that keeps turning him out in the name of "patient's rights." I won't blame the person who is out of his mind.
I am fairly libertarian in my views of taxes and the role of government. But I think in this case an ounce of prevention really is worth a pound of cure. We are paying for mental illness one way or the other. I would rather help the mental ill and avoid the crime and human suffering (for both the victim and committer) that will so often come if the mentally ill are left untreated.
I would be interested in seeing the statistics related to the role of serious mental illness in major crimes. I would be willing to be that a huge percentage of major crime is related to mental illness. In fact I bet the drugs and mental illness would be numbers one and two, though not necessarily in that order. I know I am sounding insensitive here (non-PC) so let me say it again, I don't necessarily blame the mentally ill for their actions when they are unmedicated.
I know that I have made some generalizations but this is based on my experiences with both private and public health care. And my state (CA) is ranked better than many other states by NAMI for its mental health programs.
Here is one point I agree with: the mental health system is broken. This does not mean that locking people up is the answer. Creating a system of care where individuals can receive appropriate and FREE (or very cheap) services is the key. Also, reducing stigma so people actually seek out help is a good start, rather than creating more stigma in the media.
Lucky for you, I have written a book chapter on violence AGAINST the mentally ill, and am now pretty much done with the violence OF the mentally ill. I can't post the articles on here, but look up criminalization of the mentally ill, and articles from Linda Teplin and Art Lurigio, if you are truly interested in getting stats on this. BTW, these two horrific school shootings recently were committed by people with a mental illness, but the rest of the school shootings were not. For a more "popular press" article, you can read this Psychology Today: Are the Mentally Ill Really Violent?
Also, it is very fair to use problems with previous institutions as an arguments against it today. We may not be doing labotomy's, but they still aren't always the best placement option, and have been found through research to be harmful to those who don't need it. Regarding schizophrenia, many are medically compliant, and judges can court order treatment if necessary. The majority of individuals with schizophrenia can function normally. Is it fair to lock them all up? BTW, neither of the recent individuals in the school shootings had schizophrenia.
I understand your perspective, but it is coming from your personal opinion, rather than research.
Ooops... clearly I made a typo in this original post - here's the correction in red!
Quote:
Originally Posted by think.reciprocity
In all the world there are few things I despise - but gossip is definitely one of them. Gossip, the actions of the paparazzi, & our evil addiction as a society to feed that frenzy. It isn't as though I'm playing my mini violin over here for "those poor celebrities"... But, in a sense, I suppose I am. I think that this behaviour is unconscionable & we all need to step the heck back a minute.
These are people with lives & families & their own personal issues to deal with day in & day out just like the rest of us. Just because we pay to see them on TV or in Movies or whatever does not give us unfettered right to nose into their world at any moment.
My god, can any of you imagine having your worst moments on display before 100's of flashing cameras? Think, that one moment you raised your voice at your child & regretted it seconds later - or whatever it may be! All the world being voyeurs into your most private, dark, difficult moments. I cannot even begin to imagine how difficult that is.
I hate how so many are faining concern & loving interest in Britney Spears' life now. I hate it. She is the butt end of everyone's jokes & somehow it all still puts smiles on too many faces. Shame on all of them.
We know absolutely NO FACTS about what she is going through & it is, frankly, none of our dayum business. I'm grateful that her family has stepped in to help her figure out how to manage her life, her health, & find some sort of peace & wholeness - hopefully away from the hollywood scene.
Anyone who really cares should refuse to participate in the drama of it all - no tabloid news of any kind, no purchasing gossip rags or watching it on television or the internet. I refuse to listen to anyone gossip about anyone - on a personal level or about celebrities.
As for laws (related back to the legally forcing meds on the mentally ill) - I say there should be a stiff anti-stalking law of some sort against the paparazzi & the like. If I wasn't "crazy" before being stalked by them every waking & sometimes sleeping moment - god knows I'd likely become insane from their bombardment.
I genuinely pray that, whatever Ms Spears' issues are, she finds real love & support from her true friends & family & that peace finds her soon...
Also, it is very fair to use problems with previous institutions as an arguments against it today. We may not be doing labotomy's, but they still aren't always the best placement option, and have been found through research to be harmful to those who don't need it. Regarding schizophrenia, many are medically compliant, and judges can court order treatment if necessary. The majority of individuals with schizophrenia can function normally. Is it fair to lock them all up? BTW, neither of the recent individuals in the school shootings had schizophrenia.
I understand your perspective, but it is coming from your personal opinion, rather than research.
Jessiegirl, I can tell that we are never going to agree on what should be done. I'm not looking for an argument. I do believe that if most Americans knew the true cost of mental illness to society that we would be more willing to help the mentally ill before they reach rock-bottom. And I think it would reduce the stigma that you mentioned too.
Not to put you on the spot but I do have a few questions for you since you are a professional in this area:
1) What percentage of schizophrenics can function normally without medications?
2) What percentage of the homeless on the streets suffer from a serious mental illness?
3) What percentage of crime is committed by people with major mental illness who are off their medications?
I realize that my viewpoints are shaped by my experiences with my family member. However, please don't dismiss them so readily. He has been seen by several teams (psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker), all of whom have had little options to offer as far as programs, facilities, and help legally for the family to ensure that he stays on his medications. (His type of schizophrenia is among the worse and without meds he is pretty scary. )
I don't want to restate my previous posts here. Suffice it to say that just the fact that we are in the situation with very few options is a poor reflection on the system.
Jessiegirl, I can tell that we are never going to agree on what should be done. I'm not looking for an argument. I do believe that if most Americans knew the true cost of mental illness to society that we would be more willing to help the mentally ill before they reach rock-bottom. And I think it would reduce the stigma that you mentioned too.
Not to put you on the spot but I do have a few questions for you since you are a professional in this area:
1) What percentage of schizophrenics can function normally without medications?
2) What percentage of the homeless on the streets suffer from a serious mental illness?
3) What percentage of crime is committed by people with major mental illness who are off their medications?
I realize that my viewpoints are shaped by my experiences with my family member. However, please don't dismiss them so readily. He has been seen by several teams (psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker), all of whom have had little options to offer as far as programs, facilities, and help legally for the family to ensure that he stays on his medications. (His type of schizophrenia is among the worse and without meds he is pretty scary. )
I don't want to restate my previous posts here. Suffice it to say that just the fact that we are in the situation with very few options is a poor reflection on the system.
I actually think we are agreeing on one point: The system isn't great and needs to be revamped. I'm not dismissing what is going on with your family member, I'm saying that you shouldn't make generalizations about what should happen with the majority of individuals based on one. I do understand your frustration in dealing with your family member and that hospitalization may be their best option, but that isn't the case for most. I totally agree with this statment you made:
"I do believe that if most Americans knew the true cost of mental illness to society that we would be more willing to help the mentally ill before they reach rock-bottom. And I think it would reduce the stigma that you mentioned too"
Regarding the stats below, I'm not disagreeing that the system needs to be revamped....I actually work in a prison and the majority of those individuals would not have been there if there were preventative measures. I'm just disagreeing on stigmatizing people based on a desire to mandate treatment that is not effective to most.
Here is stats from a lecture I did regarding the mentally ill and homelessness:
At least 25% are mentally ill
40% abuse substances
15% have co-occurring disorders (i.e., substance use and mental illness)
1% need long-term hospitalization
Less than 5% of the population have severe mental illness
20-40% of the homeless population have a severe mental illness
About 25% of individuals in prison have a history of mental health problems. Again, this means that the majority of offenders don't have MH problems. Within those who are mentally ill, those with co-occuring disorders (i.e., substance abuse and SMI) are more likely to commit crimes. This shows that we do need to do better prevention but that the majority of crimes are still committed by those who are not mentally ill.
Those who are mentally ill who are arrested are more likely to be arrested for a "criminalized" offense (such as "causing a disturbance" by talking loudly in a store) than any "real offense."
Regarding mentally ill as victims of crime:
24x’s more likely to be victims of rape
9x’s more likely to be victim of a violent crime
7x’s more likely to be victims on any crime
Not only in the United States
Majority of women with a mental illness report being sexually assaulted AFTER having the mental illness
The overal prevalence for schizophrenia is 1%. Overall, traditional insitutationalized is not effective, but milieu therapy can be, as are community homes. The BEST predictor of successful treatment for schizophrenia is family support! The majority of schizophrenics are in need of medication, between 60-80% ARE complaint with meds. People with schizophrenia can be court ordered to take meds if they are a danger to themselves or others.
I'm also not looking for an argument, but don't agree in locking people up when it's been proven to not be effective. What needs to happen is a fully-funded, revamped system that uses evidence based practices (i.e., those that have been shown to work), with a combination of preventative measures.
Thanks for your response. I appreciate your commitment to this issue.
I don't see any real changes soon unfortunately. Our politicians - across the spectrum - are way too shortsighted and fiscally irrespsonsible to address this issue in a meaningful way. It would take a rare leader with foresight and the ability to communicate to the public why change is necessary - and how it would save money and suffering in the long-run. And even then, one of us (and the schools of thought that we represent) is likely to disagree with the proposed changes.
I suppose the best thing is to hope that research continues to come up with better medications. Hopefully, we don't tax or sue "Big Pharma" to the point that research suffers!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Me? Make a Typo?
