Under what circumstances would a person be required to take medication? (depression, smoking)
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.
Generally doctors recommend meds for patients, and the patient is free to research and take the meds or not. Seems draconian, but for example would some prison inmates be required to take meds even if they don't want to? And are there any people in the free, general population who are required to take pharmaceuticals against their wishes?
Posted in mental health because it would seem that some people who have mental health problems might need meds but don't think clearly enough to accept that they must take them, therefore that decision must be legally made for them.
I'm not sure I have much of an 'understanding' of this matter, but I think that people who are in prison, a hospital, nursing home are required to take their medication.
I suppose in some instances you could refuse. If they're injected into an IV, you're going to get them.
Not accurate. People in my state have to be court-ordered to take medication even if they want to refuse (whether they're in hospital or not). The court orders specific medications and no others that can be given against the person's will. Many psych meds can be given IM, but those that can't be, it's pretty hard to order an oral medication against a person's will. This comes up mostly when people are severely manic and have court-ordered medication. The mood stabilizers don't come in IM form, but anti-psychotics and calming medications can be given IM and then likely the person will "come down" and take the mood stabilizers once out of the manic state.
ECT can also be court ordered. The person has to be in close to life-threatening condition from their depression before that happens.
Generally doctors recommend meds for patients, and the patient is free to research and take the meds or not. Seems draconian, but for example would some prison inmates be required to take meds even if they don't want to? And are there any people in the free, general population who are required to take pharmaceuticals against their wishes?
Posted in mental health because it would seem that some people who have mental health problems might need meds but don't think clearly enough to accept that they must take them, therefore that decision must be legally made for them.
What is your understanding of this matter?
Pure barbarism. Since psychiatric "conditions" are nothing but subjective labels, the idea of people being forced drugged against their will for something that's completely arbitrary is lunacy. Luckily I escaped that deathtrap of a system by utilizing a lawyer who successfully argued that my "diagnosis" was but pure conjecture. Too bad it didn't stop the lying quack doctors from commencing their pseudoscientific witch hunt first. I would have certainly sued if they were allowed to go any further and inject Haldol, Risperdal or any other toxic poison in my body.
*Edit* To answer the question directly - the only circumstances in which a person would be required to take medication is if they, their legal defense (assuming they have one) and/or the deciding judge/jury are ignorant enough to believe that a fiat decree from a miseducated and self-appointed quack is the same thing as a legitimate and objective medical diagnosis. Since most of society is hoodwinked into thinking "mental illness" is as literal as diabetes, psychiatrists are given free reign to unaccountably declare people "mentally" diseased and use such a destructive farce to take away their human, civil and constitutional rights.
Last edited by Pookie Jenkins; 10-07-2014 at 01:00 PM..
I was on lamicatal and welbrutain with serequel for crisis moments. I tried telling my doctor they weren't working, I wasn't sleeping and friends online would notice and ask when I'd last had sleep. I was going around in a perminant manic puncuated by sleep and a few crashes. Nobody had time to listen but it plainly wasn't working. The reason it wasn't working was that some of it was triggers, for the landscape was full of them (no money for therapists, alas). The other reason was that my absorbson of meds is irratic due to a past problems with the parts that do the absorbtion. So one pill would do nothing and the next zap me. Higher doses made it worse. I decided I wasn't going to ride this train but didn't expect the so called doctor to listen so did it on my own.
I cut back ultra slow, but kept cutting back until I was taking half. The pdoc noticed I seemed improved, and I just said I was going to be moving. I got loaded up with pills so I could have time to get set up in the new state. But I just kept cutting down until they wore out.
I will never ever take them again. I am not perfect, but I function far more like the 'expected' without any pills. I have other ways of stopping lows and have cut the stress by getting away from all the triggers. I could have been treated this way, but the county did not have money for anything but a three month supply and ten minutes with a pdoc who you've never seen before.
My problem with instances of forcing medication when people refuse is that too many places are just like that and there have been attempts to explain but there isn't time. I cut out meds on the quiet since that way nobody got in my way. When the doctor noticed how much better I was doing (and the meds were halved) I considered it a personal victory over the system.
People refuse meds for all sorts of reasons, primarily for side effects. Sometimes these are as important as the meds effect and yet most people can't squeeze a discussion about it into the schedule. I was never ask about other medical concerns and the weight gain I questioned as risky was ignored. And you wonder why people lose confidence in their doctors. And the weight gain did end in an emergency surgery I had told them might happen as I had medical issues.
If I'd have pushed it, and brought in a doctor who dealt with my medical history, I doubt there would have been meds. But it shouldn't have to take that. This so called doctor who writes out a script is supposed to care about all of you but could be replaced with a robot in most county style clinics.
I have medical power of atty. for my wife who has dementia. If she would object to the prescribed medications I give her, it would be illegal for me to continue to do so because I never took the time to have her declared mentally incompetent by a court even though she is.
i was court ordered to take a certain medication and i refused. they eventually gave up. now i am much healthier.
i'm not a fan of taking a new medication to counteract the side effects of an old medication. i just stopped the old medication and dealt with the recovery from the withdrawal on my own.
the doctor who signed my court order didn't even speak to me before doing so. he wasn't even a "real" doctor! just an "MA". the judge signed the paperwork begrudgingly. the judge sided with me because he actually spoke to me. he didn't seem to have the authority to go against the "doctor".
i'm not sure this kind of thing is as common in other cultures.
There are psychiatric advance directives in some states that allow a person to cede his treatment decisions to a family member. So if a person is in serious trouble because he is "off his meds" -- and unwilling to take them -- the appointed mother/husband/son/sibling or whomever, can legally compel hospitalization, medication, or other treatment on short notice without a court battle.
From what I can understand though, the ill person has to sign this directive, which can detail limits to treatment, during some period of "normalcy." If they're already running naked through the streets smoking crack and wearing a tin foil hat it's too late. Moreover, these directives may not be applicable in states that don't have them or have reciprocity with states that do.
So yes, under these circumstances, a person can legally be compelled to take medication or be hospitalized
I believe there are cases where a person is ORDERED by the courts to take medication. I think this practice is getting less and less common....but it still does happen. Long acting injections or a required regular dosing of whatever med is mandated.........if you miss this requirement, your bail/parole/probation may be revoked.
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.
