Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Psychotic? Schizophrenic? Both?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="slsh" data-source="post: 400278" data-attributes="member: 8"><p>I think Marg really nailed it - it's 2 very opposite rights clashing head-on: the right to be safe versus the right to refuse treatment. If you're diabetic, you have the right to refuse tx. If you're depressed, you have the right to refuse tx. But... if you become dangerous, you lose the right to refuse... at least until you're not dangerous anymore, and then you can refuse again. My head has been going around and around in circles over this. It is such a horrible tragedy, for the victims as well as the shooter - it just bites all the way around. There has to be (or *should* be) a way to protect the public, but I'm not sure it can be done without trampling severely on the rights of the mentally ill. </p><p></p><p>The really sad thing is that once people realize there was nothing truly political behind this (beyond this poor man's distorted perception of whatever the heck his particular vision of reality is), I think it will just reinforce the stigma of mental illness. I don't think there will be any empathy - I'm not excusing what he did, but I cannot help but wonder if there were some magical system in place that guaranteed him appropriate diagnosis and treatment, supervised if necessary, this could have been avoided.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="slsh, post: 400278, member: 8"] I think Marg really nailed it - it's 2 very opposite rights clashing head-on: the right to be safe versus the right to refuse treatment. If you're diabetic, you have the right to refuse tx. If you're depressed, you have the right to refuse tx. But... if you become dangerous, you lose the right to refuse... at least until you're not dangerous anymore, and then you can refuse again. My head has been going around and around in circles over this. It is such a horrible tragedy, for the victims as well as the shooter - it just bites all the way around. There has to be (or *should* be) a way to protect the public, but I'm not sure it can be done without trampling severely on the rights of the mentally ill. The really sad thing is that once people realize there was nothing truly political behind this (beyond this poor man's distorted perception of whatever the heck his particular vision of reality is), I think it will just reinforce the stigma of mental illness. I don't think there will be any empathy - I'm not excusing what he did, but I cannot help but wonder if there were some magical system in place that guaranteed him appropriate diagnosis and treatment, supervised if necessary, this could have been avoided. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Psychotic? Schizophrenic? Both?
Top