3 ms·

Agreed but it's a pity the only response is reacting to the homophobic slur here; it is truly criminal and worth talking about how much leeway pseudo-scientific

Agreed but it's a pity the only response is reacting to the homophobic slur here; it is truly criminal and worth talking about how much leeway pseudo-scientific "doctors" are given, to this day, to abuse the human rights of those different enough to be deemed "mentally unsound".

gnaritas 11y ago
It's not a pity at all, someone spouting hatred doesn't deserve to be heard until he learns to stop spouting hatred.
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  No. That is the method of problem solving espoused by Jerry Springer culture. It is literally beneath HN.
  - gnaritas 11y ago
    No it isn't in any way "Jerry Springer" and it isn't beneath HN to comment on bigotry. I need no lecture from you on HN, I've been here since the beginning. Beyond that, learn what literally means, because what you mean is it's figuratively beneath HN; exactly the opposite of what literally means.
    - oldmanjay 11y ago
      Congratulations on your tenure. I'm not sure what it proves but you should be proud.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - gnaritas 11y ago
        No one said it proves anything, but nice dodge on your bad English.
openasocket 11y ago
In the US at least, a mentally ill person can only be committed against their will if they are deemed an active threat to themselves of others, and it has been that way for decades. The days of involuntary in-patient institutions are largely over.
- qrendel 11y ago
  In many cases this is basically a rubber stamp. I know several people who were committed against their will after as little as a cursory 5 minute conversation. To anyone who knew them at all, they pretty clearly weren't violent or a threat to others. Another person I knew was hospitalized for a suicide attempt, at which the doctors, for no particular reason and with no evidence, assumed she must be hearing voices, and had her on anti-psychotics for around a week before her family managed to convince them otherwise. Clinical psychologists and psychiatrists weld a frightening amount of power over the people who may not be aware of just how easy it is to be locked up for seeking any kind of help or therapy. At this point, I consider pretty much any contact with clinical psychs to be every bit as dangerous as talking to a cop without a lawyer.
  - gnaritas 11y ago
    > I know several people who were committed against their will after as little as a cursory 5 minute conversation. Not to call you a liar, but quite simply I don't believe that. Having dealt with wanting to get someone committed against their will, I found it was all but impossible unless they're actively and obviously dangerous to themselves or others. > Clinical psychologists and psychiatrists weld a frightening amount of power They really don't. They can't just commit people because they talked to them and decided hey lock that guy up.
    - qrendel 11y ago
      > They can't just commit people because they talked to them and decided hey lock that guy up. They're free to assess you however they want and then use that as an excuse. Who is going to argue with and stop them? The judge? Your lawyer? Someone else who lacks a medical degree and "psychiatric expertise"? There are so many ways it can go wrong for you. Maybe they thought you said something you didn't. I was once accused of making suicidal statements that I never did - not even a matter of being misheard, but completely making up things that I had never said. Maybe you just seem twitchy or distracted or they think they see signs of some other symptom. Maybe they just decide to lie because they think they know best. I'm not claiming that every psych is out to get you, just that you really roll the dice when you talk to an unknown one. Hence the comparison to dealing with police. From my own experiences and people I've known, it gets worse when you aren't involved of your own free will or aren't the one directly paying for your own treatment. In your case, I'd be curious whether whichever working clinical psychiatrist that was assigned to this person also felt as strongly that they should be committed, and had similar lack of success doing so? Some non-anecdotal evidence either way would be more convincing, but this is the impression I've gotten considering the uniformity of experiences I've observed. Only one person I can think of actually felt they were helped by and had a positive experience with a psychiatric institution, and that was through a college health service. The only paper[1] I could find on it reports that "retrospectively, between 33% and 81% of patients regard the admission as justified and/or the treatment as beneficial," which is a uselessly broad range and could be used to conclude either way. [1] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006.00823.x/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006....

gnaritas 11y ago

It's not a pity at all, someone spouting hatred doesn't deserve to be heard until he learns to stop spouting hatred.

oldmanjay 11y ago
No. That is the method of problem solving espoused by Jerry Springer culture. It is literally beneath HN.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  No it isn't in any way "Jerry Springer" and it isn't beneath HN to comment on bigotry. I need no lecture from you on HN, I've been here since the beginning. Beyond that, learn what literally means, because what you mean is it's figuratively beneath HN; exactly the opposite of what literally means.
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    Congratulations on your tenure. I'm not sure what it proves but you should be proud.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - gnaritas 11y ago
      No one said it proves anything, but nice dodge on your bad English.

openasocket 11y ago

In the US at least, a mentally ill person can only be committed against their will if they are deemed an active threat to themselves of others, and it has been that way for decades. The days of involuntary in-patient institutions are largely over.

qrendel 11y ago
In many cases this is basically a rubber stamp. I know several people who were committed against their will after as little as a cursory 5 minute conversation. To anyone who knew them at all, they pretty clearly weren't violent or a threat to others. Another person I knew was hospitalized for a suicide attempt, at which the doctors, for no particular reason and with no evidence, assumed she must be hearing voices, and had her on anti-psychotics for around a week before her family managed to convince them otherwise. Clinical psychologists and psychiatrists weld a frightening amount of power over the people who may not be aware of just how easy it is to be locked up for seeking any kind of help or therapy. At this point, I consider pretty much any contact with clinical psychs to be every bit as dangerous as talking to a cop without a lawyer.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  > I know several people who were committed against their will after as little as a cursory 5 minute conversation. Not to call you a liar, but quite simply I don't believe that. Having dealt with wanting to get someone committed against their will, I found it was all but impossible unless they're actively and obviously dangerous to themselves or others. > Clinical psychologists and psychiatrists weld a frightening amount of power They really don't. They can't just commit people because they talked to them and decided hey lock that guy up.
  - qrendel 11y ago
    > They can't just commit people because they talked to them and decided hey lock that guy up. They're free to assess you however they want and then use that as an excuse. Who is going to argue with and stop them? The judge? Your lawyer? Someone else who lacks a medical degree and "psychiatric expertise"? There are so many ways it can go wrong for you. Maybe they thought you said something you didn't. I was once accused of making suicidal statements that I never did - not even a matter of being misheard, but completely making up things that I had never said. Maybe you just seem twitchy or distracted or they think they see signs of some other symptom. Maybe they just decide to lie because they think they know best. I'm not claiming that every psych is out to get you, just that you really roll the dice when you talk to an unknown one. Hence the comparison to dealing with police. From my own experiences and people I've known, it gets worse when you aren't involved of your own free will or aren't the one directly paying for your own treatment. In your case, I'd be curious whether whichever working clinical psychiatrist that was assigned to this person also felt as strongly that they should be committed, and had similar lack of success doing so? Some non-anecdotal evidence either way would be more convincing, but this is the impression I've gotten considering the uniformity of experiences I've observed. Only one person I can think of actually felt they were helped by and had a positive experience with a psychiatric institution, and that was through a college health service. The only paper[1] I could find on it reports that "retrospectively, between 33% and 81% of patients regard the admission as justified and/or the treatment as beneficial," which is a uselessly broad range and could be used to conclude either way. [1] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006.00823.x/abstract http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0447.2006....