5 ms·
I think in The Netherlands the rule is that when they are a danger to themselves or others they can be forced to be treaded. Imho this is a very clear line.
by pasta 8y ago
I think in The Netherlands the rule is that when they are a danger to themselves or others they can be forced to be treaded.
Imho this is a very clear line.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- dsego 8y agoHow do they make sure someone is taking their medication? Is it by monthly injections?
- pasta 8y agoIf you are forced to do something someone else is making sure you will do it...
- dsego 8y agoSo far the only way to control my brother is to have him take an intramuscular injection every few weeks. Pills usually need to be taken 2 to 3 times daily. No one can control that (unless hospitalized), it's hard even for family members.
- robbiep 8y agoIn Australia a treatment order is enforced by 3 monthly depo injections, usually of respiradone
- whatshisface 8y agoIf you drink soft drinks every meal you are stressing your insulin system, thereby acting as a danger to yourself. People who practice extreme sports are also dangers to themselves, along with private pilots and those who take dangerous jobs. This is not even to mention that disagreeing with the Party can become very dangerous to yourself... (Not so much in the Netherlands, but elsewhere, possibly. The soviets used forced institutionalization against their political enemies.)
- VLM 8y ago"along with private pilots" Which brings up the next problem that what will be enforced is perceived risk, not actual risk. Per billion-vehicle-miles-traveled, private pilots are as safe as car drivers around 11 or so deaths, but much more common activities such as bicycle commuting is vastly more dangerous around 31, and simple walking commute is even higher around 36. Speaking of bicycle commuting, that brings up the third dimension which is political, in that aggressive public support of bicycle commuting is a hipster sacrament not to be interfered with. Speaking of politics, AOPA is not really a group to be messed with, so even if private pilot flying were more dangerous, it might not be a fight worth picking for bureaucrats. And finally the forth dimension is time; its possible, in fact nearly certain, that private pilot flying was at one time, perhaps 1925 or 1955, more dangerous than driving in 2018, however influential or profitable that might be in 2018 it would be bad justification for legal enforcement in 2018, in a sort of affirmative action sense that my grandfather was a "very dangerous private pilot" in the WWII era therefore I should be punished for his actions by making it illegal for me to fly...
- charmides 8y agoSeems like "billion-vehicle-miles traveled" is not a good metric; people travel faster in aircraft and in cars than they do on bicycles and on foot. Time spent travelling should be a better metric.
- InitialLastName 8y agoTime spent traveling isn't necessarily better; by some metrics people going faster are just traveling more effectively. It's a question of whether we rate the travelage by utility or by luxury. If we consider it for utility, vehicle-miles travelled is a perfect metric. If for enjoyment, time spent traveling is better (but still not perfect).
- scatters 8y agoUtility doesn't scale (linearly) with distance. Consider someone walking 0.5 miles to a neighborhood store versus driving 5 miles to a big-box store. The big-box store may have a larger selection of product lines and slightly lower prices, but there's certainly not 10x the utility there.
- roel_v 8y agoHow is this a clear line? When you're schizophrenic and living on the street in box, but not suicidal or attacking other people, you're not a 'danger' to anyone. Yet that's the case of the OP.