3 ms·

Ugh.. that's none of their damn business? If a person needs help they can reach out and you can make remove any barriers preventing them but having your mental

by _8j50 5y ago

Ugh.. that's none of their damn business? If a person needs help they can reach out and you can make remove any barriers preventing them but having your mental disorder identified against your will sounds horrific. Ends don't justify means!

cscurmudgeon 5y ago
Where does it say it will be against someone’s will?
- _8j50 5y ago
  > ...since patients will often tell their clinicians what they think the clinician wants to hear rather than how they are truly feeling Right in the article. The idea is to find out medical information patients aren't willing to share with their physician.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    > The idea is to find out medical information patients aren't willing to share with their physician. Plenty of routine medical tests already do that.
unfocussed_mike 5y ago
*sigh* HN comments are entirely predictable. Tools that help understand and detect suicidal behaviour could also help refine an understanding that people can use to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they love. You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach out for help at all, right? And may in the days before their suicide appear to be dramatically better, serene, even peaceful? There are likely other common patterns of pre-suicidal behaviour (unusual secrecy for example), and a tool that can help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we? In DARPA's case, if those people are in the service, it is their damn business; they have a duty of care. Away from DARPA, better processes might have stopped a horrific airline disaster in recent years. There are some people in highly significant, routinely stressful roles who are regularly psych-screened anyway. Those screenings need better tools to be more useful.
- _8j50 5y ago
  > that people can use to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they love. The people they love did not obtain consent from them. > You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach out for help at all, right? Yes. First hand. Suicidal and/or mentally ill people have rights such as one for privacy just like you. > and a tool that can help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we? We don't. Assholes who think using other peoples' death and illness to perform non-consensual medical examination is good do. By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. I concur about the predictability of HN comments. When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. Here too, someone will do a startup out of this so it is a cause for celebration. Never mind privacy, free will and self-determination. > t is their damn business; they have a duty of care. So things made by darpa never make it to public use and service members have no right to medical privacy like us HIPPA enjoying civilians? Okie... To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    We don't want to help people not kill themselves? This is depressive realism taken to a frightening new level. What DARPA is talking about need not be incompatible with some relaxation around medically-assisted suicide. But people kill themselves for all sorts of terrible non-terminal reasons. Teenagers, especially. We should try to help them not do it. And research like this might shed more light. > By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. "By this logic" === "Here's a straw man argument" > When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. I am not in that particular "you all", thank you. > To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition. Yes. But as I understand it, soldiers sign up for a lot of evaluations and even some interventions over which they have no choice.

by _8j50 5y ago

cscurmudgeon 5y ago

Where does it say it will be against someone’s will?

_8j50 5y ago
> ...since patients will often tell their clinicians what they think the clinician wants to hear rather than how they are truly feeling Right in the article. The idea is to find out medical information patients aren't willing to share with their physician.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  > The idea is to find out medical information patients aren't willing to share with their physician. Plenty of routine medical tests already do that.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago

*sigh* HN comments are entirely predictable. Tools that help understand and detect suicidal behaviour could also help refine an understanding that people can use to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they love. You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach out for help at all, right? And may in the days before their suicide appear to be dramatically better, serene, even peaceful? There are likely other common patterns of pre-suicidal behaviour (unusual secrecy for example), and a tool that can help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we? In DARPA's case, if those people are in the service, it is their damn business; they have a duty of care. Away from DARPA, better processes might have stopped a horrific airline disaster in recent years. There are some people in highly significant, routinely stressful roles who are regularly psych-screened anyway. Those screenings need better tools to be more useful.

_8j50 5y ago
> that people can use to spot potentially pre-suicidal behaviour in the people they love. The people they love did not obtain consent from them. > You know that suicidal people often don't, can't or won't reach out for help at all, right? Yes. First hand. Suicidal and/or mentally ill people have rights such as one for privacy just like you. > and a tool that can help clarify what the reliable indicators are, really might stop people killing themselves. We want this, don't we? We don't. Assholes who think using other peoples' death and illness to perform non-consensual medical examination is good do. By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. I concur about the predictability of HN comments. When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. Here too, someone will do a startup out of this so it is a cause for celebration. Never mind privacy, free will and self-determination. > t is their damn business; they have a duty of care. So things made by darpa never make it to public use and service members have no right to medical privacy like us HIPPA enjoying civilians? Okie... To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  We don't want to help people not kill themselves? This is depressive realism taken to a frightening new level. What DARPA is talking about need not be incompatible with some relaxation around medically-assisted suicide. But people kill themselves for all sorts of terrible non-terminal reasons. Teenagers, especially. We should try to help them not do it. And research like this might shed more light. > By this logic, you will eventually even say people's eating habits and behavior should be monitored before they kill themselves by eating food that causes obesity and diabetes before dood addiction starts. "By this logic" === "Here's a straw man argument" > When euthanasia pods became a thing in sweden you all lauded it because someone is profiting. I am not in that particular "you all", thank you. > To your last paragraph: those people agree to consensual and explicitly stated evaluations not non-consensual psychological examination of a medical condition. Yes. But as I understand it, soldiers sign up for a lot of evaluations and even some interventions over which they have no choice.