4 ms·

Agreed, it's basically the same argument as against the death penalty. Can't exonerate yourself if you're dead, can't be found mentally sound if you've been eff

Agreed, it's basically the same argument as against the death penalty. Can't exonerate yourself if you're dead, can't be found mentally sound if you've been effectively lobotomized. Obviously psychiatry has come a long way since lobotomy, but it doesn't have a great history when it comes to treating unwilling patients. If a mentally unwell person is a demonstrated threat (ie commits crimes and harms/endangers people) the state already has the power to lock them up. In my view letting the state forcibly alter their brain and mind against their will is a bridge too far.

denton-scratch 4y ago
> In my view letting the state forcibly alter their brain and mind against their will is a bridge too far. I don't share your view. It's quite clear to me that there are circumstances when a mentally-ill person benefits enormously from compulsory treatment (provided they are released; a system that rewards clinics financially for continuing to detain patients that are fit for release is a special kind of madness).