5 ms·

One of the symptoms can be tremendous creativity. Would you recommend to force treatment upon an artist, because she/he suffers from other side effects? These

One of the symptoms can be tremendous creativity. Would you recommend to force treatment upon an artist, because she/he suffers from other side effects? These mental illnesses are adaptions/optimizations to the rise and fall of violence that was normal human history for the longest time. A armed paranoid hobo maybe looking like a maladjusted human being to you now, but in stalingrad, sebreniza or bhakmut, he would be very adapted to his surroundings. All those stress triggered changes had their spoke on the wheel of time. My opinion is that people should be force treated, but only until they reach "sentience" and can decide for themselves, not under any influence. They also should be able to make sentient "wills", specifying condition under which the state is allowed to step in and help them. If somebody wants to return to his mental state, nobody should be allowed to stop them. Human lifes value is not there to be useful, aesthetic pleasing or comfortable for society. Its value is only defined by the person living it.. But then again, i view optimists as mentally sick..

asveikau 4y ago
> If somebody wants to return to his mental state, nobody should be allowed to stop them I don't think this works well when clear-cut, unambiguous delusions cause somebody to act on them and harm themselves and others. I do acknowledge it's very hard to know when that is, and people can disagree.
lazide 4y ago
And someone like Kanye which just torpedoed more wealth than many people could ever imagine for his family? I take it they should have no say either? At least he won’t be stabbing someone in an alley in 10 years - probably.
- mlyle 4y ago
  > just torpedoed more wealth than many people could ever imagine for his family You know, I believe that Kanye may have significant mental illness, but... An argument primarily from an economic angle makes me uncomfortable. On paper, I am not maximizing economic value right now-- but I'm pretty sure I'm well adjusted and happy with my (seemingly economically irrational) choices.
  - lazide 4y ago
    I agree, however the family court in California doesn’t agree. He’s on the hook for ‘expected future earnings’, and voluntary actions to decrease them don’t get him out of it. It’s from case law where someone quit their highly lucrative (but stressful) job to become a priest. The court ruled, ‘nah bro, you’re still on the hook’. One could argue having a mental breakdown and destroying your career is not voluntary - but if it is not voluntary, then the whole argument about personal freedom goes out the window doesn’t it?
    - mlyle 4y ago
      > I agree, however the family court in California doesn’t agree. I think what you describe is completely orthogonal to what we were discussing-- whether seemingly acting in one's economic interest can be a measure on one's mental well being and used to judge whether someone is using their autonomy appropriately. If we use outside economic tests, we become pretty fascist and authoritarian really-quick-like.
      - asveikau 4y ago
        Being able to support yourself is actually a point that psychiatrists can use. Eg. A lot of people can have symptoms of a psychotic disorder but they are still "productive" and functioning. On the other hand a lot of people with bipolar disorder go through "manic spending sprees" which leaves them in huge debt. Or, people start to be unable to hold a job or keep up with studies. They might quit their job impulsively persuing a delusion, or make unwise investments while manic. This can be a proxy for how they are doing with the illness. Someone with this type of issue who is very wealthy kind of makes that kind of argument fall apart. Kanye can blow a lot of money and still survive. A more normal person with bipolar disorder would hit rock bottom from a financial standpoint much sooner.
        mlyle 4y ago
        > Being able to support yourself is actually a point that psychiatrists can use. Yes, and Kanye may have various financial and business problems, but by any sane metric is able to support himself. > Kanye can blow a lot of money and still survive. Yes, which makes the behavior less obviously irrational. This is why diagnostic criteria have phrases like "cause marked impairment in social or occupational functioning" --- and meeting diagnostic criteria alone is not generally sufficient for involuntary commitment. There, we reach the legal system, and definitions that generally include a pretty strict definition of danger-to-self-or-others-or-gravely-disabled, which wouldn't include this kind of thing.

asveikau 4y ago

> If somebody wants to return to his mental state, nobody should be allowed to stop them I don't think this works well when clear-cut, unambiguous delusions cause somebody to act on them and harm themselves and others. I do acknowledge it's very hard to know when that is, and people can disagree.

lazide 4y ago

And someone like Kanye which just torpedoed more wealth than many people could ever imagine for his family? I take it they should have no say either? At least he won’t be stabbing someone in an alley in 10 years - probably.

mlyle 4y ago
> just torpedoed more wealth than many people could ever imagine for his family You know, I believe that Kanye may have significant mental illness, but... An argument primarily from an economic angle makes me uncomfortable. On paper, I am not maximizing economic value right now-- but I'm pretty sure I'm well adjusted and happy with my (seemingly economically irrational) choices.
- lazide 4y ago
  I agree, however the family court in California doesn’t agree. He’s on the hook for ‘expected future earnings’, and voluntary actions to decrease them don’t get him out of it. It’s from case law where someone quit their highly lucrative (but stressful) job to become a priest. The court ruled, ‘nah bro, you’re still on the hook’. One could argue having a mental breakdown and destroying your career is not voluntary - but if it is not voluntary, then the whole argument about personal freedom goes out the window doesn’t it?
  - mlyle 4y ago
    > I agree, however the family court in California doesn’t agree. I think what you describe is completely orthogonal to what we were discussing-- whether seemingly acting in one's economic interest can be a measure on one's mental well being and used to judge whether someone is using their autonomy appropriately. If we use outside economic tests, we become pretty fascist and authoritarian really-quick-like.
    - asveikau 4y ago
      Being able to support yourself is actually a point that psychiatrists can use. Eg. A lot of people can have symptoms of a psychotic disorder but they are still "productive" and functioning. On the other hand a lot of people with bipolar disorder go through "manic spending sprees" which leaves them in huge debt. Or, people start to be unable to hold a job or keep up with studies. They might quit their job impulsively persuing a delusion, or make unwise investments while manic. This can be a proxy for how they are doing with the illness. Someone with this type of issue who is very wealthy kind of makes that kind of argument fall apart. Kanye can blow a lot of money and still survive. A more normal person with bipolar disorder would hit rock bottom from a financial standpoint much sooner.
      - mlyle 4y ago
        > Being able to support yourself is actually a point that psychiatrists can use. Yes, and Kanye may have various financial and business problems, but by any sane metric is able to support himself. > Kanye can blow a lot of money and still survive. Yes, which makes the behavior less obviously irrational. This is why diagnostic criteria have phrases like "cause marked impairment in social or occupational functioning" --- and meeting diagnostic criteria alone is not generally sufficient for involuntary commitment. There, we reach the legal system, and definitions that generally include a pretty strict definition of danger-to-self-or-others-or-gravely-disabled, which wouldn't include this kind of thing.