I live with a son who is mentally ill. I love my son. But he terrifies me.

[Quantum Windbag]

metal illness is an illness and should be treated.


you need to have it available to EVERYONE.

BTW the body is attached to the head and does effect mental health.

You have to have comprensive full medical care for everyone even non citizens.

A lot of things that we call mental illness are actually personality disorders. If we could cure them we could cure homosexuality.

For the non-violent, I guess one can say, "They want to live that way, not taking their meds, unable to hold a job, have friends, perhaps become homeless." For those that become violent when upset? No, they do not belong amongst the unsuspecting. They should be forced by courts to be in residential centers for the purpose of giving them the care they need, meds to hopefully turn their lives around, and much more freedom than prison, which tends to be the choice of housing for so many today.

You think people should lose their civil rights simply because society thinks they are abnormal?

 

[saveliberty]

A lot of things that we call mental illness are actually personality disorders. If we could cure them we could cure homosexuality.

For the non-violent, I guess one can say, "They want to live that way, not taking their meds, unable to hold a job, have friends, perhaps become homeless." For those that become violent when upset? No, they do not belong amongst the unsuspecting. They should be forced by courts to be in residential centers for the purpose of giving them the care they need, meds to hopefully turn their lives around, and much more freedom than prison, which tends to be the choice of housing for so many today.

You think people should lose their civil rights simply because society thinks they are abnormal?

If by abnormal you mean violent, then yes.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actually it sounds like there isn't anywhere safe for her to send him. He's a danger to himself, his brothers, and himself. Not to mention the others at school. She had the sense to move him from 'gifted' classes to self-contained behavior disordered classes, though little teaching goes on in those classes, thus she referred to babysitting.

Institutions that existed prior to the 1960's certainly left much to be desired, rather than improving, they were closed. When that meant mentally ill children, particularly violent children, the problem was dumped on the home. At 18 or even earlier, many stopped taking their meds, eventually leaving home and many our now the homeless.

Sending a 13 year old, mentally ill boy to a juvenile detention complex doesn't seem the right choice for most. If though he managed to carry through with his threats in 2 or 3 years, he'll be treated as an 'adult.' That is certainly wrong.

If the problem had been dumped on the home we might actually have a solution by now, instead it was dumped on the schools when the feds declared that everyone had a right to get the exact same education. This dumped all those kids into the public school system, and put teachers that were trained to deal with normal children in charge of kids who are not normal. They cannot do this, and it is expensive to hire qualified teachers that are also qualified in psychiatric care, so schools resort to medicating children that cause problems.

And, no, i do not believe that medication causes violence. I do, however, believe that medication is not always the best solution, which is why these children should not be shoved into schools that are not equipped to handle them.

The best thing to do is stop treating everyone the same and give parents options for treatment that work for their children. We also have to be harsh and recognize that it is not the responsibility of society to make sure everyone is healthy and sane. While laudable, it is impossible to pretend people like this do not exist and assume that more federal government oversight is the answer. Everyone needs to be treated on an individual basis, and anyone that cares about mentally ill should care about making sure the government does not set out a one size fits all policy that shoves everyone into the same box based on a label.

That has some merit for some issues. Not like that of this kid from OP or the one that shot up the school on Friday. She shooter's mom pulled him out of school and homeschooled-in high school. The kid was from accounts, easily found by honor roll publications, yet some 'school plan,' the mother disagreed with enough to stay home with a 17 year old. That sure sounds like there was a severe behavior issue, leading to IEP, something the school was going to insist upon probably via court, caused her to pull him out. He graduated, but I'll be that was via the homeschooling and individual testing. So far, we know nothing of his being on meds or any psychiatric care he may or may not have received.

The boy in the article? On meds, with psychiatrists, been hospitalized it sounds repeatedly, police have been involved, has own social worker. School recommended pulling him from gifted program to self-contained BD, mother agreed. He's getting treatment and it's been ongoing, he's still pulling knives, punching, threatening murder and suicide, when he's upset. Can't guess what will upset him. He's brilliant, mostly under control, but when not under control? He could kill.

She exercised her parental tights to decide on the treatment she thought was best. Unless you have conclusive proof it resulted in what happened this week, it is irrelevant. Even if you have that proof you still have to prove that something else would have prevented it before you can start talking about alternatives.

In other words, all you have is speculation.

 

[freedombecki]

I did, why?

The post seemed to be about how we are NOT dealing with mental health in the US. There are disturbed people that should be institutionalized before they end up suicides or suicide by cops. Of course some will simply commit assaults, not murders and end up repeatedly jailed.

When these issues become apparent in the adolescent years and treatment, meds aren't doing the job, more drastic measures are needed. Much less drastic though than prison however, with fewer other losses that seem to repeatedly happening without the alternative care.

I took a course in college once that had a chapter on mental health. Experts agree that 95% of Americans are treated for one kind of mental illness or another during their lifetimes. Even if that were an exaggeration to sell a course or a book to a university administration, it probably means a lot of people at one time or another have at least one bout of depression or other issue relating to the health of their brain.

That would mean (taking into account exaggeration) having half of the nation placed in a mental institution for fear they will go off their meds and kill someone. That is not a sustainable figure.

The first trouble some criminals cause is the day they march upstairs to a library tower and start picking off people with an AK-47 like bullseyes on a target one bright and sunny day when everybody else is going about a normal life.

Some people with worse mental conditions than the Newtown shooter will never kill or hurt anybody for a long lifetime.

Average people aren't trained to deal with something like what happened that morning last week. They don't know that a person with a history of disease who announces he is going to kill someone Friday and you will hear about it in the news is more serious than another who says he hates someone so much he could just kill them (but never does anything about it.) We're looking for an onus when we should be looking for a solution. One consideration is to gather the mentally ill person's family members together and explain an outline of what must be done with that particular patient's screaming needs. Even then, 90% of the people still wouldn't know when to take that illness seriously. imho. Their first inkling something is wrong could be when they are laying on the floor, bleeding from the heart thinking "oh, noes. I should've listened to the psychologist/psychiatrist's explanation a little more carefully, now I've got about 60 more seconds before I pass out and die."

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Violent people need to be removed from society, mental illness is not a fitting excuse to allow someone to stay in society.

Society first has to decide what constitutes mental illness. Vincent Van Gogh had hallucinations, self mutilated, and showed every indication of bipolar disorder. If drugs had existed then, and courts had the power to do what you say, we wouldn't have had what, arguably, is the greatest artist of all time.

Personally, I enjoy art too much to insist we wipe out insanity.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

For the non-violent, I guess one can say, "They want to live that way, not taking their meds, unable to hold a job, have friends, perhaps become homeless." For those that become violent when upset? No, they do not belong amongst the unsuspecting. They should be forced by courts to be in residential centers for the purpose of giving them the care they need, meds to hopefully turn their lives around, and much more freedom than prison, which tends to be the choice of housing for so many today.

You think people should lose their civil rights simply because society thinks they are abnormal?

If by abnormal you mean violent, then yes.

I wouldn't mind getting rid of the police either.

 

[jillian]

Violent people need to be removed from society, mental illness is not a fitting excuse to allow someone to stay in society.

Society first has to decide what constitutes mental illness. Vincent Van Gogh had hallucinations, self mutilated, and showed every indication of bipolar disorder. If drugs had existed then, and courts had the power to do what you say, we wouldn't have had what, arguably, is the greatest artist of all time.

Personally, I enjoy art too much to insist we wipe out insanity.

like most things, mental illness exists on a continuum. our laws allow for people to be institutionalized involuntarily if they are a danger to themselves or others, but there are time limits involved and the standard is, as it should be, very high.

but we should do better with treatment and support for families who are dealing with someone who is mentally ill.

 

[April]

And that was his mother's fault. Lanza tried to buy a gun on his own, but was denied. The system worked, but his mother just loved him too much for the system to help her, or him.

Exactly.

How many mothers do you know that would willingly accept that their child is a threat to society? Probably few to none.

Even when they know, they still think it's someone else's fault. But, yes, most of the time the loving mother is in such deep denial that they are usually the first ones murdered.

As it is in this particalar case. I think that this young man was in danger of acting out and she chose to have a blind eye...which cost her and the children dearly.
His mental state obviously was ignored and not treated...he needed to be istitutionalized away from the public for the rest of his days. Why not? When all of this could have been prevented.
Such a sad situation all the way around.

 

[Zoom]

'I Am Adam Lanza's Mother': A Mom's Perspective On The Mental Illness Conversation In America

Friday’s horrific national tragedy -- the murder of 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut -- has ignited a new discussion on violence in America. In kitchens and coffee shops across the country, we tearfully debate the many faces of violence in America: gun culture, media violence, lack of mental health services, overt and covert wars abroad, religion, politics and the way we raise our children. Liza Long, a writer based in Boise, says it’s easy to talk about guns. But it’s time to talk about mental illness.

I live with a son who is mentally ill. I love my son. But he terrifies me.

The way we treat our mentally ill, we may as well still be back in the Dark Ages.

A picture of Adam Lanza's mother, Nancy, before he removed her face:

She did love her guns though. Poor woman. I feel for her and her surviving family.

 

[jillian]

You think people should lose their civil rights simply because society thinks they are abnormal?

If by abnormal you mean violent, then yes.

I wouldn't mind getting rid of the police either.

but then who would force women to carry pregnancies to term?

 

[AmyNation]

Like someone else said, mothers can be blind to their children's faults sometimes. She taught her mentally unstable son to shoot, and kept a half dozen guns in her home where he had was able to access them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Violent people need to be removed from society, mental illness is not a fitting excuse to allow someone to stay in society.

Society first has to decide what constitutes mental illness. Vincent Van Gogh had hallucinations, self mutilated, and showed every indication of bipolar disorder. If drugs had existed then, and courts had the power to do what you say, we wouldn't have had what, arguably, is the greatest artist of all time.

Personally, I enjoy art too much to insist we wipe out insanity.

like most things, mental illness exists on a continuum. our laws allow for people to be institutionalized involuntarily if they are a danger to themselves or others, but there are time limits involved and the standard is, as it should be, very high.

but we should do better with treatment and support for families who are dealing with someone who is mentally ill.

We can always do better. I am just making the point that the best way to make it better is letting doctors and patients make their own decisions, not mandating that everyone get treatment as set out by law.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If by abnormal you mean violent, then yes.

I wouldn't mind getting rid of the police either.

but then who would force women to carry pregnancies to term?

One of these days you are going to figure out that, just because I oppose abortion, that does not mean i support forcing people to do something. Once you do it might be possible to have a rational conversation with you.

 

[eots]

'I Am Adam Lanza's Mother': A Mom's Perspective On The Mental Illness Conversation In America

Friday’s horrific national tragedy -- the murder of 20 children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut -- has ignited a new discussion on violence in America. In kitchens and coffee shops across the country, we tearfully debate the many faces of violence in America: gun culture, media violence, lack of mental health services, overt and covert wars abroad, religion, politics and the way we raise our children. Liza Long, a writer based in Boise, says it’s easy to talk about guns. But it’s time to talk about mental illness.

I live with a son who is mentally ill. I love my son. But he terrifies me.

The way we treat our mentally ill, we may as well still be back in the Dark Ages.

Michael calmed down nicely in the ER, so they sent us home with a prescription for Zyprexa and a follow-up visit with a local pediatric psychiatrist.


the disorders listed are not medical they are made up disorders and no child should be on zyprexa


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuK1t474ei4]St. Petersburg Times Reports on Zyprexa - YouTube[/ame]

 

[eots]

I did, why?

The post seemed to be about how we are NOT dealing with mental health in the US. There are disturbed people that should be institutionalized before they end up suicides or suicide by cops. Of course some will simply commit assaults, not murders and end up repeatedly jailed.

When these issues become apparent in the adolescent years and treatment, meds aren't doing the job, more drastic measures are needed. Much less drastic though than prison however, with fewer other losses that seem to repeatedly happening without the alternative care.

I took a course in college once that had a chapter on mental health. Experts agree that 95% of Americans are treated for one kind of mental illness or another during their lifetimes. Even if that were an exaggeration to sell a course or a book to a university administration, it probably means a lot of people at one time or another have at least one bout of depression or other issue relating to the health of their brain.

That would mean (taking into account exaggeration) having half of the nation placed in a mental institution for fear they will go off their meds and kill someone. That is not a sustainable figure.

The first trouble some criminals cause is the day they march upstairs to a library tower and start picking off people with an AK-47 like bullseyes on a target one bright and sunny day when everybody else is going about a normal life.

Some people with worse mental conditions than the Newtown shooter will never kill or hurt anybody for a long lifetime.

Average people aren't trained to deal with something like what happened that morning last week. They don't know that a person with a history of disease who announces he is going to kill someone Friday and you will hear about it in the news is more serious than another who says he hates someone so much he could just kill them (but never does anything about it.) We're looking for an onus when we should be looking for a solution. One consideration is to gather the mentally ill person's family members together and explain an outline of what must be done with that particular patient's screaming needs. Even then, 90% of the people still wouldn't know when to take that illness seriously. imho. Their first inkling something is wrong could be when they are laying on the floor, bleeding from the heart thinking "oh, noes. I should've listened to the psychologist/psychiatrist's explanation a little more carefully, now I've got about 60 more seconds before I pass out and die."

the medical model of mental illness if a fraud

 

[Annie]

A lot of things that we call mental illness are actually personality disorders. If we could cure them we could cure homosexuality.

For the non-violent, I guess one can say, "They want to live that way, not taking their meds, unable to hold a job, have friends, perhaps become homeless." For those that become violent when upset? No, they do not belong amongst the unsuspecting. They should be forced by courts to be in residential centers for the purpose of giving them the care they need, meds to hopefully turn their lives around, and much more freedom than prison, which tends to be the choice of housing for so many today.

You think people should lose their civil rights simply because society thinks they are abnormal?

Emphasis has always been on violence. No, I don't think autistic kids in general or depressed people or OCD that's non-violent, etc., should be locked up for being 'abnormal.' I also don't believe that schizophrenics are better off on the street than in an environment where they can be medicated and kept safe. There was a time that parents could have these people put in sanitarium if they had the money. Another option was to make them wards of the state. That all disappeared for other than the retarded, pretty much in the 1960's. It was done for the right intentions and to save money. In actuality it paved the way to hell on earth for too many.

 

[eots]

Was he given Anti-depression medication?

worse.. he was given ant-psychotics...

 

[eots]

so they sent us home with a prescription for Zyprexa and a follow-up visit with a local pediatric psychiatrist.


for these made up illnesses...

, ADHD, Oppositional Defiant or Intermittent Explosive Disorder


he would most likely be on kiddy crack..ritilain as well

 

[Papageorgio]

Was he given Anti-depression medication?

worse.. he was given ant-psychotics...

This is the problems, we are giving children with every little problem, drugs. Drugs for ADD, ADHD, depression and on and on, many of these alter the thinking and the reasoning ability. We are a society of drug addicts, prescription and non-prescription, I really think we are seeing the results.

Now excuse me, I need a drink.

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-VouCjp_eI]Risperdal® Side Effects in Children - Stephen Sheller on CBS Evening News - YouTube[/ame]