Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
"Lanza, 20, killed his mother at the home they shared, shooting her in the face with her own gun, before driving three miles to the school in Newtown, Connecticut."
Connecticut school massacre: Gunman's mother taught him to shoot - Telegraph
"What we know is he shot his way into the building. He was not buzzed in," Malloy said. "He penetrated the building by literally shooting an entrance into the building. That's what an assault weapon can do for you."
Connecticut school shooting: Latest developments - CNN.com
That's like saying skilled pipefitters who can lay pipelines that will not leak are not the best people to build safe gasoline stations in population areas. I can understand some of it, but imho, mental health professionals should be equipped to discern best who is and who is not fit to be out in society as safe and functioning individuals. I think they have challenges, though, eots, as mental health is a most complex issue. We need more science looking through microscopes to determine what brain chemistry is misfiring, and how to fix it. The reason that's difficult is that child behaviors (and adult) are often the product of neglect so off the wall you might not believe what you saw if you entered their home to find the child or young adult locked in a closet with all sensory stimuli omitted while a parent is so irresponsible he or she is not providing them with adult guidance and support in their time of needing adult supervision. OTOH, the child may be a true ninnyhammer of impatience, driving an immature adult to seek escape from the day-to-day responsibilities of child care due to media proffering certain habits as glorified pastimes for "normal" people that aren't all so normal as hollywierd shows them to be. And with politicos engaged in steamy debates over taboo issues of generations past, Hollywood tends to frame taboo behaviors as desirable ones. As their chief teachers, Hollywood is the hand that rocks the cradle in America while idiots believe all that they say. I recall a ruckus over a Hollywood production entitled "It Takes a Thief" as glorifying stealing, back when Robert Wagner was the drop-dead good-looking cat burglar who made a mint off people who "deserved" to have goods stolen from them.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.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.
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
"Lanza, 20, killed his mother at the home they shared, shooting her in the face with her own gun, before driving three miles to the school in Newtown, Connecticut."
Connecticut school massacre: Gunman's mother taught him to shoot - Telegraph
"What we know is he shot his way into the building. He was not buzzed in," Malloy said. "He penetrated the building by literally shooting an entrance into the building. That's what an assault weapon can do for you."
Connecticut school shooting: Latest developments - CNN.com
Definitely a situation where "more guns" didn't help anyone but the shooter.
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
That's like saying skilled pipefitters who can lay pipelines that will not leak are not the best people to build safe gasoline stations in population areas. I can understand some of it, but imho, mental health professionals should be equipped to discern best who is and who is not fit to be out in society as safe and functioning individuals. I think they have challenges, though, eots, as mental health is a most complex issue. We need more science looking through microscopes to determine what brain chemistry is misfiring, and how to fix it. The reason that's difficult is that child behaviors (and adult) are often the product of neglect so off the wall you might not believe what you saw if you entered their home to find the child or young adult locked in a closet with all sensory stimuli omitted while a parent is so irresponsible he or she is not providing them with adult guidance and support in their time of needing adult supervision. OTOH, the child may be a true ninnyhammer of impatience, driving an immature adult to seek escape from the day-to-day responsibilities of child care due to media proffering certain habits as glorified pastimes for "normal" people that aren't all so normal as hollywierd shows them to be. And with politicos engaged in steamy debates over taboo issues of generations past, Hollywood tends to frame taboo behaviors as desirable ones. As their chief teachers, Hollywood is the hand that rocks the cradle in America while idiots believe all that they say. I recall a ruckus over a Hollywood production entitled "It Takes a Thief" as glorifying stealing, back when Robert Wagner was the drop-dead good-looking cat burglar who made a mint off people who "deserved" to have goods stolen from them.
Now, we have drop-dead, good-looking congresspersons lining up armored cars outside the US Treasury taking taxpayer money enroute to their state's family or friends' failed business ventures they voted 100% government guarantees for backing businesses going bankrupt prior to Congress granting this corrupt "gift payback" for generous campaign contributions.
They've made a mockery of the Congress' role in being a watchdog looking out for the taxpayer by diverting public money to themselves.
All because the few people who protested Hollywood's teaching influence on people wore horn-rimmed glasses, were a little overweight, might have dressed in last year's fashions, spoke without realizing their hair wasn't combed, you name it, so who won the debate? I'll tell ya. It wasn't the American people who used to abide by the rules, do their jobs well, made it a point to be on time, paid all their bills with what they brought home, and limited their credit spending to a sustainable amount that could be paid off at the end of the loan's term, no more than a year or two.
Your present government kingpin is cramming bad loans down bankers' throats, spending more than 3 generations can pay back and have a sustainable government in their future, etc.
Yet, here we are, talking about how we will help those who have mental issues not to have them any more without talking much about the progress being made on the science frontier, because laypeople political persons don't have the vocabulary as a general rule to read a JAMA or APA publication and understand the drift of what is being proffered and what is being proven.
he was 20 years old folks.
legally she couldnt do something without his co operation
he was 20 years old folks.
legally she couldnt do something without his co operation
she could have read the eli lilly pdf on the drugs effects and realized they where the cause of the behavouires
The thing I find most interesting about the legal end of the drugs debate is that those who have ADHD a lot--that was almost unseen when I was growing up, and it's almost a given now, that a lot of children have that. One of the things I picked up from your link (which linked to other links) is that one of the links said ADHD (other than heredity) was thought to be largely the property of a child whose mother smoked during her pregnancy.the medical model of mental illness if a fraud
That's like saying skilled pipefitters who can lay pipelines that will not leak are not the best people to build safe gasoline stations in population areas. I can understand some of it, but imho, mental health professionals should be equipped to discern best who is and who is not fit to be out in society as safe and functioning individuals. I think they have challenges, though, eots, as mental health is a most complex issue. We need more science looking through microscopes to determine what brain chemistry is misfiring, and how to fix it. The reason that's difficult is that child behaviors (and adult) are often the product of neglect so off the wall you might not believe what you saw if you entered their home to find the child or young adult locked in a closet with all sensory stimuli omitted while a parent is so irresponsible he or she is not providing them with adult guidance and support in their time of needing adult supervision. OTOH, the child may be a true ninnyhammer of impatience, driving an immature adult to seek escape from the day-to-day responsibilities of child care due to media proffering certain habits as glorified pastimes for "normal" people that aren't all so normal as hollywierd shows them to be. And with politicos engaged in steamy debates over taboo issues of generations past, Hollywood tends to frame taboo behaviors as desirable ones. As their chief teachers, Hollywood is the hand that rocks the cradle in America while idiots believe all that they say. I recall a ruckus over a Hollywood production entitled "It Takes a Thief" as glorifying stealing, back when Robert Wagner was the drop-dead good-looking cat burglar who made a mint off people who "deserved" to have goods stolen from them.
Now, we have drop-dead, good-looking congresspersons lining up armored cars outside the US Treasury taking taxpayer money enroute to their state's family or friends' failed business ventures they voted 100% government guarantees for backing businesses going bankrupt prior to Congress granting this corrupt "gift payback" for generous campaign contributions.
They've made a mockery of the Congress' role in being a watchdog looking out for the taxpayer by diverting public money to themselves.
All because the few people who protested Hollywood's teaching influence on people wore horn-rimmed glasses, were a little overweight, might have dressed in last year's fashions, spoke without realizing their hair wasn't combed, you name it, so who won the debate? I'll tell ya. It wasn't the American people who used to abide by the rules, do their jobs well, made it a point to be on time, paid all their bills with what they brought home, and limited their credit spending to a sustainable amount that could be paid off at the end of the loan's term, no more than a year or two.
Your present government kingpin is cramming bad loans down bankers' throats, spending more than 3 generations can pay back and have a sustainable government in their future, etc.
Yet, here we are, talking about how we will help those who have mental issues not to have them any more without talking much about the progress being made on the science frontier, because laypeople political persons don't have the vocabulary as a general rule to read a JAMA or APA publication and understand the drift of what is being proffered and what is being proven.
no.. its more like the takes a normal pipe then damages it so it leaks
And in tomorrow, what about the life, body, brain, and ability to make decisions by posterity? These are the earnest issues of our lives, and people are too self-absorbed to care what is happening to the birthing end of things, where tomorrow's future leaders, speakers, athletes, statespersons, and decision-makers will be coming from.
The thing I find most interesting about the legal end of the drugs debate is that those who have ADHD a lot--that was almost unseen when I was growing up, and it's almost a given now, that a lot of children have that. One of the things I picked up from your link (which linked to other links) is that one of the links said ADHD (other than heredity) was thought to be largely the property of a child whose mother smoked during her pregnancy.That's like saying skilled pipefitters who can lay pipelines that will not leak are not the best people to build safe gasoline stations in population areas. I can understand some of it, but imho, mental health professionals should be equipped to discern best who is and who is not fit to be out in society as safe and functioning individuals. I think they have challenges, though, eots, as mental health is a most complex issue. We need more science looking through microscopes to determine what brain chemistry is misfiring, and how to fix it. The reason that's difficult is that child behaviors (and adult) are often the product of neglect so off the wall you might not believe what you saw if you entered their home to find the child or young adult locked in a closet with all sensory stimuli omitted while a parent is so irresponsible he or she is not providing them with adult guidance and support in their time of needing adult supervision. OTOH, the child may be a true ninnyhammer of impatience, driving an immature adult to seek escape from the day-to-day responsibilities of child care due to media proffering certain habits as glorified pastimes for "normal" people that aren't all so normal as hollywierd shows them to be. And with politicos engaged in steamy debates over taboo issues of generations past, Hollywood tends to frame taboo behaviors as desirable ones. As their chief teachers, Hollywood is the hand that rocks the cradle in America while idiots believe all that they say. I recall a ruckus over a Hollywood production entitled "It Takes a Thief" as glorifying stealing, back when Robert Wagner was the drop-dead good-looking cat burglar who made a mint off people who "deserved" to have goods stolen from them.
Now, we have drop-dead, good-looking congresspersons lining up armored cars outside the US Treasury taking taxpayer money enroute to their state's family or friends' failed business ventures they voted 100% government guarantees for backing businesses going bankrupt prior to Congress granting this corrupt "gift payback" for generous campaign contributions.
They've made a mockery of the Congress' role in being a watchdog looking out for the taxpayer by diverting public money to themselves.
All because the few people who protested Hollywood's teaching influence on people wore horn-rimmed glasses, were a little overweight, might have dressed in last year's fashions, spoke without realizing their hair wasn't combed, you name it, so who won the debate? I'll tell ya. It wasn't the American people who used to abide by the rules, do their jobs well, made it a point to be on time, paid all their bills with what they brought home, and limited their credit spending to a sustainable amount that could be paid off at the end of the loan's term, no more than a year or two.
Your present government kingpin is cramming bad loans down bankers' throats, spending more than 3 generations can pay back and have a sustainable government in their future, etc.
Yet, here we are, talking about how we will help those who have mental issues not to have them any more without talking much about the progress being made on the science frontier, because laypeople political persons don't have the vocabulary as a general rule to read a JAMA or APA publication and understand the drift of what is being proffered and what is being proven.
no.. its more like the takes a normal pipe then damages it so it leaks
When I was studying human health administration, one of my classes was in addictions. In the chapter on alcohol, it was describing fetal alcohol syndrome as being caused during the developmental time of the first trimester, when certain cells were dividing. This disease causes a child born that will never compete intellectually and may have facial deformities--all because the mother had as few as one drink in the first trimester or a history of alcoholism (most cases). It never appears in women who never drink. Doh! So what do doctors do when the FAS baby is born? They do not bother to tell the mother she caused her baby's deformity! So what happens? The next pregnancies are at risk for the same issue! More kids are born with FAS out of ignorance imposed on the family by the doctor whose panacea is "do no further damage to the patient," the patient being the mother and her mental health. By not telling her she caused the problem, she is free to repeat the same problem on subsequent new additions to the family. It didn't make sense to me, except I could understand not wanting to be the cause of depression in a mother who may be having post-partum issues as well.
Drinking while pregnant and smoking while pregnant seem to be a human race footshoot. That's where we could avert the problem entirely, but doctors won't get a spine overnight, and babies in the same family will repeat the disease until it is thought the disease is hereditary.
Also, our particular class got into a debate over what is hardest of all to prove--the father's habits causing problems in infants. They just don't know, because a guy might not remember being drunk or having participated in a cigar-smoking marathon the week the fusion of gametes took place.
Yet, in our society, it's leave me alone, it's my life, my body, my brain, my decision.
What a horrible story. I can't even begin to imagine what that's like.
I'm becoming more and more convinced that it's the psychotropic drugs causing all these mental instabilities.
Your link is linked to areas of studies that implicate smoking during pregnancy as a strong indicator of producing an ADHD child. These studies may seem poor proof to someone who likes smoking and thinks they're gonna live forever, but for those of us who came up through understanding social measurement skills and obtaining information that is quite reasonably reliable, the writing is on the wall: a mother who smokes is a likelier candidate for having an ADHD child than one who does not smoke, has never smoked, does not allow smoking in her home, and who likely never will smoke so long as she has children under her roof.The thing I find most interesting about the legal end of the drugs debate is that those who have ADHD a lot--that was almost unseen when I was growing up, and it's almost a given now, that a lot of children have that. One of the things I picked up from your link (which linked to other links) is that one of the links said ADHD (other than heredity) was thought to be largely the property of a child whose mother smoked during her pregnancy.no.. its more like the takes a normal pipe then damages it so it leaks
When I was studying human health administration, one of my classes was in addictions. In the chapter on alcohol, it was describing fetal alcohol syndrome as being caused during the developmental time of the first trimester, when certain cells were dividing. This disease causes a child born that will never compete intellectually and may have facial deformities--all because the mother had as few as one drink in the first trimester or a history of alcoholism (most cases). It never appears in women who never drink. Doh! So what do doctors do when the FAS baby is born? They do not bother to tell the mother she caused her baby's deformity! So what happens? The next pregnancies are at risk for the same issue! More kids are born with FAS out of ignorance imposed on the family by the doctor whose panacea is "do no further damage to the patient," the patient being the mother and her mental health. By not telling her she caused the problem, she is free to repeat the same problem on subsequent new additions to the family. It didn't make sense to me, except I could understand not wanting to be the cause of depression in a mother who may be having post-partum issues as well.
Drinking while pregnant and smoking while pregnant seem to be a human race footshoot. That's where we could avert the problem entirely, but doctors won't get a spine overnight, and babies in the same family will repeat the disease until it is thought the disease is hereditary.
Also, our particular class got into a debate over what is hardest of all to prove--the father's habits causing problems in infants. They just don't know, because a guy might not remember being drunk or having participated in a cigar-smoking marathon the week the fusion of gametes took place.
Yet, in our society, it's leave me alone, it's my life, my body, my brain, my decision.
there is no proven genetic cause of any of these mental illnesses..it is completely subjective..there is no medical test
It was before December 3 when the APA decided to drop it from its list of Mental illnesses. I think they should review their decision as possibly a quite erroneous one considering the wake created last week by one of its sufferers.Didnt the kid just have aspergers?
That's not "mentally ill".
It was before December 3 when the APA decided to drop it from its list of Mental illnesses. I think they should review their decision as possibly a quite erroneous one considering the wake created last week by one of its sufferers.Didnt the kid just have aspergers?
That's not "mentally ill".
IOW, it was listed as a mental illness in November. Aspberger's syndrome dropped from APA Manual December 3, 2012
