PSYCH PATIENTS CAN BE FORCED TO TAKE MEDS: JUDGES

New York Post ^ | 2/18/04 | KENNETH LOVETT

[stuartcr]

They'll probably have a special medicine that makes homeless people 'go away'.

[TaxRelief]

Excellent news. Steps like these are needed to take back our cities once and for all. Now how's about the homeless and their "right" to invade our public parks be next?

Did you forget your "sarcasm" tag?

A law like this presumes that all families and all pychiatrists are honest. We all know that is not the case.

This law, like the current euthanasia laws*, opens another door for dishonest people to remove family "obstacles".

This law denies due process, bypasses a jury trial, and allows a judge, a "doctor" and a family member or roommater to make the decision to incarcerate someone (mentally).

Another chip out of, what used to be, our 4th amendment rights.

[Fishing-guy]

Actually we already have "residential treatment" for the mentally ill. It's called the county jail.

For example, in Los Angeles, after they cut down mental health services for the indigens because of budget problem, these patients started ending up in the county jail. No doubt, they could no longer get their meds, had decompensation of their illness, and got arrested for unruly behaviors.

Now, the county spends a fortune housing these people in one of the "twin towers" county jail. It's a lot more expensive to give them medications in a decompensated state in a jail facility than to give them medications in the community when they are stable.

Politicans are so short-sighted.

[stuartcr]

Soma?

[livius]

Yes, that's the truth. I read a study once of the law enforcement and sanitation costs caused to cities by the "homeless," a large proportion of whom are mentally ill. The costs were staggering, and factoring in the costs of their crimes to the victims, the loss in tourism to the cities, etc., it would have been a heck of a lot cheaper to spend money on residential institutions or mandatory out-patient treatment programs.

My daughter is a police officer, and one of the things she hates the most is a call for a mentally ill person who has gone off their meds. These things often end with the deranged person getting shot, a cop getting hurt or killed, and massive lawsuits, all of which could have been prevented.

[fml]

You sound paranoid.

[TaxRelief]

The law is broad and does not apply specifically to schizophrenia.

The law does not guarantee any rights or due process for the patient except a lawyer (who has no law to use to defend his client).

The law allows a "director" of a community health center, or a social worker to initiate a court order, (that would include those well-trained, overloaded with cases DSS employees who allow children to die in foster care).

Families may initiate, but have no rights to intervene other than by providing, at their expense, a lawyer (who has no law to use to defend his client) to represent the "patient" .

Failure to comply with outpatient commitment, carries the penalty of inpatient commitment (involuntary incarceration).

Fairly thorough analysis of the law by APA.

NY Mental Hygiene Law (Section 9.60)

The law provides no outs, allows no counter witnesses, is not required to review case history beyond the recent past, allows no arguments, has no provision for private facility or home alternatives, allows no non-medicinal alternatives...

The fundamental problem is that the law gives the government more power to itself.

[TaxRelief]

An interesting twist on case law relevant to Terri: In its 6-0 decision, written by Chief Judge Judith Kaye, the [NY State Appeals] court said the law was an effort to enable mentally ill persons to lead more productive and satisfying lives, "while at the same time reducing the risk of violence."< /i>

Didn't the judge in Florida tht is was "wrong" and "unconstitutional" to force medical treatment on someone?

[libravoter]

I am very torn.

On one hand, I believe strongly that less government is better, that people have the right to make their own medical decisions, that requiring anyone to take a medication should be a very rare event.

On the other hand, my mother was (is) mentally ill. And, of course, the sicker she got, the less rational she was. The crazier she became, the less able she was to see that she was sick.

It seems to me that mentall illness treatment is a catch-22. If you're really psychotic, you don't think you're sick and won't take medication. But the only way to treat psychosis is with medication.

That said, this law seems to have flaws that maybe a different law wouldn't have.

[TaxRelief]

You sound paranoid.

Sounds like you have grounds for my outpatient commitment. </ tongue-in-cheek

[TaxRelief]

Some form of law allowing for involuntary treatment for patients, who are truly not capable of judging for themselves, and whose families are no longer interested, was and is necessary. (Guardianship of some sort needs to be initiated first).

NY State law has allowed for involuntary commitment for violent mental patients for more than a century in one form or another. Violent people do not belong on the street.

This particular law however, as written, is too broad and too all-encompassing.

Based on what is happening in other states, it will lead to a power grab by Social Services and will be abused by domestic-abusers.

[libravoter]

I hear you.

In my particular case, my mother was not violent and did not want a guardian. My family was EXTREMELY interested and wanted to be involved, but the lawyer(s) we consulted basically told us that there wasn't anything we could do.

As long as she didn't actively hurt herself or others, we couldn't require her to be medicated or see a doctor. All we could do was try to pay her bills and hope that she would be ok.

[T'wit]

Yes! Very interesting point. Food and water were portrayed as a medical procedure that only Terri's doctors and family could determine. For the state to butt in was therefore to invade Terri's privacy.

What did Felos say? Jeb Bush was interrupting her dying process, or words to that effect -- as if she were enjoying the excruciating torture of death by dehydration and starvation.

Even after Terri's Law was applied and the tube was to be reinserted, Felos vigorously threatened to sue any doctor or nurse who reattached the tube. The result was that Terri was shuffled around for hours without relief. After she'd been starved for some six days, even those few extra hours put her in risk of organ failure or damage that could have killed her, even with a feeding tube. Clearly, that was Felos's hope and intention. But she got through it without such damage and you have to think the good Lord has a special place in His heart for Terri Schiavo.

[Marie]

Here's my concern; what does this do for children who are diagnosed with ADD, ODD, OCD, etc? My son was diagnosed with ADD and I pulled him out of school and homeschooled. It turns out that he is a Celiac and once we removed the gluten, he calmed down. It took five years to get the right diagnosis. Will this law force parents to give their children meds, even if they really think it's the wrong decision? This is frightening.

[VxH]

>>Will Americans ever wake up to creeping communism in America?

Not if they take their "medication", they won't.

Got Ritalin?

[talleyman]

You sound paranoid.

"Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you."

Okay, I'll take my meds - Bartender!

[Tamzee]

Good.