on the question of involuntary meds for the mentally ill

[ima_sinnic]

I've been a little out of it lately because of some crises on the home front--one of them being a schizophrenic relative that I am largely caretaker for--and didn't know that Dean had mentioned involuntary meds until this morning. I'm still not really informed as to the entirety or context of his remarks on the subject, but want to say this:

Anyone who thinks someone suffering from schizophrenia is capable of making decisions about whether he/she should take meds is completely ignorant, and I mean COMPLETELY. My relative has the "right" I suppose, not to take his meds--but then he abrogates his right to live at home, because he WILL then have to be hospitalized for the good of society as well as MY RIGHT to live a life free of having to care for someone who could take care of himself if he took his meds. Or should I just let him run completely amok and maybe kill me because of his "right"?

It is because of misguided do-gooders who think that a diseased brain has "rights" that we do have the disgusting policies now in place that have mentally ill people burdening homeless shelters and welfare programs and assailing YOU on the streets with panhandling and barrages of obscenities. These people are suffering, ferchrissakes! Spare me your PARANOID, SANCTIMONIOUS ramblings about "mind control", "Patriot Act" and all that CRAP and take a look at reality. Nobody is going to come breaking down your door and force you to take thorazine. Psychotropic drugs have come a long way since the 70s days of Haldol and thorazine; they can restore virtual normalcy in many cases to otherwise tormented souls, and with ever decreasing side effects--and they are for SCHIZOPHRENIA, not "the blues," PMS, headaches, rebellion, refusing to bathe, overweight, drug addiction, alcoholism, nonconformity, or worshipping satan.

My hands have been tied several times because I couldn't "force" him to take his meds--instead, I had to add yet another burden to a court system and ask for a hearing into whether he should be hospitalized when he went off his meds, to prevent harm to me, himself, or others. Perhaps one of you misguided do-gooders would like to take him off my hands while he exercises his "rights" to be a menace to society??

The fact that Dr. Dean is even addressing this issue puts him miles ahead of the competition. I have been supporting him but I will now jack up that support. This is an issue that needs to be addressed--and only a DOCTOR has the education and knowledge to address it intelligently. When a person is diagnosed with schizophrenia--and there are definite symptoms, it's not guesswork, even brain scans show a pattern--that person must take his/her meds or be incarcerated. Which is worse--someone's "rights" being violated resulting in an employed and reasonably normal life and no danger to others, or a "free" mad person possibly killing you and, at the least, taxing a community's resources? COMPASSION dictates that, when a person is incapacitated, society must take over and make the most humane and RATIONAL decision possible for that person's well-being.

[Upfront]

1. Well Said

and correct in every way. Thanks for spelling it out from personal experince.:-)

[bearfartinthewoods]

27. personal experiences vary

i have a brother with the same issues. i wish i could be as positive that he does not deserve the right to determine his own course as you seem to be.

i'm wondering if you are too burdened by your personal situation to see any glimpse of the big picture?

if a personal, for no reason other than illness, can be compelled by the state to take medication which does not cure the disease, simply makes the person easier to handle, we are all in peril.

[ima_sinnic]

35. there is no cure for schizophrenia

You may have a brother "with the same issues" but your lack of understanding of the mechanisms and purpose of psychotropic medication for the control of schizophrenia is apparent. These drugs are not administered to make them "easier to handle"--they are taken to restore a distorted brain chemistry that makes it virtually impossible for many to live a normal life. If your brother has schizophrenia, which I doubt or you wouldn't be saying these things, or you just aren't close enough to his situation, you are doing him a big disfavor by not insisting that he get on some medication. Or do you prefer to see him tormented? Free to choose torment? It's not a free-will issue. The refusal to comply with meds is part of the illness. He isn't choosing it, it is choosing him.

[bearfartinthewoods]

38. hmmm....prove to me that schizophrenia is caused by distorted brain

chemistry. in fact, prove it to the psychiatrists since they seem to be unsure at this time.

your attitude that i don't care about my bother because i don't insist that he take medications is very telling. he has been diagnosed since 1972. our family has been through all the shit that all familys with members with schizophrenia have. while she lived, he lived with my mother and she had to move every year or so because the landlord or the neighbors would get tired or being accused of sneaking into his room and pissing on his computer or into his food.

need more nightmares to validate my "claim".

on edit...if medication is so good...if it 'restores rationality' why do people, while medicated and therefore al;legedly rationa; chose to do an irrational thing and stop taking the meds? have you ever asked your 'loved one' why they stop taking the pills?

[bearfartinthewoods]

41. i've reread your post and am now officially outraged

you wrote:
When a person is diagnosed with schizophrenia--and there are definite symptoms, it's not guesswork, even brain scans show a pattern--that person must take his/her meds or be incarcerated.

if i were religious, i'd drop to my knees and thank God that you are in charge of nothing. my brother has been diagnosed and does not belong incarcerated because he chooses to not take the medication.

he breaks no laws.
he harms no one.
he can be a pain in the ass but that's it.
and for this, you would incarcerate him.
how dare you!

while your at it, let's look at she bear's mother.
she bi-polar, diabetic and grossly overweight.
she's a burden to the medical care system also.
she's a pain in the ass sometimes as well.
ahe might also benefit from medication but she doesn't believe in it.
will you incarcerate her too?

if not, why not? is schizophrenia the only disease you would incarcerate people for if they refused medications? she would certainly be more productive if her moods were stablized. it would also probably be easier for her to regulate her weight and diabetis
as well but SHE DOESN'T WANT TO TAKE THE MEDICATION.

why doesn't she have the right to say no?
why doesn't my brother have the same right without being "incarcerated" as you say he must be.

this attitude scares me shitless.

[geomon]

2. Excellent

!!

[Speed8098]

3. Please excuse my ignorance

and accept my sympathy over your situation. But, could you provide a statistic that lists the percentage of diagnosed schizophrenics in the USA?

I too, see it as an issue that shouldn't be criticised, but then again, I'm ignorant to the facts.

[ima_sinnic]

6. Speed, thanks for asking

here is a little info from http://www.schizophrenia.com :

What is schizophrenia?
Schizophrenia, a disease of the brain, is one of the most disabling and emotionally devastating illnesses known to man. But because it has been misunderstood for so long, it has received relatively little attention and its victims have been undeservingly stigmatized. Schizophrenia is not a split personality, a rare and very different disorder. Like cancer and diabetes, schizophrenia has a biological basis; it is not caused by bad parenting or personal weakness. Schizophrenia is, in fact, a relatively common disease, with an estimated one percent to one and a half percent of the U.S. population being diagnosed with it over the course of their lives. While there is no known cure for schizophrenia, it is a very treatable disease. Most of those afflicted by schizophrenia respond to drug therapy, and many are able to lead productive and fulfilling lives.

-----------------

This website is an excellent resource for information and forums, initiated and run for years by a guy who became steadfastly committed to educating people about schizophrenia after his brother committed suicide while suffering from it.

[Le Taz Hot]

4. Yesterday, I read a thread in P&C

about this. It was presented in a VERY biased manner. Luckily, another poster posted the ENTIRE quote which clarified Dean's position. What I couldn't and still can't believe is the one poster who compared Dean to Joseph Mengele. A new low for DU -- and, of course, that person remains on DU. Criticism is one thing, but to compare a presidential candidate to Mengele made me literally physically ill.

And, Imma, I know EXACTLY what you are talking about. I've dealt with this issue up-close and personal MANY times.

[liberalnurse]

5. Do you have a link to Dean's approach to schizophrenia

and medication compliance?

I empathize with you situation. Medication non-compliance is a difficult cycle seen with many mental illnesses.

The "do-gooders" may not seem like it at the moment but history has shown that the mentally ill have been grossly abused throught forced medication...being zombies at the discression of less well intended care givers. Forced medicating would not stop with the schizophrenic client if it were to be revisited. It would revert to the days of forced chemical restrait of the elderly, disorderly children, MRDD, and maybe you and me on a bad hair day.....

[ima_sinnic]

8. liberalnurse, I haven't seen that link, only remarks about it

I think the scenario you are describing would be prevented by ENLIGHTENED people--ie, not politicians, but caretakers, doctors, and other mental-health workers--crafting something that addresses specific symptoms/illnesses. It would of course have to be done carefully and cautiously and be aimed specifically at clinically diagnosed schizophrenia and thereby exclude old age/Alzheimers and ADD and other cases that are just "nonconformity" or senility.

[liberalnurse]

10. It is definately going to be a political challenge

to evoke change without risking exploitation. It comes down to a legal issue, I know because I can be sued....

I know the courts and community service officers are fatigued with the revolving door. I would attempt another approach.....Expanding the group home model. It's much easier to evoke compliance in a therapeutic mileau. This would take the burden off of family members ill-equipted to 24/7 the chroniclly mentally ill.

It has been terrific with the MRDD. This option also provides for respite care.

[InkAddict]

33. Supporting care for the selectively(?) forgetful elderly is

Especially problematic for the formerly self-sufficient "only child" family breadwinner that is now part of the long-term unemployed.

Don't forget, in some cases, the elderly will never be eligible for Medicaid due to a system that rewarded the uneducated "faithful" dogs in the manufacturing sector w/healthy pensions, SS, and paid health/script benes soon to go the way of the dinosaur/then reniged on outsourced service turned underemployed "greeter" economy of the past 25 years to present.

Those extra $$ used to stimulate these old brains run out eventually, just like H2O in the desert. Just one being turned away from adequate/any employment will effect how many as it backs up the line --and become the problems of future generations -- not everyone has supportive families and/or can be a "brain" surgeon/medicator.

Timing is everything and the insanity of this administration is making ME crazy!

[bearfartinthewoods]

28. exactly..if the state has the power to treat without permision.......

for which diseases will that power extend to? and which treatments?

TB presents an even more dangerous situation as the infected can spread the disease if they do not complete treatment. can we force them to take the antibiotics?

[ima_sinnic]

34. we can and we do.

I know of a person who was confined in a hospital, in a locked quarantine, until he had finished his TB treatment. Would you rather this contagious disease ran unchecked in your town? I'm sorry, but my right to be protected against fatal contagious diseases is greater than the right of infected people to spread them. There would be no humans on earth now if there hadn't been quarantines at different places and times in history.

[bearfartinthewoods]

39. he was quarentined which is available by law but

tell me they forced him to take the meds. it was probably a case that he was given a choice of the meds or the quarantine if you investigate further.

[radfringe]

7. been there, did that for over 20 years

worked in various programs with mentally ill... have seen tooooo many folks go off their meds and end up on back on the wards - usually worse off than they were on their previous visit

[tomp]

9. not sure i agree

i'm well aware of the problems of schizphrenia and the need for meds. i simply disagree that the govt should mandate it. what the govt can do, through an MD or a court, subject to expert testimony, is declare that person to be incompetent to decide for themselves, and appoint or have appointed a guardian for the sick person to make reasonable judgements on that person's behalf.

i'm certainly willing to hear arguments as to why that won't work.

also, i'm sorry to hear you're having so much personal trouble on this issue.

[ima_sinnic]

11. appointing a guardian just burdens another person

who now must battle to get the person medicated. You're just proposing an additional link in the chain that leads inevitably to medication--or lifelong dependency on others for care and restraint. Frankly I know very few people who want to be burdened like that, even by a loved one.

Instead of appointing a guardian, or in addition to appointing one, for the good of society just order that the person take the appropriate medication and contribute to society instead of draining it. I know it sounds fascistic but a diseased brain just cannot make rational decisions. Again, it must be carefully defined and limited to specific diagnoses to prevent abuse. As it is now, a sz patient who refuses medication will still end up incarcerated eventually, either in prison or in a mental hospital, but at great public expense that could have been spared.

[scarletlib]

12. Prisons & Jails full of Mentally ill

That's how we "treat" the mentally ill today. We need massive education in this country that mental illness is not a character flaw. It is a "brain disease" and just like diabetes, cancer, etc. has a physical: genetic, chemical/hormonal cause. The more it is studied the more this is realized.
When viewed as a disease the need to take required medication becomes clearer. I have worked with the mentally ill and I favor getting them to take their medication. An enlightened policy needs to be developed and all of us need massive reeducation on this issue.

On edit: I heard Dean's speech where he addressed the issue. At no point did he advocate forcing people to take their meds. He said it was an issue that we all needed to look at. What is best for the person and society. Is it right to let them roam the streets, etc. He posed the subject as one needing further discusssion and a serious look.

[bearfartinthewoods]

32. what does the phrase "they take their meds `cause we can make them."

mean to you?????

he said a helluva lot more than we need to look at the issue.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=16579&mesg_id=16579#16777

[liberalnurse]

13. What you are really saying is....

that you are overwhelmed.....Understandable.

Thats why I suggest the expanded group home option. If there were many more medically supervised group homes a win-win situation can occur.

The schizophrenic is unable to handle and process all the stimuli of "lifes" choices. Reduce the input and build a ritual of daily routines will facilitate compliance. They tend to stop taking meds due to the inability to process all the information. Paranoid thinking kicks in....you know the routine.

Expanded group homes are effective. It works because they get stabilized when admitted to the psyche units, a medically managed and therapeutic miliue. Group homes provide predictable routines under medical monitoring or supervision. There, early detection of problems can be addressed before they become unmanageable.

[ima_sinnic]

14. but my relative cherishes his independence

. . . and who pays for this group home?
Being around other people is at times the worst situation for him. He feels that people are "bugging" him, harassing him, and mistakes even harmless kidding for challenges and insults.

Yes, believe me, I would fall on my knees and thank the goddess every single day of my life if he could truly get on his own--either in a group home or in his own apartment. When he is working and bringing in an income he doesn't need any special facility. Unfortunately he also has physical health problems (back injury) and can't always be working. That is when the real problems start.

Mine is a long complicated situation--but I know everybody with a mentally ill relative can say the same. After reading through the thread in Politics and Campaigns, I see that Dean is just acknowledging that this is a problem that needs to be addressed. He is not advocating forcing medication on anyone. What would be a BIG help would be to make the system less cumbersome; just to make it easier to get sz sufferers to comply without having to go through the whole bureaucratic and stunting routine of getting a court order, scheduling a hearing, somehow getting the person to remember and comply with the appointment for the hearing (which can be scheduled for a week or two after the incidents that prompted it in the first place), giving testimony about his potential for violence, etc.

The need for meds shouldn't be predicated on the question of "harm to self or others," which a cop would have to see if I called to help me out when the person is not complying with meds. In addition, I once called asking the sheriff to give my relative a ride to the mental hospital and instead, because when he finally came to the door my relative was acting okay, he charged him with domestic assault--adding a very stressful legal process to his already disheveled existence--and this was a very big stress on me as well as my testimony would be needed in the process. I finally succeeded in convincing the DA to drop the charges but not after weeks of stress and strain that could so easily have been prevented if the sheriff had just done what I asked and taken him for that ride to the mental hospital where he would have been INVOLUNTARILY MEDICATED and everything would have been copacetic.

[bearfartinthewoods]

30. so now it's the irrationality of it?

so people who behave in a manner that the state decides is irrational should me held down and have pills stuffed down their throat two times a day? of course that's a big hassle so it's better to include a "calming' agaent into the meds so the medicating can go easier.

this must be done because the person has been judged irrational in additonal to diseased..

i wish i had ten bucks for everytime i've done something that others considered irrational.

[ima_sinnic]

37. it's not just irrationality

After reading through several of your posts, including the usual Dean-bashing crap, I see you like to use words for their flaming, emotional effect.

Schizophrenia encompasses a whole suite of symptoms and is clinically diagnosable. Pointing at someone and saying "he's irrational" means absolutely nothing and projecting that this is what is going to happen if Dean becomes President is just plain malicious and ignorant.

[bearfartinthewoods]

40. bull

this isn't about Dean and don't even try and label me a basher.

you used the word irrational. in no way did i associate the word with Dean.

sweet jeesus....when i first started reading people complaining about the Dean supporters distorting anything said as an attack on him, i thought it was paranoia.

yesterday and today i saw two perfect examples of the practice...

on edit...please note that the 'bashing' referred to by the poster consisted of a link to a transcript of Dean's actual words.

to all the posters, who's claims that some Dean supporters are over the edge, which i dismissed....my sincere apologies.

[Warren Stuart]

15. You have a point, but...

Not all psychtropic drugs are as wonderful as we would like them to be. Yes some do work wonders most of the time. But an illness is an illness and does flare up from time to time, requiring hospitalization regardless of the medications given.

These drugs are extremely profitable for the Pharmaceutical companies and get released without adequate testing, oftentimes the side effects of these drugs are almost as debiliting as the illness they are meant to treat (Parkinsonian tremors for instance).

But you are correct regarding the mindset of those in the Mental Health field, they regard mental illness as an illness, something that can be cured. Which to me in some cases is like telling a one armed person to grow their arm back. Yes in some cases high functioning patients can lead close to normal lives, but for the severely mentally ill, this is a preposterous notion.

A poster mentioned adult homes and group homes as places the mentally ill can live in. All to often Adult homes fail to meet the minimal requirements and the residents live in absolute squalor with minimal supervision. In group homes there may community resistence to the homes and the residents live as prisoners. Think of the logic of putting a paranoid person in a hostile environment, and you'll get the picture.

[liberalnurse]

16. There are standard guidelines.....

A good example of effective group home settings and programs are the MRDD operations. They are funded by local levys, state and federal funds. Granted, there are some good and bad settings as there is in every system. I have seen a much more of the positives. Go visit some local MRDD group homes as well as community mental health half-way houses. Indeed the funding and expansion is needed for this to be mainstream. It's a good thing.

We are spending 1 billion dollars a week in Iraq.....I think this money can be put into better use here at home. This is an excellent example.

[bearfartinthewoods]

36. even the best have problematic side effects

tremors which need more medication to try and control and lose of sexual function are the biggies.

my point here is not to attck Dean on this, although i don't like people whitwashing the stance he takes but ignoring the truth of his words. the issue is actually too 'real' for me to tie it into politics.

some people don't want to be medicated. if they really wanted to be medicated, why do they go off the meds when they are out of the hospital'away from stste mandated control. if the meds return them to a state of 'rationality' as some here have phrased it, why do they stop taking them? ever wonder about that? if the meds are so benifical and do such wonders, why, while medicated and in a so called
productive state of mind do they decide to stop taking the medication???

i say it's not about what the patient wants when he or she is either medicated and rational or un-medicated.

it's what the state and sometimes the relatives want because it makes them easier to handle...more productive.

was van gogh medicated?

[Mairead]

17. You're creating a false dichotomy

People who object to mandatory medication are not talking about the genuine schizophrenics. We're objecting to no safeguards. One psychiatrist can subject you to a life sentence without the possibility of appeal. That's outrageous. And I'm not overstating the case--there have been many exposés of that problem, starting with Nellie Bly's at the turn of the last century. Because 'mental health' is a continuum rather than a step function, once a person has been diagnosed and imprisoned, everything they do is seen as a reflection of the diagnosis. That should frighten the hell out of everyone, because it means there is no way to demonstrate 'mental health'. If the state wants to say you're sick, then you're sick, period, end of (your) story. The Soviets exploited that to great effect--criticise the state, get diagnosed and medicated. I bet Smirk and Ashcroft would be happy--perhaps even are happy--doing the same.

[spinbaby]

18. Very well said

It's so hard to get a schizophrenic to take meds if they don't want to. I've got three in my life right now and, I don't know what's in the air this summer, but they all went off their meds at once (to be fair, one just switched meds). It's been a long summer of lying down in traffic, demonic emails, and general chaos. Two are fortunately back on track. The third--an ex husband of a good friend--won't go back on meds until he's hospitalized. When she had him locked up for 72 hours he managed to act normal enough that they let him go ("we can't keep him unless he's a danger to himself or someone else"). Now he's busy drinking, talking to God, and making strange phone calls to anyone he's ever known. He needs treatment but probably will go to jail instead.

[Branjor]

19. You all could use...

a little education on this subject other than what the industry puts out. Here, try this...

http://www.breggin.com

Sorry for all the trouble you are having with your family members.

[yowzayowzayowza]

20. Could you be a bit more specific?

Beyond the obvious fact that drugs have been overprescribed in the mental health issues, I don't see anything new there.

The newer drugs (clozeril) seem to have solved the problmes with tardive dyskinesia side-effects in drug therapy for schizophrenia.

[Branjor]

23. Read more...

Especially under his section about neuroleptic antipsychotics. There is actually no proof that schizophrenia is biochemically or genetically caused to this day despite industry propaganda. I would not trust an industry which has always given highly unsafe drugs to suddenly be giving safe ones, Clozaril included. Psychiatrists know so little about the drugs they prescribe that they usually think drug side effects are symptoms of the mental illness and prescribe more of it when less is actually needed. Psychaitric drugs "work" by a brain disabling effect. The info I have before me is from Peter R. Breggin, M.D.'s 1991 book "Toxic Psychiatry". About Clozaril, it says..."It apparently does not suppress dopamine neurotransmission in the motor regualting areas of the brain, thus reducing the risk of tardive dyskinesia. However, this does not mean that it won't cause tardive dementia, tardive psychosis and other central nervous system disorders when it blocks neurotransmission in the higher centers of the brain....Clinicians I have spoken to in Europe feel that clozapine produces a particularly profound lobotomy effect....once patients are put on the drug, it can be very difficult to withdraw them; yet due to the drug's toxicity, their higher mental functions may be deteriorating the longer they stay on it...Clozapine also causes an unusually high rate of agranulocytosis, a life threatening blood disorder that reduces the white blood cell count...It has been found to occur in 2% or more of patients....Despite all the hoopla, there is very little evidence of its efficacy, even by traditional psychiatric standards. It is being slated for only those patients resistant to other drugs, or about 25% of those people diagnosed as schizophrenic. Of these, drug advocates estimate that about one-third will be helped...." There is more, but I could not copy the whole thing, of course.
All that said, some people seem to be helped by these drugs, but the dangers should be understood and the fact that they operate on a principle of brain disabling and are not "curing" anything.
Also, as to violence and the mentally ill, some studies have shown that the arrest rate of the mentally ill for violent crime is about equal to that of the rest of the poulation and some have shown it to be less. All I have read is that no studies show the mentally ill to be committing violent crime at a greater rate than the rest of the population, despite media hype to the contrary.

[yowzayowzayowza]

26. Though knowledge of the cause would be nice...

Clozeril is certainly not a cure and like all drugs can have side-effects that require constant monitoring. For my family members situation, itz the difference between coherent conversation and discussions about talking to folks on the internet via her television. From the lifetime I've spent dealing with these issues, I'd say your Dr. is right about the over and desperate prescription of drugs in the past, as well as, the adverse effects of those measures. However, his blanket condemnation of drug therapy is extreme.

Jus so you know... No, we don't have WebTV.

[clar]

21. Scary, scary post

Sorry but your experience with your relative is too limited for you to make a blanket judgement regarding the rights of all persons with mental illness. Not all schizophrenics, or for that matter, those with bi-polar illness, or other serious mental illnesses present a threat. Most don't. Mass forced medication is not the answer. Making it easy for relatives to medicate their family members opens a dangerous door. The new generation of anti-psychotics is getting another look regarding deleterious effects.

Dean is right. This is a complex and painful issue involving basic civil rights Vermont has actually dealt with it fairly well. In most states when a person is committed, the state assumes, at the time of committment, the right to force medicate you. In Vermont, committment does not trigger involuntary medication. The state must petition to involuntarily medicate through a hearing process. This does not mean that a committed person cannot be medicated in an emergency situation, but the emergency must be clearly documented, and there is a process for post-incident review. (All states can medicate a person in an emergency). Out patient forced medication is fairly new under Vermont's Act 114 (I think it's 114). Again, a person must be legally committed and have gone through a separate med hearing.

In Vermont, persons with serious mental illness can execute a DPOAH, an advanced directive, detailing the type of care they wish to receive should they become incompetent. This includes the right to specify drugs they may want to take, and in what dosage, or to refuse drugs and opt for alternative treatments. On August 6, The US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, ruled that Vermont could not override the DPOAH of a person with mental illness. This is an important decision.

From The Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law webpage:

Have Any Courts Upheld the Validity of Psychiatric Advance Directives?

Permitting people who are not mentally ill to engage in advance planning through advance directive instruments on a wider basis than people with mental illnesses raises significant issues. To date one federal court has addressed such an issue. A Vermont law allows doctors to go to court to nullify mental health provisions in a durable power of attorney/advance directive if the treatment choices made by the agent do not result in improvement of the declarant's condition. In October 2001, a federal Magistrate Judge ruled that this provision is discriminatory and violates the Americans with Disabilities Act. The decision is Hargrave v. State of Vermont, No. 2:99-CV-128 (D. Vt. Oct. 11, 2001).

Vermont has an excellent parity law. Insurance companies must provide mental health coverage. Dean strongly supported it.

I give Dean a C+ on these issues. Vermont gets a B+, maybe even an A-.

BTW, for those interested in disability rights, Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law is an excellent recource, as is the Center for Public Representation and the National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems. All have good websites.

[Touchdown]

22. What did Dean actually say?

Did he make a blanket statement about everybody, no matter what degree should be on forced meds, or did he qualify it by stating only the dangerous are affected?

The issue for me would be different depending on the severity of the illness. Would Uncle Bob, who washes his hands in scalding water 25 times a day, and talks to his goldfish be required, or is this rule only reserved for the Hannibal Lecters in the world? There's not a lot of specifics here.

Also what did Dean do as Governor, and what will he do if President?

Did he introduce a bill in the Vt. legislature? Did he sign one into law? This seems like a state issue, not one for the federal government. So, as a candidate for President, does he want to push for a FEDERAL law forcing schitzophrenics to take their meds, or was this an issue he took when he was governor...which has completely different responsibilities BTW?

[UTUSN]

24. Totally Agree w Your Plight, Heart-Goes-Out, But...

You have nailed describing the dilemma. And I KNOW that any Dem candidate will have a superior policy to that of any Repuke's. However, I'm hanging back from the leap of choosing a candidate on a single issue, and, for that matter, sometimes even on MANY issues. Shrub has proved that outright CYNICISM and irrelevance of issues is his m.o. and the basis of how we have to beat him.

Please, thank you for what you do and stay safe. You are actually at the front line of everything-----providing watchful care while attempting to maximize your relative's dignity and freedom.

I missed a detail, you DO have Guardianship, I hope. While it DOES take a lot of commitment, you are already demonstrating that commitment, and it cuts right through the system's red tape. From your description of your relative, he would likely fight it, and he has a right to and would have legal counsel helping him fight it, but just the details you have presented here should convince the court AND your relative's attorney. (The attorney is supposed to go with the best interests of the client, not just "fight".) Bless you.

[Branjor]

25. Uh, excuse me...

But you are talking about a person, not a "diseased brain" and persons do have rights. Your attitude is highly offensive and I would not be surprised if that is part of the problem you are having with your relative.
As to the phrase "do gooder", I am a former patient and I find that phrase highly offensive also.
I agree that more needs to be done for the mentally ill, but it does not consist of drugs and more drugs, institutionalization and more institutionalization. Drugs can be helpful, but for a limited amount of time, not permanently. Contrary to what the psychiatric profession says, psychosocial approaches, even without drugs, have been found to be very effective with schizophrenics. And also contrary to what they say, most schizophrenics do get better. It is not a lifelong condition unless it is made so by poor treatment.

[clar]

31. Branjor,

Thanks for weighing in. Your perspective is an important one. I agree with you regarding psychosocial approaches providing effective help in certain instances.

There are no simple answers to this debate. We need to grapple with the many different expert opinions. Some of those opinions come from psychiatric survivors.

[Jackpine Radical]

29. I'm a psychologist and generally anti-med,

not to mention paranoid as hell about the "system," even when I'm an agent of that system, but goddamit, I can sure think of a number of cases over the years where court-ordered, forced medication is the only way to keep society and the person with the psychosis both safe. And I have testified to this effect in court without regret when called upon to do so. The most recent case, a month or so ago, involved a paranoid schizophrenic with a car full of guns who led cops on a cross-country high speed chase.