From a perspective, of course. From one another, absolutely not.
Fear, psychologically speaking, is the most powerful weapon that have ever existed on the arsenal of the mankind and unfortunately it is not a condition that people who knows this glimpse of a fact are not necessarily benevolent, since benevolence is something quite relative, I am to explain a point of view on this. The truth is, logically, we can not really believe in concepts such as benevolence and malevolence, these are, completely related to the eye of the beholder, so, in order to explain this particular point of view, there is a need of construction a cognitive empathy with those who suffer from a mental illness and those who not, if one is to establish a cognitive empathy between the psychiatrists, government officials and what one perceives them to feel, of course one would be able to prove some truth in what they say. Why I am saying all of this to you? It is really simple, actually. As a personal remark, my empathy is based on preference here since it is well agreed that is one of the most effective ways of preventing fanaticism and bigotry, for what is about to be presented to you is mostly based on fated choice.
It can be said that a mandatory mental health screening would be terrible for society and its people in the long term, of course, in short term, people will be relieved from a lot of anxieties, for they will know that the ''mad'' in between them would be ''purged.'' Since people are extremely afraid from their potential of madness, they project that fear on people who have already gone mad as pure hate, for it is hard for a human being to accept the fact that he is afraid or anxious, since we are mostly unaware of our anxieties. This people, will lose their anxiety towards madness and they'd be quite happy to give the keys to their minds and hearts to the psychiatrists and of course thus, to governments. Imagine a political rally made by the party who proposed this, for your imagination will mostly give you discomfort here, for releasing fear unto people and stripping them away from that fear when you are, or your system is the one who released that fear in the first place is the most sure way to gain control over them.
Imagine an organization is offering you mental projection, continuous supervision and a constant state of control.
This, in my opinion is too good to be true, for as human beings we are mostly motivated by agendas that are even hidden from our own selves. Of course now, we can not say that that these institutions are hiding their agendas from themselves, for as an aspiring researcher of psychology, I can define my stance in this matter as anti-psychiatric, and I feel the urge to underline the phrase ''in this matter''. Why there should be no mandatory mental health screening? Ironically, the reason is exactly the same with the argument of why it should be; human nature can not be trusted, be it professional or amateur, there is always another professional all these seemingly trusted professionals serve, judging from this, one believe there is no cure to madness, instead, madness in itself is a cure for such a normal and obedient, easily manipulated and herd-mentality shaped society. Mandatory health screenings, if they one day occur, are going to serve as a proof for this, according to Ni. For even if we eradicate madness from society, the absence of it will be the exact thing that will mother it to be born again.
Our own attempts of curing madness is in fact riddled with fear, anxiety and madness, so we can not define what is mad or what is not at all, can we?
Dear old Sigmund once said that a little neurosis was good for everyone, yet my observations show me that the people are ruled and directed by neurotics that are also the people, and it is this notion of people which define what is mad and what is not, which makes me think of the question that can we really trust the judgment of a neurotic in such delicate areas? I think not, otherwise psychologists and psychoanalysts would not get any supervision. The psychologists and psychiatrists mostly see through the neuroses of society and from a perspective, they also think that collective neuroses and collective psychoses are the things what makes the world go round, in short words that we live in a dangerously mad world, for we think that we know what madness is and by this assumed knowledge we assume that we know what sanity is, which is terrible logic. Mental health specialists define madness as something dangerous to a neurotic society, methinks and that can be called as lazy psychiatry, for we do not cure people from their neuroses, we only cure who pose a threat against people who possess neuroses.
Considering these arguments I think it is healthy to say that what society needs is psychoterapy and psychoanalysis, a mental health screening may present a lot of negative outcomes in these times.