When should someone be "committed"?

[SearchingforPeace]

I'm not comfortable with ending this here. We're airing everyone's issues anyway and the intervening posts thing was a huge part of this that wasn't addressed or has been written off as just a tangent.

Is nobody going to take responsibility for this discussion and the opinions espoused here? This is more than purging hurts of the past.

Why not add in the desire to quarantine others? To lock up those that deviate from some norm? Or is the desire to stamp out people and their individuality so strong?

I truly believe that we shouldn't be throwing around the idea to commit others to mental institutions just because they bother us. It is a very serious issue and the fact people espoused the idea that we should lock up those that bother us is shocking. In my case, it was an absolutely last ditch measure done likely far later than we should have, no matter my son tried to kill me.

I am sorry WUR had bad experiences with people she believes to be INFJs. They may be unhealthy INFJs or just unhealthy people. The world is full of them.

I am sorry that my words triggered others. I am sorry it appears that some were misinterpreted and seemingly twisted and other's took offense at things I never intended. I only intended to address the issue at hand without hostility. I can't speak for Fi users and really can only speak for myself after all...... But some things stand out to me, as if shouted, things that are blatantly obvious.....

I have no problems with my statements you posted or a single thing I posted, except that perhaps I could have used greater clarity.

Oh, well.... I guess I am just fucking insufferable.....

 

[Forever]

Why not add in the desire to quarantine others? To lock up those that deviate from some norm? Or is the desire to stamp out people and their individuality so strong?

I truly believe that we shouldn't be throwing around the idea to commit others to mental institutions just because they bother us. It is a very serious issue and the fact people espoused the idea that we should lock up those that bother us is shocking. In my case, it was an absolutely last ditch measure done likely far later than we should have, no matter my son tried to kill me.

I am sorry WUR had bad experiences with people she believes to be INFJs. They may be unhealthy INFJs or just unhealthy people. The world is full of them.

I am sorry that my words triggered others. I am sorry it appears that some were misinterpreted and seemingly twisted and other's took offense at things I never intended. I only intended to address the issue at hand without hostility. I can't speak for Fi users and really can only speak for myself after all...... But some things stand out to me, as if shouted, things that are blatantly obvious.....

I have no problems with my statements you posted or a single thing I posted, except that perhaps I could have used greater clarity.

Oh, well.... I guess I am just fucking insufferable.....

Mental institution was quite recent in history in fact, it's original purpose has been severely changed through time where the work staff can't support the amount of the mentally ill. It's a serious problem. Too bad it seems like we have a strong lack of anthropologists in this forum.
[MENTION=22178]hel[/MENTION] lets be honest, what are you trying to accomplish? WUR unfriended me, caused strain between other members or maybe even different opinions for the better. I mean all of its events has consequences. It seems to me I wasn't even important to you.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Mental institution was quite recent in history in fact, it's original purpose has been severely changed through time where the work staff can't support the amount of the mentally ill. It's a serious problem. Too bad it seems like we have a strong lack of anthropologists in this forum.

The effort at deinstitutionalization was import. Mental health professionals do have their hands tied in many cases. We do have people that need help in this world, but the standard is actually pretty strict, which I believe is a good thing.

In the past, way too many were locked up on questionable basis. The process historically was very dehumanizing, treating people like animals. Dictatorships used alleged mental illness as a tool to keep people in line.

People just don't realize how far we have come. And the medical science side of mental illness is advancing. The pop a pill mentality is likely going away at some point, as we understand better the gut related nature of various disorders. It is fascinating.

Having seen the inside of a few mental hospitals, having felt the pain and suffering inside, I really don't want to have anyone institutionalized. It is that troublesome....

 

[magpie]

[MENTION=22178]hel[/MENTION] lets be honest, what are you trying to accomplish? WUR unfriended me, caused strain between other members or maybe even different opinions for the better. I mean all of its events has consequences. It seems to me I wasn't even important to you.

I'm trying to have the validation others in this thread have received, as the various other ways this thread has been upsetting to people have been addressed, as you've pointed out. Not sure what this has to do with you being important to me, as we've never spoken very much at all.

Also my intention isn't to have people philosophise about mental health. It really is just to have people take responsibility. Also this is quickly becoming about everything except me now. It's about SfP and even about you now.

 

[violet_crown]

I'm not comfortable with ending this here. We're airing everyone's issues anyway and the intervening posts thing was a huge part of this that wasn't addressed or has been written off as just a tangent.

Is nobody going to take responsibility for this discussion and the opinions espoused here? This is more than purging hurts of the past.

If you have questions about anything I've expressed here, you're welcome to shoot me a PM.

 

[Forever]

The effort at deinstitutionalization was import. Mental health professionals do have their hands tied in many cases. We do have people that need help in this world, but the standard is actually pretty strict, which I believe is a good thing.

In the past, way too many were locked up on questionable basis. The process historically was very dehumanizing, treating people like animals. Dictatorships used alleged mental illness as a tool to keep people in line.

People just don't realize how far we have come. And the medical science side of mental illness is advancing. The pop a pill mentality is likely going away at some point, as we understand better the gut related nature of various disorders. It is fascinating.

Having seen the inside of a few mental hospitals, having felt the pain and suffering inside, I really don't want to have anyone institutionalized. It is that troublesome....

I have optimism for psychology's future as long as we consider that empiricism's bias has got to loosen up a little.

I'm trying to have the validation others in this thread have received, as the various other ways this thread has been upsetting to people have been addressed, as you've pointed out. Not sure what this has to do with you being important to me, as we've never spoken very much at all.

I don't mean in a personal way, but I think it's fair to say I'm pretty huge in this thread topic regardless if I was distasteful to some. You've only responded to WUR and not me her "opposing" party. Yet then you shoot down both of us for not holding it up? What are we, tools?

Edit: it seems clear you're not neutral. I mean I'm okay with you all going for her, but don't pretend you're not.

 

[magpie]

If you have questions about anything I've expressed here, you're welcome to shoot me a PM.

Okay, thank you. I would love to have this conversation privately. Unfortunately I have to sleep now so I'll PM you tomorrow. Thanks.

 

[Coriolis]

Having had considerable experience with the mental health system over the last few years, including mental institutions, the standard for admission is "an immediate danger of physical harm to yourself or others". Anything less than that will not get admitted. So unhealthy does not cut it.

That may be the standard in your state or county. I shouldn't need to tell you that rules about admission to mental hospitals are a patchwork across our 50 states, just like many other laws and regulations. I have a friend who has been hospitalized repeatedly for mental health issues, despite being no threat to herself or others. Fortunately so, since she needed the help. Which brings me to:

Edit: Also, I think it's worth questioning why we immediately lump broken in together with harmful, but I suppose that's not really the topic of this conversation.

One shouldn't need to be on the verge of harming yourself or others to get the medical care you need, whether that is in-patient or out.

That's going to be one of the next issues in our society, I hope. You're right that we cannot lock everyone up, nor should we. But really, would it be such a bad idea to destigmatize mental health and actually have society provide guidelines for mental health, do mental health check ups for kids growing up and so on as to minimise this shit?

So amazing that you claim to want to find the individuality in everyone in other threads and then want to quarantine those you find unpleasant.

You (SfP) are the one who mentioned locking people up simply because they bother you or disagree with you. Everyone else linked hospitalization with doing actual harm, specifically here:

Oh, who should we lock up? Everyone that bothers you? Should we lock up members of any group that bothers you? How about people who support contrary political parties? Or have different religious beliefs? Or any other idea that bothers you?

It is a hate INFJ thread (one of very many on the internet in various places and I suspect that there are more hate INFJ threads than for any other type on the entire internet, despite the very limited numbers of INFJs in the world). What good intentions could be assumed when someone posts that "broken INFJs" should be locked up? And isn't assuming intentions at all a very bad thing in Fi land?

I think INTJ hate threads would give the INFJ ones a run for their money. And guess what? I don't usually see INTJs getting all butthurt in them, however nasty the hate runs. Perspective, folks. If someone starts a thread called "Why people hate INFJs/INTJs/XYZWs", you can bet there will be some unflattering and perhaps even hyperbolic remarks about that type in the thread. You don't have to read it, you know.

 

[Forever]

Alright [MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION] has a point. Well I guess I'll leave unless I am mentioned again.

So if you are going to mention me, don't use me as an example for a counter argument and me and you will be smooth sailing with me no matter what your opinion on this matter is.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

That may be the standard in your state or county.

Voluntary admissions are different....

You (SfP) are the one who mentioned locking people up simply because they bother you or disagree with you. Everyone else linked hospitalization with doing actual harm, specifically here:

WUR did post 156. And since the is addressing her original statement about "broken INFJs", she is stating pretty clearly that she believes a "broken INFJ" should be locked up.

Eilonwy in post 160 has a similar take on it as me, and her post that WUR quoted in 156 is pretty on target.

In post 165, WUR states

I think unhealthy INFJs are particularly capable of causing psychological damage to those around them--much more so than other types. I would just as soon those people be somewhere where there are those who are trained to treat them then allowing them to do what they do to those closest to them.

Pretty clear she expressed the desire here that unhealthy INFJs who are not causing physical harm but just psychological harm should be locked up. It isn't parsing words, just looking at the plain reading of the words.

And then in post 170 said I should have been committed.....

Amargith gets into it in post 175

And in that respect, it doesn't seem far-fetched to get people quarantined until treated and properly taken care of - with the worst cases going to a hospital.

Ugh, distasteful to even reread through all that.

But hey, whatever..... I guess it is all on me. No one else objected to it, did they? Oh, they did. And reacted similarly? Hmmm.... I just was more outspoken. And pissed people off for actually reading their words and addressing their words.... oh, well.....

 

[Sinmara]

 

[Coriolis]

Voluntary admissions are different....

Standards for involuntary admissions are not uniform across the US.

WUR did post 156. And since the is addressing her original statement about "broken INFJs", she is stating pretty clearly that she believes a "broken INFJ" should be locked up.

Eilonwy in post 160 has a similar take on it as me, and her post that WUR quoted in 156 is pretty on target.

In post 165, WUR states


Pretty clear she expressed the desire here that unhealthy INFJs who are not causing physical harm but just psychological harm should be locked up. It isn't parsing words, just looking at the plain reading of the words.

And then in post 170 said I should have been committed.....

Amargith gets into it in post 175



Ugh, distasteful to even reread through all that.

But hey, whatever..... I guess it is all on me. No one else objected to it, did they? Oh, they did. And reacted similarly? Hmmm.... I just was more outspoken. And pissed people off for actually reading their words and addressing their words.... oh, well.....

All the quotes you referenced specifed causing actual harm as the condition for hospitalization. None mentioned annoyance or disagreement. You did. You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to force them into the mouths of others. Moreover, not all the quotes you referenced here specify involuntary hospitalization. You seem conveniently to be ignoring a legitimate interest in helping people who have mental illness, including when that is best done in the hospital.

This may seem nitpicky, but I am highlighting it because it is this sort of repeated misrepresentation of someone else's comments (I was going to include "deliberate", but I'm not sure it actually is) that fuels much of the heated and unproductive debate on the forum.

The issue of who should receive mental health care in a hospital setting and when it is justifiable to compel someone to do so should be treated holistically, and is a derail from the present topic. A thread split has been requested, and will be done as soon as we can clarify where/what to split.

 

[1487610420]

around noon, on weekends, in winter time "kinda works"

 

[GIjade]

If you have questions about anything I've expressed here, you're welcome to shoot me a PM.

You really should be careful, PAM.

 

[Cloudpatrol]

If a person's mental health makes them a danger to themselves and others, they can't be reasoned with and believe they're "righteous" in the harm they're doing, then that person should be removed from the general population. Especially if it's to a place where there are those trained to deal with them.

If you can agree with the initial portion of that statement then the conclusion I arrive at is actually pretty reasonable.

It is saddening but easily understandable to me why this question brings up so much emotion. In the country where I live, 'committing' someone is certainly looked at as a last resort and only a stop-gap in between finding more resources.

I had a family member who was suffering extreme mental health issues. He was delusional and although not suicidal his actions were likely to result in his own death. His health was deteriorating and the family's entire resources were depleted - emotionally and financially. The police had been involved numerous times. It was excruciatingly difficult (these words don't even suffice) to make the decision to commit him. Taking someone's essential freedoms away from their control is not to be taken lightly and should continue to be scrutinized, discussed and evolve.

In our case, the 'institution' was a very compassionate environment that allowed him a much needed rest. He was allowed freedoms that gradually increased beginning from Day 2 and was given many resources not previously available. However, this was only a small step. The real work and ultimately solution came from our family finding someone who specialized in the rare mental issue our person was affected by.

These social services are needed and sometimes are necessary. However, they need to be monitored and care should be given to avoid the mistakes of the past where prejudices took precedent over legitimate need.

 

[prplchknz]

fwiw all the time i've been admitted i was actively suicidal and i've been pretty bad but not admitted. like i can be super delusional and hearing shit but as long as i'm not an active threat they'll just ignore me and i'm also relatively quiet so there's that. i think the loud people are more likely to get committed because they're 1.)more vocal 2.) more annoying. not saying that they're concerns aren't valid but sometimes just shhh

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

When they go into politics as a career.