Torture, for weeks, for months, for years, but it is somehow plausible to consider it help. The sane being shoved into a psych ward, drugged, and forced with erroneous treatments, yet this is regarded as the panacea? Mental institutes do not solve everyone’s problems. Forced treatment on the resistive or illegitimate mentally ill exemplifies the need to regain civil rights for patients. The current laws applied to the topic remain not enough to withhold these patients’ civil rights. Also, patients bias court cases while influenced by prescribed drugs. The stories and results of these foul acts are tremendously horrifying. As Americans we are born with our civil rights therefore these persons deserve justice.
The United States of America, we have a plethora of laws, those of which may vary in importance; however, the current laws attending to the mentally ill do not suffice. Currently the most justifiable laws for this group are the Constitutional Guidelines, which state
First, a court must find that important governmental interests are at stake.
Second, the court must conclude that involuntary medication will significantly further those concomitant state interests. Third, the court must conclude that involuntary medication is necessary to further those interests. The court must find that any alternative, less intrusive treatments are unlikely to achieve substantially the same results. Fourth, as we have said, the court must conclude that administration of the drugs is medically appropriate, i.e., in the patient's best medical interest in light of his medical condition. The specific kinds of drugs at issue may matter here as elsewhere. Different kinds of antipsychotic drugs may produce different side effects and enjoy differen...
... middle of paper ...
... 23 June 2003: 3-4. Student Resources in Context. Web. 21 Jan. 2014.
"Fried Brains". Law Project for Psychiatric Rights. Law Project for Psychiatric Rights,
23 Oct. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2014.
“A Week in Hell”. Law Project for Psychiatric Rights. Law Project for Psychiatric Rights,
23 Oct. 2013. Web. 21 Jan. 2014.
"Law Project for Psychiatric Rights." Law Project for Psychiatric Rights. Law Project
For Psychiatric Rights, 16 Jan. 2014. Web. 21 Jan. 2014.
Nowak, Rachel. “Should Treatment be Forced on Mentally Ill?” New Scientist
197.2648(2008):8. Science Reference Center. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.
Desmarais, Norman P. and McGovern, James H.. United States Supreme Court. Buck
v. Bell, Superintendent. N.p.: n.p., n.d. MAS Ultra – School Edition. Web. 21 Jan.
2014.
Wikipedia Contributors. "Buck v. Bell." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 20 Jan.
014. Web. 22 Jan. 2014.
As a result of the lack of regulation in state mental institutions, most patients were not just abused and harassed, but also did not experience the treatment they came to these places for. While the maltreatment of patients did end with the downsizing and closing of these institutions in the 1970’s, the mental health care system in America merely shifted from patients being locked up in mental institutions to patients being locked up in actual prisons. The funds that were supposed to be saved from closing these mental institutions was never really pumped back into treating the mentally ill community. As a result, many mentally ill people were rushed out of mental institutions and exposed back into the real world with no help where they ended up either homeless, dead, or in trouble with the law. Judges even today are still forced to sentence those in the latter category to prison since there are few better options for mentally ill individuals to receive the treatment they need. The fact that America, even today, has not found a proper answer to treat the mentally ill really speaks about the flaws in our
In the book “The Mad Among Us-A History of the Care of American’s Mentally Ill,” the author Gerald Grob, tells a very detailed accounting of how our mental health system in the United States has struggled to understand and treat the mentally ill population. It covers the many different approaches that leaders in the field of mental health at the time used but reading it was like trying to read a food label. It is regurgitated in a manner that while all of the facts are there, it lacks any sense humanity. While this may be more of a comment on the author or the style of the author, it also is telling of the method in which much of the policy and practice has come to be. It is hard to put together without some sense of a story to support the action.
The fight for improved health care for those with mental illness has been an ongoing and important struggle for advocates in the United States who are aware of the difficulties faced by the mentally ill and those who take care of them. People unfortunate enough to be inflicted with the burden of having a severe mental illness experience dramatic changes in their behavior and go through psychotic episodes severe enough to the point where they are a burden to not only themselves but also to people in their society. Mental institutions are equipped to provide specialized treatment and rehabilitative services to severely mentally ill patients, with the help of these institutions the mentally ill are able to get the care needed for them to control their illness and be rehabilitated to the point where they can become a functional part of our society. Deinstitutionalization has led to the closing down and reduction of mental institutions, which means the thousands of patients who relied on these mental institutions have now been thrown out into society on their own without any support system to help them treat their mental illness. Years after the beginning of deinstitutionalization and after observing the numerous effects of deinstitutionalization it has become very obvious as to why our nation needs to be re-institutionalized.
Few issues will motivate Americans to put down their cheeseburgers and pick up a shotgun faster than the threat of infringement upon their civil liberties. The right to choose what toothpaste to buy, what color socks to wear with those sandals, or what spiritual doctrine to follow, is fiercely defended by both conservatives and liberals alike. In fact, this commitment to personal liberty is what defines us as Americans, and sets us apart from the rest of the world (even if only in our own minds). This attitude is embodied in our presidential rhetoric:
Solitary confinement has the ability to shatter even the healthiest mind when subjected to indefinite lockdown, yet the mentally ill, who are disproportionately represented in the overall prison population, make up the majority of inmates who are held in that indefinite lockdown. Within your average supermax prison in which all inmates are subjected to an elevated form of solitary confinement, inmates face a 23-hour lockdown, little to no form of mental or physical stimulation that is topped off with no human interaction beyond the occasional guard to inmate contact. It is no wonder ‘torture’ is often used synonymously to describe solitary confinement. For years, cases arguing against solitary confinement have contested against its inhumane
Forcing someone to take medication or be hospitalized against their will seems contrary to an individual’s right to refuse medical treatment, however, the issue becomes complicated when it involves individuals suffering from a mental illness. What should be done when a person has lost their grasp on reality, or if they are at a risk of harming themselves or others? Would that justify denying individuals the right to refuse treatment and issuing involuntary treatment? Numerous books and articles have been written which debates this issue and presents the recommendations of assorted experts.
“US: Look Critically at Widespread Use of Solitary Confinement.” Human Rights Watch, 1 July 2016,
The stigma and negative associations that go with mental illness have been around as long as mental illness itself has been recognized. As society has advanced, little changes have been made to the deep-rooted ideas that go along with psychological disorders. It is clearly seen throughout history that people with mental illness are discriminated against, cast out of society, and deemed “damaged”. They are unable to escape the stigma that goes along with their illness, and are often left to defend themselves in a world that is not accepting of differences in people. Society needs to realize what it is doing, and how it is affecting these people who are affected with mental illness. If we continue to not help them, and to foster their illness, it will only get worse.
As time goes on, the law has put more emphasis on facility just like Bridgewater State Hospital in which many of the actions of the facility workers can face legal consequences such as facing prison time, fines, lawsuits, and etc. Society has a better understanding of why certain people act the way that they do and being more knowledgeable about psychology and mental diseases allows us to have a different approach when dealing with these topics or these individuals. In today’s era, there are many normal individuals who are willing to stand up for those who do not have a voice of their own. I believe that this change in one’s ability to stand up for another individual or group of individuals is what brought about change to the medical environment of those who are mentally
Metzner, J. L., & Fellner, J. (2010). Solitary Confinement and Mental Illness in U.S. Prisons: A Challenge for Medical Ethics. The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 38(1), 104-108.
The study continues on to explain further ramifications, such as, physical effects. This shows some of the devastating effects the practice of administrative segregation has on inmates’ mental and physical well-being. Often, it is the mentally ill that are unfairly subject to this practice. “Mentally ill inmates may find themselves inappropriately placed in administrative segregation because of a lack of other suitable placements, protective custody reasons, or disruptive behavior related to their mental illness.” (O 'Keefe 125). Instead of providing safety to inmates and staff as the prison system claims administrative segregation is for, its main objective is social isolation. Which is one of the harmful elements of AS that makes it torture. Additionally, an annual report from the Canadian Government’s Office of the Correctional Investigator’s states, “close to one-third of reported self-injury incidents occurred in (federal prisons) segregation units”. Therefore, one can infer that the negative effects of AS are contradictory to providing safety to inmates. UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Juan Mendéz proposed administrative segregation should be banned as the “isolation of inmates amounted to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment or – in more severe cases – to torture.” The ramifications of administrative segregation amount to what is defined as torture by lawyer and human rights Juan Mendéz. Administrative segregation is an unconstitutional treatment of inmates and does not constitute the values of our society, or the dignity and humanity of all people. Which is contradictory to rehabilitating a person to be physically, socially and mentally restored for reintroduction into society. Its use in Canada’s prison system is unjustified, unethical, and ultimately,
Rock, M. (2001). Emerging issues with mentally ill offenders: Casues and social consequences. Administration and Policy in Mental Health., 165-180.
The treatment of the mentally ill started back in the far past. In 400 BC, Hippocrates, who was a Greek physician, treated mental illness as diseases of disturbed physiology, and not displeasure of the Gods or demonic possession ("Timeline: Treatments for," ). Greek medical writers found treatments such as quiet, occupation, and the use of a drug called purgative hellebore ("Timeline: Treatments for,”). During these times, family members took care of the mentally ill ("Timeline: Treatments for,”). In the middle Ages, the Europeans let the mentally ill have their freedom, as long as they were not dangerous ("Timeline: Treatments for,”). The mentally ill were also seen as witches who were possessed by demons ("Timeline: Treatments for,”). In 1407, the first mental illness establishment was made in Valencia, Spain ("Timeline: Treatments for,”).
The features of enhanced confinement that consistently draw the most profound condemnation revolve around: the often-brutal forms and compassionless deprivations in which these units or facilities operate, the harrowing living conditions that inmates are compelled to endure, the resulting physical and psychological damage to body and soul, and the questionable legality of such confinement. Leading human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are regularly outing the United States for operating torturous prisons that house convicted criminals in the most deplorable and extra-legal conditions. (Marion Experiment pgs.
In the United States 2,193,798 people are held in Federal prisons, local prisons and local/county jails. In local prisons 64.2 % of the inmates have a mental illness, 56.2 % in Federal prisons and 44.8 % in state prisons. Most of the inmates could have prevented their stay at the prisons if they were provided help for their illness, however they were not and they still have to serve their sentenced time. The inmates locked up are abused daily by other inmates or even the officers in charge. They cannot help they have illness and it is not fair that they have to suffer a punishment worse than they already have to. They are tormented and the abuse does not help their situation, the agitation can even make their condition worse, and the treatment for their illness is low quality if there is any at all. They are given harsh punishments or can even have their sentence made longer.