In the case of John, his life has been effectively destroyed by what happened to him. There is absolutely no realistic way he can recover the financial loss he's sustained from all those decades. In terms of compensation, he should now have a free house, gas, electricity, water and some money left over. He had no chance, whatsoever, of accumulating that during his stay in the hospitals, despite being perfectly normal.
"The only psychiatric hospitals that are required should be to house persons who have been found not criminally responsible for a crime"
In theory yes. In practice, some people are unfortunately so mentally deficient they NEED to stay in a hospital to keep themselves safe. Suicide attempts are a route to being signed in. The law assumes that, if you want to kill yourself, something is seriously wrong and you require forced help. That is not necessarily a bad thing.
Bearing in mind what I just wrote, it is of course blatantly obvious that most of the persons in this video are either physically disabled, have a mild learning disability or are not at all "unwell" in any way.
Overall, I think that the way a society treats its behaviourally (read: psychiatrically) "ill" provides a deep insight into the double standard nature of our ethics.
But one does not have to look very far to find other such examples in abundance.
@shinyravenii John is not mentally abnormal. I have seen far 'crazier' people in normal society. He was conscripted into that system from the workhouses. He need physical help now, like an arm to lean on, because he's old, having spent all his time in that system. The UK is not all that backwards, we are one of the few countries who prescribe heroin to terminally ill patients to remove the pain. In terms of jail, anyone who has seriously harmed or poses a seriously threat should be there.
@lexichronicle2 I never said John was mad. I can confirm from first hand experience that the UK _is_ very forward looking in psychiatry and medicine as you say. I have worked in Germany before, which is not only socially divided in its general and mental health care, but where psychiatric institutions are also at least two decades behind ours in terms of organisational structure.
I agree I need to revise my thinking on who should be in prison and for how long. Current situation bad though.
Respond to this video... Psychiatry is increasingly reduced to an exercise in managing risk though. And on closer inspection this is not always equivalent to "treating" as in doing something good and supportive for an individual. On the contrary. Risk averseness is often leading to increases in the suffering of the mentally ill. Open societies need to take risks. That is why we do not make use of protective custody and also release criminals after a period of time served.
But there is of course also a case to me made for temporary detention of a so called mentally ill person. Psychiatric conditions are terrible in their own right and can make life very difficult. The real tragedy is that detained patients are neither afforded enough of a forum to make a case for their release and that doctors are far too overcautious when contemplating discharge, nor does society have any tolerance for weirdness, IMHO.
oilpatch totally disagree with your comment. if a person is insane which means they are sick and cant help it then they should be locked up but in a psychiatric hospital.
First, compensation. Second retribution. Unfortunately not a problem not exclusive to England, we have our own sorry past here in Canada. Shame...shame!!!! The only psychiatric hospitals that are required should be to house persons who have been found not criminally responsible for a crime i.e. murder because they are legally insane, and they should be part of the prison system.
In the case of John, his life has been effectively destroyed by what happened to him. There is absolutely no realistic way he can recover the financial loss he's sustained from all those decades. In terms of compensation, he should now have a free house, gas, electricity, water and some money left over. He had no chance, whatsoever, of accumulating that during his stay in the hospitals, despite being perfectly normal.
lexichronicle2 7 months ago
"The only psychiatric hospitals that are required should be to house persons who have been found not criminally responsible for a crime"
In theory yes. In practice, some people are unfortunately so mentally deficient they NEED to stay in a hospital to keep themselves safe. Suicide attempts are a route to being signed in. The law assumes that, if you want to kill yourself, something is seriously wrong and you require forced help. That is not necessarily a bad thing.
lexichronicle2 7 months ago
Bearing in mind what I just wrote, it is of course blatantly obvious that most of the persons in this video are either physically disabled, have a mild learning disability or are not at all "unwell" in any way.
Overall, I think that the way a society treats its behaviourally (read: psychiatrically) "ill" provides a deep insight into the double standard nature of our ethics.
But one does not have to look very far to find other such examples in abundance.
shinyravenii 1 year ago
@shinyravenii John is not mentally abnormal. I have seen far 'crazier' people in normal society. He was conscripted into that system from the workhouses. He need physical help now, like an arm to lean on, because he's old, having spent all his time in that system. The UK is not all that backwards, we are one of the few countries who prescribe heroin to terminally ill patients to remove the pain. In terms of jail, anyone who has seriously harmed or poses a seriously threat should be there.
lexichronicle2 7 months ago
@lexichronicle2 I never said John was mad. I can confirm from first hand experience that the UK _is_ very forward looking in psychiatry and medicine as you say. I have worked in Germany before, which is not only socially divided in its general and mental health care, but where psychiatric institutions are also at least two decades behind ours in terms of organisational structure.
I agree I need to revise my thinking on who should be in prison and for how long. Current situation bad though.
shinyravenii 3 months ago
Respond to this video... Psychiatry is increasingly reduced to an exercise in managing risk though. And on closer inspection this is not always equivalent to "treating" as in doing something good and supportive for an individual. On the contrary. Risk averseness is often leading to increases in the suffering of the mentally ill. Open societies need to take risks. That is why we do not make use of protective custody and also release criminals after a period of time served.
shinyravenii 3 months ago
Nobody should be imprisoned except for murderers.
But there is of course also a case to me made for temporary detention of a so called mentally ill person. Psychiatric conditions are terrible in their own right and can make life very difficult. The real tragedy is that detained patients are neither afforded enough of a forum to make a case for their release and that doctors are far too overcautious when contemplating discharge, nor does society have any tolerance for weirdness, IMHO.
shinyravenii 1 year ago
oilpatch totally disagree with your comment. if a person is insane which means they are sick and cant help it then they should be locked up but in a psychiatric hospital.
sandhilldiva 2 years ago
First, compensation. Second retribution. Unfortunately not a problem not exclusive to England, we have our own sorry past here in Canada. Shame...shame!!!! The only psychiatric hospitals that are required should be to house persons who have been found not criminally responsible for a crime i.e. murder because they are legally insane, and they should be part of the prison system.
oilpatchgirl 2 years ago
The mental health system in England is a backward thinking lot we've only just got advocacy which you in Canada have had20 years.
terratagONE 2 years ago
These films certainly give you food for thought !!!!
onawobble 3 years ago