andrewducker | Mental

You're viewing

andrewducker's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

Conversation elsewhere brought up the general public's attitude towards people with mental problems - i.e. that they are weird and somewhat scary, in an amusing fashion. Which, to be honest, bothers me quite a lot.

Not only does it lead to the generally terrible state of the NHS when it comes to mental health, but it affects the rest of society too. A case in point being the man who recently killed his friend and drank his blood, because Akasha from Queen of the Damned had told him to. His behaviour is obviously delusional, but does he get sent off to a psychiatric institute (albeit one for dangerous insane people)? Nope, off to prison with him, because apparently he's sane.

Sane people don't chop off their friend's heads and drink their blood, they just don't.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

wolflady26.livejournal.com

I don't think someone has to be sane to deserve to go to prison. I think they have to be sane enough to understand that what they were doing was both wrong and punishable.

From:

ekatarina.livejournal.com

Well that is part of the whole question. If they knew it was wrong but still have issues, send them to a prison with mental care? Or get them help until they are better and *then* they serve time? There was a sad case a while ago up-island from me regarding a mother killing her daughter. It was wrong to kill her girl, but the evidence strongly suggests she was deep in a schizophrenic psychosis. At that moment, every thing she did was absolutely correct in her world. And so far it seems that she has not left that world. She seems resigned to be going to an institution but is still happy her daughter is "safe". I recall thinking at the time the gruesome details were published that I wished she *never* got better. I hoped that she never "came to" and realized what she had done. I think it would have broken her in a much different way.

I have heard a verdict discussed of "guilty but criminally insane" which would require therapy and treatment for the mental illness. Once recovered the person would *then* serve time since only then could they understand what it was for.

We just had a man try to plea "not guilty by reason of mental defect" and he was declared guilty within a day. The jury did ask for clarification regarding 1st versus 2nd degree but they didn't take long. I believe the man has severe problems. He has issues with control and rage. He is narcissistic and jealous and while he should serve a long long time in jail he should also get some help. He killed his kids to hurt his wife and he needs to understand that he is *not* the only creature in this world of any worth.

In any case, I have to go to school now.

Ekatarina

From:

taromazzy.livejournal.com

You'd be amazed at what evil sane people can do.

From:

kpollock.livejournal.com

I don't think I would. It's perfectly possible to be utterly sane and do things that most other people find abominable and not even notice that everybody else thinks they are abominable unless it's pointed out to you Of course, in such cases, 'eveybody else' is wrong and I'm right.

As for the guy in Ekaterina's example, it sounds perfectly logical that if you want to hurt someone badly you do the thing that will do that the most. I'm not defending him in anyway, by the way, but I don't think (based on the given info) that he's insane at all.

I think I'm lucky that although I am very bad tempered, I don't take offence easily and have no real itnerest in revenge or hurting people (probably because it's really hard to hurt my feeling in any way that lasts more than 2 seconds - though sometimes 2 seconds is enough)

From:

a-pawson.livejournal.com

I knew two people at university who drank each others blood. Were they sane? I always thought so, as aside from their strange personal practices they led normal lives, graduated and presumably went on to become productive members of society.

Nowadays, you would probably class someone who sacrificed people once a month to a higher deity as insane, but there are people (quite a lot of them in fact) who believe a man was once born to a virgin, walked on water, rose from the dead! Are they sane? The latter group generally aren't hurting anyone so they are tolerated in today's society, but are they any more sane than the first?

What is the actual clinical definition of sanity? Whatever it is no doubt the individual above satisfied the criteria.

There again anyone who can be influenced by such an awful movie as Queen of the Damned has to be insane!!!

From: (Anonymous)

Why?

From:

andrewducker

Why what?

From:

wordofblake.livejournal.com

I dont think it matters (in terms of prison) whether people are sane. But then I believe in punishment rather than pretending to believe in rehabilitation. I think if you are the type of person (for whatever reason) who will kill their friend for an innocous comment then there is no box airtight enough in which you can be dropped into the deepest hole in the ground that can be found.

And when a person (who isnt killing randomly) is mentally divergent from what you expect of course it seems weird and slightly scary. They do not fit the pattern you have established and so you have no idea what they will do or how to react to them.

But you surely cant feel that the "Vampire" guy deserved to be let off with killing his friend?

From:

andrewducker

But you surely cant feel that the "Vampire" guy deserved to be let off with killing his friend?

I certainly don't believe there's any point punishing him.

On the other hand I don't think he should be wandering about free either - he's obviously dangerous.

Obviously he should be placed somewhere secure where he's no danger to others. But in my opinion it should be for reasons of treatment, not reasons of punishment.

From:

wordofblake.livejournal.com

Punishment/Vengeance. There's nothing to be gained from punishing him excpet that it's a sign that behaviour of the killing friends and eating their brains type is not to be tolerated.

I know I'd want the guy about to club me over the head and eat my brains to come to a sticky end because of it.

If you think he deserved to be put where he was no danger to others then why do you care where that place is?

From:

andrewducker

it's a sign that behaviour of the killing friends and eating their brains type is not to be tolerated.

Is there anyone out there that thinks it is tolerated?

why do you care where that place is?
Because I don't want people to be hurt. Any people at all.

From:

wordofblake.livejournal.com

Tolerance, in my opinion, includes considering the fact that he seems to be mental as an extenuating circustance. I think the fact that matters is that he is dangerous.