are you scared of the mentally ill..and would you vote to keep them off the streets?

[zippitippitoes]

..the mental health Bill are you keen to see it enacted or not?

sunday times and it's mentally scarred leader

completely agree fox.

hmmmm.

you and mental health issues zippy.

it's not the most circumspect thread title is it?

yes!

but I mean even in advance of them becoming violent (so if the community mental health support team report back that they believes X - who had say violent tendencies before X started on current medication - has stopped taking X's medication - can they section just on that or do they have to wait for X to become unstable? if they can already do that, then I think that's a good thing!)

I wondered if people were scared of the "mentally ill" taking the cue from this newspaper article and the way the Bill has been reported in the light of the high profile cases

no they can't section just because stops medication

i probably should read the thread before posting but the tittle is just repulsive to me.
properly funded services, better information for the general public? yes
keep 'them' off the streets? words fail me what does that even mean?

even if they were known to be violent pre-medication?

if people who are well enough could enter in to contracts with mentors/family/outreach workers whom they trusted who could then have a greater voice when they started to become ill to have not a section but a hospital order pending a section if required i think it would help

Fox depends on client: They could section X if there is a risk to self or others when not on meds, Esp if a history of violence! However if X has a good team they may well encourage them to come into hospital voluntarily, To be monitored

this is a link to the draft here

a lot of mental health clients do end up on the streets

ahh well that's good figgy. Gives me a bit more faith in the system.

i think the debate needs to be widen are we talking about people who are not 'curable' but can not be kept lockked up in a mental institution?
or maybe violent off meds?
i think it is easy to blame mental illness and the crimes commited by people suffering MI are in the minority (tragic as they are) but the media does turn them into a 'crisis'

the change into care in the community had a lot of positives but also a lot of big problems due to poor poor funding and poor planning (does that sound familiar?)

My mum worked in a mental hospital until its closure. While most places may have been a living hell this hospital was in spacious grounds, lots of trees and country walks that the nurses would take the patients on. There was also a garden nursery where patients would tend and grow their own flowers and vegetables.

It was a crime the place was closed and left to ruin. On the last day my mum was in tears because her patients were confused and couldn't understand why they were having to leave their home, they became frightened when the time came to go, it was truly awful. And so were the places they were dumped into. More hospitals should have been run like that one was, where patients were treated with respect and dignity without throwing them out into a world where people act like they are monsters of some kind. Something to be frightened of.

I don't believe in locking people away, I believe that those who need help like that should have somewhere to go, somewhere like that hospital that was calm and nurturing. Certainly there were secure units but mental hospitals should be brought back with the care they are not asylums. Like the government would ever fund that!

zippi you can make plan! Our team encourages "viewpoint programmes" or relapse prevention plans, done with the client/family/ect when well to discuss triggers, signs of relapse ect and put into place an action plan at each stage!

I.E. if someone knows when they are well that when they become unwell they believe they do not need medication and when they get to this point they need hospital admission then this can be documented for them!

some of the old hospitals were awful though

2ifbysee -good points most of those hospitals were prime real estate and that is why they were hastily closed and sold to be converted into luxury estates

Hi zippi, not been online all evening so apologies that I missed your Q about why people thought the thread title was leading.

Are you scared of mentally ill people? And would you vote to keep them off the streets?

Well the answer for me is clearly no, I am not scared of people with mental ill health. I know a vast number of people personally who have either been in secure care or have had strong medication for a variety of mental health disorders, from depression, substance abuse, bipolar disorder, scizophrenia to name a few. Aren't 1 in 3 people affected by mental health problems at some stage in their life?

However, I think the gist of the article attached is "Are you scared of the tiny minority of mental health patients who have a track record of violent psychotic behaviour, but are now released into society with an inadequate level of supervision, support and funding?"

So although yes, the wording in the newspaper leaves a lot to be desired, I think the meaning for me is not "mental health" per se, and is not stigmatising all sufferers of poor mental health. It is identifying the small percentage of people who are judged by many of the professionals and friends/family around them to be a danger.

And I believe it is arguable that at this present time, society is at a loss to contain the danger presented by these people at any particular point in time.

I do know people whose families have tried everything to get them back in to hospital when they are becoming ill and they have still not been admitted for weeks or months, waiting for something too awful to happen..they can even be arrested or hand themselves in and the outreach team can't get admission..lack of places and a belief that they can be treated in the community

whether the media has highlighted incorrectly and in a sensationalist manner or not the fact still remains that there is a crisis within mental health services which needs to be adressed.
I have also seen people sectioned for failure to take medication, although this is largely due to the behaviour that follows as a direct result.
I also think it is wrong to say that people just get put on medication even if its not a great combination and are left on it. I have seen people re admitted to hospital and complex programmes carried out to adjust medication to ensure that the best possible effects are achieved, be it in terms of mental health or the wider health implications.

sfxmum that is exactly why the hospital was closed, but because the buildings were listed the council has left them to ruin. The local community protested too, the amount of houses they were about to build there. They wanted the hospital brought back because most of them worked there!

but it would be better if fewer people were sleeping rough or in homeless hostels because of their mental health problems or would it? Should they be helped, or how can you help people even? Do you have to make their detention compulsory and mediacte them compulsorily?

Medication is difficult isn't it because it doesn't always work for ever, it can start to cause problems or instability..age and physical changes or substance abuse makes a difference too

The story I read in the Observer made it very plain that the people most at risk were family members, and I think the very powerful and moving personal testimonies from family members on this thread are very revealing as to why some people (esp those most at risk) are in favour of stricter regimes re drug taking. It's easy for the rest of us to say, 'oh yes, let freedom reign' when we aren't suffering the consequences every day.
Btw, I'd say this title was designed to elicit the response, 'bastard newspapers and their prejudices. Of course mentally ill people should be free to chose'. But it isn't that simple.

Medication doesn't always work forever but it has its place. I have seen a resident who was on the same meds for years suddenly deteriorate in his mental health, he then started to have delusions about his tablets and then decided to stop taking them. A funny and artculate man that had led a reasonable quality of life, changed beyond recognition, we begged for him to be seen, same old story, no beds etc. Eventually after all of us working on tenter hooks waiting for him to blow, he did, at another client and was finally taken into hospital stripped down of all medication and started on anew and more successful prgramme. It always takes a crisis though or an act of violence for voices to be heard because hospitals simply cannot accomodate the need. I believe patients with a history of violence should be made to take medication and if this is unsuccessful in a community setting then hospital unfortunately is the other option. I believe that all should be done prior to this to keep those suffering in the community but when all else fails what else can be done?

I think that is the hard part the crisis having to happen first

I also think there is good stuff in the bill, of course it is very difficult as at a time of crisis the patient/client is in a very difficult place

i think the emphasis should be on improving services and good practice (there obviously is plenty of good practice in some areas to draw on)

no it's not simple at all

the matter of choice couldn't be more complex than in this context..it's a very difficult balancing act