It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The government's Mental Health Bill strikes the "right balance" between patient safeguards and protecting the public, the health secretary has said.
Patricia Hewitt told the Commons it was "essential" to ensure discharged patients continued taking medication.
The bill, which will allow people to be held against their will even if they have not committed a crime, has been attacked by the Tories as "punitive".
They and the Lib Dems say the plan would stop sufferers seeking help.
Originally posted by infinite
remember we have the toughest gun laws in the world and the shooting took place in the United States, not the United Kingdom.
Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
Just because someone may look like that their are a danger to the public, institutionalizing them without proof, is against our human rights...
That is the new laws the Gov wants introduce....... Jail someone who might look like they are a dangerr to the pujblic... with or without proof.....
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
The ban has not stopped people from using guns has it.....
Originally posted by magicmushroom
Bodrul, all the Goverment is doing is backtracking on what was done previously. It was called care in the community where mentaly ill persons were chucked out of various institutions due to cut backs.
Originally posted by dgtempe
Someone please, lets have the definition of "Normal"
I guess i'm high risk, i take prozac and it works very well for me. Would that classify me as mentally unbalanced?
I dont see how Prozac can help one person and make another go on a killing spree.
Hello, to clarify, for some people with Bipolar Mood disorder, SSRI`s can indeed increase manic phase intensity, and therefore heighten dangers to the patient and sometimes public too. Many people do not receive a coorect diagnosis for years, and the most response from doctors is to try them on SSRI`s first. I have some personal experience of this, I am BP and was on Prozac for a year. I ended up in the Police station 3 times that year, and only in retrospect realise why. There are many examples of this. Don`t mean to freak you out though.
Also, on the implications of the "Mental Capacity Bill":
1)Many people will benefit from this as before, once someone had bin found incapable of making decisions(mentally ill, dementia, stroke victims, Learning disabilities etc.)EVERY decision was automatically made for them after this point. NOW their ability to make decisions must be assessed on a decision by decision basis, before this right is taken away from them.
(this even includes getting dressed, spending money. Everything really, including their treatment) Making a decision that seems irrational is no grounds for saying that someone has lost "Mental Capacity" either.
2)People can now make an Advanced Directive while in a Capable state in regard to what treatment they wish to receive or not(including to refuse life saving and other treatments) and decisions they wish to make in the future, that applies and safeguard their wishes should they become incapable at any point.
3)If somebody has no-one to act on their behalf should they become incaple, an Idependent Mental Capacity Advocate will be automatically assigned to safeguard their wishes and "Best Interests"
4)EVERY decision made for an incapable person must be assessed and shown to be in the clients/patients best interests, including that that person was given every chance to make that decision themselves first and that their wishes were taken into account.
5) There was a case in which the UK Govt. got taken to the European Court of Human Rights and lost, when a person had been forcibly medicated and restrained by healthcare workers.
For many people(est. 6million) this legislation will safeguard their wishes, although I do accept that some people may be forced to take Medicines against their will if deemed a possible risk to society(Yes, who decides?!). There are concerns about this and it is a difficult area to legislate. Many charities have shown concerns, and I`m not sure personally that their can be a perfect solution to balancing individuals and societies needs. The ex head of the mental health charity MIND is now sitting in the House of Lords and so will hopefully provide a check to this govts. sometimes knee-jerk policy decisions.
More info, search for Bournewood proposals. I can`t ref the ECHR vs, Govt, case atm, will seek to do so.
Guns are cheap in this country, but bullets are expensive, by the way
'Add (a vast amount of) more guns' as a means to help stop gun crime IMO is, quite simply, insane.
Well, let's be honest sj, it only looks that way to those who either want it to and who know little about how things work or those of a particular political persuasion who want to pretend it might work that way.
sure, but it`s an improvement actually IMO. Gun and knife crime in the UK has apparently steadily fallen over the last twenty years, despite the Hype. will find some figures, hopefully.....
Originally posted by spencerjohnstone
Looks at the amount of killings that have happened over the past few weeks in the UK (only not the us), so Much for some ban which has done nothing to deterr people hellbent on killing others.
How many times do we need to have another dunblane massacre here inthe UK before we all do something about it.
Too many innocent lives are being lost.
And something needs to be done.
Looks morelike political browny points to me
imprisoning or institusalising someone based on that they look like they are off their nutter is wrong... or if they look like they are going to harm someone is wrong also.... until you have proof then, the Gov or any GOV has no right to detain anyone based on face value....without due process....