shootings and mental health

here_kitty · Apr 28, 2007

... The point is that people can have AS or other developmental D/O or psychosis or other mental illness without being violent. Likewise, people can have no mental illness or developmental D/O and be extremely violent.

:yelclap: Exactly, it's unfortunate, however, that the mentally ill who ARE violent are the ones that are the representatives for all the other gentle, kind souls who happen to suffer from the same disease. If John Wayne Gacy had diabetes (I don't know if he did, but suppose), he would not become the poster boy for people with diabetes, that would be absurd. But, people like Cho, who happened to have a mental illness and committed the atrocity he did because of it are made to represent the entire population. It's time that mental illness really become a topic of conversation. In that vein, please see my post at https://allnurses.com/forums/f46/canvas-film-221019.html. Talks about an awesome movie that, if it becomes mainstream, could be an eye-opener to people who only think that the mentally ill are dangerous.

pickledpepperRN · May 1, 2007

Helen Thomas? No there's a real nonpartisan for ya. She is the biggest left wing hack of them all.

The fact is that Martha Mitchell was wrongly labeled mentally ill because she told reporters that her husband, Attorney General John Mitchell, and the Nixon administration were violating the law.

I believe most of us want to avoid wronly taking away a persons freedoms, such as gum ownership, for mental health reasons unless that person is truly a danger to themself or others.

rclimbr · May 9, 2007

I am a college student(Nursing) and a transporter at a hospital w/ a mental ward. "Being a danger to self and others" is a big category. There is a big difference in being suicidal and being homicidal. If every college student that gets depressed and has suicidal thoughts was institutionalized, then half my class might be locked up.

SoxfanRN · May 9, 2007

Likewise, if everyone who had homicidal thoughts (think of driving on a crowded highway in traffic) were institutionalized, we'd all be locked up.

daubney · May 9, 2007

Man's Inhumanity to Man

How do we attempt to explain to ourselves and to each other the reasons for what we identify as atrocities? It seems that we recognize and are conditioned to accept the fact that atrocities involving one or two people happen on a regular basis. It is when we hear of atrocities of magnitude, those that affect many, that our dialogue begins.

In order to capture our undivided attention the event has either to be marked by magnitude or affected us in a personal or peripheral way. Cause for concern is that one act of atrocity may, in short order, beget another. The fact that we make any prediction indicates that we must realize on some level the reason for our prediction.

Man's inhumanity to man or the perception of intolerable treatment seem to be the catalyst for the initial event. It is often difficult to predict initial events as we, as a society, are groomed to suppress exaggerated emotional responses. Emotions that result from the perception of being wronged, threatened, humiliated, betrayed, or rejected, create strong anger, or fear responses capable of generating irrepressible rage. The evoked emotional response can be discharged through emotional implosion; internalization, or explosion; externalization. Violence can manifest in suicide or homicide. It is the secondary atrocities or what is referred to as the copycat syndrome that is predictable enough to attract our attention and action.

Many of us have experienced inequities and most of us are able to cope with our unpleasant emotional responses without serious incident. Some may choose to hold their noses and swallow; some may stand their ground and fight. The memory of any significant event remains with us. Each time we are reminded of the offending incident we tend to ruminate. One wonders what catalyst would cause these feelings to erupt. It is with the internalizers, the imploders that my concern exists. It seems it is possible to experience vicarious rage. Unbridled youth driven by raw emotion rather than reason may consider they have little to loose if even they pause to consider. Conversely those who receive the unexpected and unwanted golden handshake may be unable to absorb the shock. It does not require a quantum leap to imagine that those at both ends of the spectrum as well as the undefined inbetweens have been subjected to enough emotional damage to develop psychological scar tissue.

Those who dare to function outside of what their community defines as "the box" are at risk of alienation. We can all recall the few classmates who, because they did not fit in, were singled out and taunted unmercifully. One wonders what has become of them.

One such student has recently been identified. The recipe for disaster has created an autrocity. Those who would attempt to find reason by the assignment of blame are doing so. Blame is assigned to the perpetrator, described as a deranged, mean spirited, coward. Blame is assigned to the state for inadequate regulation of the provision of firearms. Blame is assigned to those who are responsible to provide security and protection. Blame is assigned to all those who had previous knowledge of the student's unusual conduct. Blame has even been directed toward the student's mother. The media has collected and unleashed a number of loose cannons that have assigned blame in every imaginable external arena yet most have failed to assign any weight to introspective blame. Where have we collectively failed this student? This student is not unique nor is he alone. There have been students before him, like him, and there will be others to follow if we are unable or unwilling to address the reasons that he felt compelled to act as he did. It is not reasonable to assign blame to those who are designated to protect us from harm or to expect those who had selective information to piece the bits of the puzzle together any more than we can hold the state responsible for issuing the inanimate object that fired the fatal bullets. We need not to condone but to find meaning. We need not to exact vengeance but to validate enormous loss. We must now rely on ourselves to attempt to create a pervasive climate of peaceful co-existence.

Fortunately for all, most people are able to resolve their issues and redirect their lives in spite their perception of difficult beginnings middles or endings. The few who have harbored their emotional baggage may need only a small reminder to recall a flood of negative emotion. A trigger event can result in a suicidal implosion or a homicidal explosion. One needs to consider causation in the context of mental health and illness.

Is there even one of us who is unaware of another who has exhibited the emotional extremes that, given a set of circumstances, could culminate in a recipe for disaster. We are indeed our brother's keeper. When we, by word or deed, deliver untenable messages to others we create the possibility of a climate of violence. Others who sit idly by acting neither in support nor in defense are not absolved from responsibility. We are all responsible on some level if we commit the sin of commission or omission. Edmond Burke once said, "The only thing necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to stand by and do nothing".

What to do? Adopt a gentle tread. Practice decent treatment of one another. Celebrate the uniquety of individuality. Develop and promote the skills necessary to learn the ability to ventilate in safe environments. Develop and provide environments that are conducive to the discharge of emotional baggage.

Years ago a profound statement appeared in a comic strip, Pogo announced "We have met the enemy, and he is us". We are indeed our brother's keeper. Peace at any level will begin when we individually and collectively commit to promote acceptance of each other; only then can we begin to create peace as a self fulfilling prophesy constructed step by step.

teeituptom, BSN, RN · May 10, 2007

You know Ive heard people refer to this Cho guys as wacko, crazy, schizoid, delusional, antisocial, sociopathic, Asbergers, Autistic.etc. Ive also heard people complain about the lack of gun control in this nation and how easy it is to get firearms. Now I would like to bring up a point of a different perspective totally.

If other people around had been carrying guns also, They could have dropped Cho in his tracks before he had shot many people at all. Maybe the death and injury toll would have been far less. Not counting adding Cho to it.

Now I never carry a gun at work, but the rest of the time I am almost always carrying a gun to protect my self and family. As an example, several years ago some nut job went bananas and started shooting up a restaurant here in Texas. Yes he got several people then an armed bystander, stopped him from hurting even more people, children included.

Dont take my guns away

teeituptom

Fuzzy · May 11, 2007

Don't worry Tom. I won't take your guns away. Gun Control just makes so law abidding citizens can't own guns. Only the crooks will have guns. Plus if people want to kill themselves and others they don't need a gun to do it. Timothy McVeigh used a homemade bomb. The psuedoreverand Jones used poison. The terrorists used airplanes. A person could burn down a building full of people also. See there's many ways to take out a group of people. You don't need a gun. Gun control doesn't prevent violence.

Fuzzy

psychRN33 · May 17, 2007

Snowfreeze commented that mental illness remains a "closet illness". Until all healthcare providers acknowledge and the public understands that mental illness is biologically based, not merely a human fraility, mental illness will remain stigmatized. Consequently mental illness will receive marginal attention, treatment and advocacy.

allantiques4me · May 17, 2007

Does anyone else agree that the USA needs to get their act together on all issues of mental health? The lastest shooting could have been prevented if only the perpretrator could have been treated properly. He refused, and no one could do a thing about it due to his rights. Well he violated 33 peoples rights to live when he snapped. What can we do as health professionals to educate the public and change some laws in the favor of treating these troubled souls.
Mental illness remains a "closet illness".

I agree. I work in a facility with abused children suffering from physche issues.I also live in the inner city wher i do see alot of mental health isues.A lot of drug abuse.Its so sad that these people are trying to treat themselves with these awful street drugs.They should have been able to access some mental health services.It could have prevented a lot of bad decisions on thier parts.

SoxfanRN · May 17, 2007

I agree. I work in a facility with abused children suffering from physche issues.I also live in the inner city wher i do see alot of mental health isues.A lot of drug abuse.Its so sad that these people are trying to treat themselves with these awful street drugs.They should have been able to access some mental health services.It could have prevented a lot of bad decisions on thier parts.

Approximately 50% of people with schizophrenia use illicit drugs. Many of these people cannot work or can only manage lower-end jobs. This is certainly not enough money to support a great place to live in a great neighborhood. Many people with mental illness live in areas that are drug-ridden because that is all they can afford, even with government supplementation. Add in the cost of medications (ie. $400/month for Depakote ER) and cost of living that we all struggle with, and you have non-compliance, bad influences, crime, and drug use. Deinstitutionalization was a dis-service to many people with severe mental illness. There just are not enough public support systems in place to adequately manage severe mental illness.

The places I used to go to give my mental health patients meds when I was a visiting nurse would make most people cringe.

banditrn · May 17, 2007

You know Ive heard people refer to this Cho guys as wacko, crazy, schizoid, delusional, antisocial, sociopathic, Asbergers, Autistic.etc. Ive also heard people complain about the lack of gun control in this nation and how easy it is to get firearms. Now I would like to bring up a point of a different perspective totally.
If other people around had been carrying guns also, They could have dropped Cho in his tracks before he had shot many people at all. Maybe the death and injury toll would have been far less. Not counting adding Cho to it.
Now I never carry a gun at work, but the rest of the time I am almost always carrying a gun to protect my self and family. As an example, several years ago some nut job went bananas and started shooting up a restaurant here in Texas. Yes he got several people then an armed bystander, stopped him from hurting even more people, children included.
Dont take my guns away
teeituptom

Ahhh, someone that GETS it!! No, we'll never be able to stop the whackos from doing what they're going to do - but we CAN try to lessen the impact a bit - or even up the odds.

No, I don't carry a gun - I've not been trained in the proper use of weapons, and I have an essential tremor that would make it difficult to aim or hold one - but I sure hope you're around - or more like you, the next time some Cho type goes off.

coral0033 · May 28, 2007

RE: Shooting and Mental Health.

Yes Snowfreeze i do agree USA should get it's act together where mental nursing is concerned; now the latest is you have the Police using Tasters to stun individiduals who presumably are mentally ill.

I wounder will they do such to an animal that has gone berserk?