Don't want this to melt into a political anarchy situation but a certain governor of California dismantled the mental health system. Anybody that's worked in the field at any level can tell you the current system is a complete failure. It ends up creating a huge miasma of death, destruction, homelessness, addiction, incarceration, violence and terrible suffering. It's interesting that in our society we place such little value on mental and physical health. The F-35 that flopped the other day probably cost enough to pay for an overhaul of health services for an entire state. Ooops, I'm starting to smell smoke from political anarchy. Sorry bout that.
I'm a police officer and a swat team member, ask me anything?
- Thread starter Vgree
- Start date
billy backstay
Backstay, never bought a suit, never went to Vegas
It's not just California, and not just the US. This report is from exactly 5 years ago....
How The Loss Of U.S. Psychiatric Hospitals Led To A Mental Health Crisis
The evaporation of long-term psychiatric facilities in the U.S. has escalated over the past decade, sparked by a trend toward deinstitutionalization of mental health patients in the 1950s and '60s.
www.npr.org
And this includes the rest of the planet and addresses only mental health itself, not lack of care...
'Alarming' Worldwide Decline in Mental Health | NAMI: National Alliance on Mental Illness
NAMI, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, is the nation’s largest grassroots mental health organization dedicated to building better lives for the millions of Americans affected by mental illness.
nami.org
Most serious mental health issues start to manifest during the teen years. There are very few effective interventions available, especially for less than wealthy families. Private institutions cost waaaaay too much. In most states minors can't be institutionalized against their will even if there are appropriate facilities. By the time they reach their twenties and are in desperate need of help they are usually self-medicating and often homeless. Then it becomes a problem for law enforcement and the cops are put in no-win situations as in the above video. Very few people know how incredibly difficult it can be to deal with a mentally ill individual, especially when they are on meth or pcp, much worse if they are armed. Getting them under control without anyone being injured is almost impossible. It's also extremely difficult to treat mental illness because the sufferer has so much trouble understanding what's happening and there still aren't any real "cures." Incredibly tough problem.
Almost everything you said is either a gross generalizations or absolutely not true.
I don't have the energy right now to get into the details, and no, that's not just an excuse.
I will comment on the last one because it is so egregious.
Many serious mental health conditions are manageable and treatable in many cases through medication, psycho therapy or a combination of both. Many people with serious mental health conditions understand a lot about their situation. It is dangerous and demeaning to people with mental health issues when people make statements like you did. The medications used today often can be very effective compared to some years ago.
The biggest problem is funding and the scarcity of inpatient treatment which is directly related to funding.
I guess we're going to have to disagree, but I have quite a lot of recent experience in the field, and I don't think there is anything even remotely "dangerous or demeaning" about anything I said. After rereading my post I stand by every word of it based on many hours of working compassionately with mentally ill individuals. In fact, I am 100 percent certain that I had a positive influence on some of the most extremely difficult, dangerous individuals, people who the average citizen would pray to avoid at any cost. As to the part you consider so "egregous," I'm guessing you haven't had the pleasure of trying to convince a severely mentally ill individual that it's in their best interest to take their meds. Especially when they've been smoking meth for a week. I agree that some of the newer meds are effective, problem being it can be very difficult to get the sufferer to take them consistently. It's interesting that you reacted so vehemently and yet in the last sentence you repeat my original thesis, that society doesn't prioritize an extremely tragic situation. Sorry you feel so negatively, I think you misinterpreted.
Point Break
Super Anarchist
This is a huge local issue. Inpatient spots are really hard to get. There are some limited spots for 72 hour hold/evaluation but even those are pretty crowded and not always available.
A few years ago the EMS and ER community in conjunction with some Hospital Administrators and mental health advocates put together a professional assessment response capability to patients in the ER. That way the ER staff gets to punt the decision to somebody who is trained/educated in the problems and know referral resources for follow up on discharge. An improvement for certain but the shortage of inpatient spots is still a massive bottleneck.
Identifying the nature of the problem is one thing…….having resources to address it is another. I always felt bad for the families in those emergent situations. They often call not because anything is emergently different (although sometimes it is explosively different) but instead because they are just exhausted trying to cope. A trip to the ER gives them a brief respite and a 72 hour hold is heaven. You can just tell.
mathystuff
Super Anarchist
- 1,164
- 771
It is literally the same stuff. Kids i work with still get prozac and quetiapin. These meds also aren't very effective with a Cohens d of ~0.3* even in the heavily biased studies which by desgin can not differentiate between withdrawl in the placebo group and actual drug effect.
Long term studies show better outcomes in patients who have never taken psych drugs. I.e. harrow and jobe. Also better outcomes for kids who have never been diagnosed ( doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.36364).
*For comparision effect of sex on size has a Cohens d of ~2.
There's also the kids who go psychotic from vyvanse. Great fucking treatments.
Vgree
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #649
We get some, but it is limited.
There are officers who specialize in mental health orders and when you get to see them in action on a call where they are needed they are amazing. Sadly we get limited training time and everyone has a passion, also many times the officers who want to learn all about the quirks of the human brain aren't the ones you want to send when a felon needs to be arrested, the skill sets don't have much crossover.
Vgree
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #650
So I've been in the job 10 years, when I started body cameras weren't a thing yet, our policy book was a big binder in the training room, the cars were crown vics, and a taser only had one cartridge.
The biggest change has been body cameras. Wearing them is one thing and I wouldn't do the job without one, but they bring a lot of other aspects with them. The handling of the video, each one has to be labeled after every call because what it is labeled and what category it is placed in determines how long it is saved. Traffic stops are 120 days, some evidence is forever.
With body cameras comes review of that video. Cops can learn and experience more situations than ever before. As a firearms instructor I get to use body camera video to analyze what officers do in real lethal force encounters and am not relying on an officers memory.
We also get judged on the smallest of things now. The officer I work with was assaulted with a baseball bat and ended up using lethal force and the suspect died. It doesn't look pretty on camera because you can't see much of what happened. The DA has charged him for the shooting because you can't see the Assault.
Without that camera he would have been cleared quickly. But someone who wasn't there, didn't have their life on the line now gets to spend years analyzing those 4 seconds of video.
Our policy is now on a App and I get constant emails with updates that I have to acknowledge, and we have to take weekly policy quizzes with situations and test questions. Failure to pass those results in remedial training.
Tasers now have more than one shot and are actually falling out of favor. I carried one for years and have the most deployments at our department. The failure rate is extremely high, I would guess near 70% don't work. That's not worth the space it takes on the belt so I took mine off, back to pepper spray and jiu-jitsu, we just fight spicy.
Lastly the cars, I miss my crown vic, it was tough, roomy, and would fishtail if there was a heavy dew, but that thing got me through more bad situations than I could have ever imagined. There was nothing as comforting as hearing a screaming crown vic engine coming your way when you were fighting for your life with some turd, it told you back up was there.
Now we drive explorers and Durangos. They are good cars, and the creature comforts are nicer, but they are fragile compared to the older car. Plus all the modern electronics seem to cause more electrical problems.
There are many other ways which tech has changed the job, but this post is long enough.
Steam Flyer
Sophisticated Yet Humble
Interesting perspective on what the cameras fail to show. Thanks again!
robtoujours
Communist
Thanks for your reply!
Cluster B disorders are funny, the manipulative ones (e.g. narcissists, borderline) often cause their victims to lash out. Then you can get false accusations etc - have you seen this in real life a lot? I'm thinking of Johnny Depp / Amber Heard type scenario but you get all sorts.
Also, rewatching The Wire got me wondering about office politics in the force. Do you think the show is still relevant? Sorry if this was asked earlier...
Cluster B disorders are funny, the manipulative ones (e.g. narcissists, borderline) often cause their victims to lash out. Then you can get false accusations etc - have you seen this in real life a lot? I'm thinking of Johnny Depp / Amber Heard type scenario but you get all sorts.
Also, rewatching The Wire got me wondering about office politics in the force. Do you think the show is still relevant? Sorry if this was asked earlier...
Vgree
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #653
We get a shocking number of false accusations, ask any cop their thoughts on rape accusations, domestic abuse allegations, or other situations where the main piece of evidence is the victims word. Almost any cop you ask will tell you that they take far more false reports than real ones.
We work 1 or 2 "rapes" a month, where we go through the whole process of requesting the victim go through a full exam, DNA collected, sheets processed for evidence, hours and hours of investigation. About 95% the victim admits they were mad at the suspect and just made it all up. Turns out if two people have sex, then one gets mad at the other DNA and all other evidence of rape will be there.
It sucks and makes it really hard to remember that their are real victims and to treat them that way.
As for "The Wire" it's one of the best cops shows ever made. Not perfect but damn good.
The politics is real, at a small department it isn't as bad, but we have city council members intersecting themselves into situations on a regular basis. They have their vision for how arrests should go and how criminals should be handled. Sometimes it's great and sometimes it sucks.
Vgree
Super Anarchist
- Thread starter
- #654
I mentioned it somewhere in the last 33 pages, but mental health calls suck, you need an armed person there for safety, but many times the hardened person who isn't afraid to use violence when needed is 100% not the person who should be communicating with someone having a mental health crisis.
The perfect answer is far more specialization in law enforcement, but that requires more officers to keep response times reasonable, and as of right now the public isn't ready to stomach the cost of that and would instead rather crucify the officer when the call isnt handled how they believe it should have been.
I believe that you need officers who are caring, loving, and only somewhat trained in protecting themselves. Then you also need the guy you keep behind glass and only break out in an emergency. That person who is dedicated to training and using violence to protect innocent people.
Those two people are very far apart on the spectrum and right now we employ both and they both get sent to any call that comes out. So you can get two very different responses depending on who shows up. Neither are wrong, and both are needed, but the system has set both up for failure under different circumstances.
The perfect answer is far more specialization in law enforcement, but that requires more officers to keep response times reasonable, and as of right now the public isn't ready to stomach the cost of that and would instead rather crucify the officer when the call isnt handled how they believe it should have been.
I believe that you need officers who are caring, loving, and only somewhat trained in protecting themselves. Then you also need the guy you keep behind glass and only break out in an emergency. That person who is dedicated to training and using violence to protect innocent people.
Those two people are very far apart on the spectrum and right now we employ both and they both get sent to any call that comes out. So you can get two very different responses depending on who shows up. Neither are wrong, and both are needed, but the system has set both up for failure under different circumstances.
Last edited:
Sorry, I thought you were just looking for attention with that pseudo intellectual BS.
We can certainly agree to disagree. I do respect the fact that you have worked in the mental health treatment field and have dealt with serious issues.
What triggered me were your rather histrionic statements.
I have dealt with psychotic individuals and other dangerous situations. At times it can be extremely dangerous, especially as you said, if the individual has a weapon. However those situations are not the norm, and even then it is often possible to defuse the situation without anyone getting hurt. In the years that I worked in mental health, I never had to 'take down' anybody or use any kind of force to get a situation under control. Maybe I was just lucky. I happen to be quite tall and physically imposing which can be an advantage in a difficult situation, but I was also aware that I had to be careful with my body language and tone of voice to not cause the individual to feel threatened and making the situation even worse. I worked with a brilliant supervisor for a couple of years that had a PhD in social work. He once told me that when you deal with a psychotic individual, you have to deal with them from where they are, not where you are. Simple and profound advice that I often thought about and used to my advantage.
I don't know exactly what your credentials are but if you are a licensed mental health professional, I find you statements a little troubling. Perhaps you will find this article from the APA interesting. It explains my position far better than I can here. Here is one quote from the article, but it is best to read the article in its entirety.
"Such research may seem to support the notion that people with mental illness pose a danger to society. But a closer look reveals that the situation is more complex, says Elbogen. In the most general sense, “there is a link between mental health and violence,” he says, “but at the same time, most people with severe mental illness are not violent.” " (bolding is mine)
I think I understand the intention of what you wrote, but to me you paint a picture of dangerous, mentally unstable people lurking around every corner ready to commit mayhem, and that just isn't the case. The majority of people with a serious mental health condition, while living lives of misery, still maintain some kind of control, chemical or otherwise. Unfortunately the ones that act out in a spectacular and destructive fashion get a lot of attention and publicity, while the others don't. I feel your statements paint with a very broad brush and create the impression that many, many people with a serious mental health condition are out of control monsters and that isn't a fair image to create. Part of the problem with people who want to seek treatment for mental health issues, among many other things, is they don't want to be stigmatized as one of these 'monsters' so they don't seek help. That really isn't useful and can lead to otherwise preventable situations if it weren't for the stereotypical and often erroneous image of mentally ill individuals.
I think Vernon's observations about the subject are spot on and far more rational and credible than your overly dramatic statements.
I do think we all agree the biggest problem is the issue of inadequate resources devoted to effective treatment of mental health issues, from small to large. I believe that more rational, objective education about mental illness for the general public would be very helpful in minimizing the stigma of being diagnosed with some kind of mental health condition, and make people more amenable to seeking treatment. Perpetrating false stereotypes isn't at all useful or beneficial. Until these and other things change the situation will not improve. Of course that's just my informed opinion.
I believe you took my post completely out of context. The context is quite clear: how do law enforcement agents deal with dangerous, difficult individuals. I even specifically referred to the unfortunate lady in the video. There are no histrionics and I absolutely did not paint a picture of dangerous people lurking around every corner. If the topic would have been, "mental health in general" my statement would have been completely different. I feel that many of your recent posts have a very aggressive edge to them, you seem to feel the need to attack people and misinterpret their statements. That's not very nice.
Perhaps I did take your comments out of context. Excuse me if I did.
As far as my being aggressive lately, you're right. I am actually a very nice person normally. I have a progressive degenerative neuro muscular illness similar to ALS or MS. In the last 6 months my condition has deteriorated tremendously after a slow decline over almost 20 years. If it's any consolation, I don't think I'll be around here too much longer. I'm a get worn out just getting through the day doing nothing, the struggle is real. I know that's still not a good excuse but I'll use it anyway and try to lighten up a bit, okay? Please accept my sincere apology.
Steam Flyer
Sophisticated Yet Humble
Ed L is a good person going thru bad times including a war next door.
