The Law & Politics: Abnormality in Psychology
UNTIL now, we have examined psychological distress from the vantage
point of researchers and clinicians, concentrating on the causes of, and
remedies for, individual psychological suffering. In this chapter, we shift our
focus to society and examine how society reacts to the psychological suffering
of its members. We will concentrate on the mechanisms society uses to
protect its members from psychological suffering and its consequences,
mechanisms that find expression in the laws regarding involuntary and
criminal commitment. In exercising these legal powers, society has to make
difficult and often painful choices between its own needs, and the rights and
freedom of its individual members. Those choices concern us here.
In addition to the issues associated with involuntary and criminal commitment,
we will discuss two kinds of abuse of abnormal psychology. First,
we will look at how a state or government abuses what we know about psychology
and psychiatry by removing dissident (but sane) individuals or
groups from society, or controlling their behavior. Second, we will look at a
more general problem: the stigma that is cast over an individual when that
individual is labeled "mentally ill." In any profession, there are often conflicts
between the requirements of practice and those of society, The practice
of psychology and psychiatry is no exception.
INVOLUNTARY PSYCHOLOGICAL COMMITMENT
No societal response to psychological suffering has received more attention
during the past decade than has involuntary commitment, the process
whereby the state hospitalizes people for their own good, and even over their
vigorous protest. In effect, the state acts as parent to those who have "lost
their senses," doing for them what they might do for themselves if they had
their wits about them. Consider the following situations in which the state
might seek to involuntarily commit an individual, and in which most people
would agree that the state is right in doing so: · As the result of a toxic psychosis,
a young man wants to throw himself
from the roof of a tall building. In twenty-four hours, both the impulse and
the psychosis will have passed-if he is restrained now.
· A young man is despondent over the termination of his first love. To
him, there is currently no alternative to suicide. A month from now, even
sooner, he may think differently.
· An attorney is overcome by irrational guilt. She calls two of her clients
and informs them that she has not handled their cases properly, and that she
has stolen from them. Of course, this is untrue. She would have called the
rest of her clients had the state, through her family, not intervened and hospitalized
her against her will.
Following the birth of two previous children, a woman suffered a postpartum
depression, and attempted to murder the infants. She is about to
give birth again, and is experiencing the same impulse. To protect those
young lives, the state hospitalizes the mother involuntarily.
For most people, these cases are compelling arguments for involuntary
hospitalization. Where there is clear-cut danger to self or to others, most
people agree that some kind of intervention is necessary.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Looking for treatment?
If you are ready to schedule a FREE Consultation...
I encourage you to access this website
for the treatment I recommend here:
http://www.TheLiberatorMethod.com/
point of researchers and clinicians, concentrating on the causes of, and
remedies for, individual psychological suffering. In this chapter, we shift our
focus to society and examine how society reacts to the psychological suffering
of its members. We will concentrate on the mechanisms society uses to
protect its members from psychological suffering and its consequences,
mechanisms that find expression in the laws regarding involuntary and
criminal commitment. In exercising these legal powers, society has to make
difficult and often painful choices between its own needs, and the rights and
freedom of its individual members. Those choices concern us here.
In addition to the issues associated with involuntary and criminal commitment,
we will discuss two kinds of abuse of abnormal psychology. First,
we will look at how a state or government abuses what we know about psychology
and psychiatry by removing dissident (but sane) individuals or
groups from society, or controlling their behavior. Second, we will look at a
more general problem: the stigma that is cast over an individual when that
individual is labeled "mentally ill." In any profession, there are often conflicts
between the requirements of practice and those of society, The practice
of psychology and psychiatry is no exception.
INVOLUNTARY PSYCHOLOGICAL COMMITMENT
No societal response to psychological suffering has received more attention
during the past decade than has involuntary commitment, the process
whereby the state hospitalizes people for their own good, and even over their
vigorous protest. In effect, the state acts as parent to those who have "lost
their senses," doing for them what they might do for themselves if they had
their wits about them. Consider the following situations in which the state
might seek to involuntarily commit an individual, and in which most people
would agree that the state is right in doing so: · As the result of a toxic psychosis,
a young man wants to throw himself
from the roof of a tall building. In twenty-four hours, both the impulse and
the psychosis will have passed-if he is restrained now.
· A young man is despondent over the termination of his first love. To
him, there is currently no alternative to suicide. A month from now, even
sooner, he may think differently.
· An attorney is overcome by irrational guilt. She calls two of her clients
and informs them that she has not handled their cases properly, and that she
has stolen from them. Of course, this is untrue. She would have called the
rest of her clients had the state, through her family, not intervened and hospitalized
her against her will.
Following the birth of two previous children, a woman suffered a postpartum
depression, and attempted to murder the infants. She is about to
give birth again, and is experiencing the same impulse. To protect those
young lives, the state hospitalizes the mother involuntarily.
For most people, these cases are compelling arguments for involuntary
hospitalization. Where there is clear-cut danger to self or to others, most
people agree that some kind of intervention is necessary.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Looking for treatment?
If you are ready to schedule a FREE Consultation...
I encourage you to access this website
for the treatment I recommend here:
http://www.TheLiberatorMethod.com/