News7 mins ago
More Mental Illness
50 Answers
Honestly, do the Establishment think we were all born yesterday? I know the luvie Libs (they'll be along in a mo I'm sure) but they are a minority.
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Bigbad - // Ah, the fashionable mental illness tag.
Of course there are people who have a genuine mental illness, but as it’s so ‘in vogue’ at the moment, It comes in very handy for the weak, the attention seekers and the downright evil. //
As I understand it, the woman has been confirmed as having mental health issues.
That fact has not ben used as a reason - much less an excuse - for her behaviour, which may turn out to be unrelated to her historical mental health issues.
It seems that some on here are keen to assume that a potential terrorist action has been attributed to mental health issues as though that is a get-out-of-jail-free card, whereas in fact, no link has been ascertained at this stage.
We would do better to wait until more information is available instead of assuming that doctors are labelling this action as the result of mental illness, which is not something they have advised as being their findings.
Of course there are people who have a genuine mental illness, but as it’s so ‘in vogue’ at the moment, It comes in very handy for the weak, the attention seekers and the downright evil. //
As I understand it, the woman has been confirmed as having mental health issues.
That fact has not ben used as a reason - much less an excuse - for her behaviour, which may turn out to be unrelated to her historical mental health issues.
It seems that some on here are keen to assume that a potential terrorist action has been attributed to mental health issues as though that is a get-out-of-jail-free card, whereas in fact, no link has been ascertained at this stage.
We would do better to wait until more information is available instead of assuming that doctors are labelling this action as the result of mental illness, which is not something they have advised as being their findings.
I didn’t say it was being used as a reason/excuse for HER behaviour.
My comment was about the fact that mental illness seems to be trotted out to explain OR excuse every atrocity these days.
Quite possibly to detract from the fact that the perpetrator is often a follower of a certain religion.
I stand by my comment “Having a mental illness does not absolve anyone from responsibility for their actions.”
(Sorry about the capitals - not shouting, it's just italics never seem to work)!
My comment was about the fact that mental illness seems to be trotted out to explain OR excuse every atrocity these days.
Quite possibly to detract from the fact that the perpetrator is often a follower of a certain religion.
I stand by my comment “Having a mental illness does not absolve anyone from responsibility for their actions.”
(Sorry about the capitals - not shouting, it's just italics never seem to work)!
I think it depends, andy-hughes.
If diminished responsibility (allegedly) occurred only at the time of the incident, then I see that as a cop-out. Let’s say 2 people have a row, row becomes heated, person 1 lashes out and caves person 2’s head in with whatever was handy, and claims diminished responsibility.
That to me is a cop-out. an excuse.
Anyone with a genuine mental illness, who commits an atrocity should still be treated the same as someone without.
If they were able to plan and carry out a crime, and try and evade capture, then I see no difference.
If they took a knife out with them, had ‘an episode’ and attacked someone, then why were they carrying a knife in the first place?
Psychiatry is not an exact science, and mistakes have been made in the past with people walking the streets who really shouldn’t be.
One psychiatrist could say someone has a "problem" but another could say there is nothing wrong.
I guess it comes down to who is on the jury and who is the judge during your trial, and how sympathetic they would be.
I think my sympathies would lie with the victim and their families.
We often hear the phrase “He was suffering from mental illness”
I think the victims and their families suffer more.
If diminished responsibility (allegedly) occurred only at the time of the incident, then I see that as a cop-out. Let’s say 2 people have a row, row becomes heated, person 1 lashes out and caves person 2’s head in with whatever was handy, and claims diminished responsibility.
That to me is a cop-out. an excuse.
Anyone with a genuine mental illness, who commits an atrocity should still be treated the same as someone without.
If they were able to plan and carry out a crime, and try and evade capture, then I see no difference.
If they took a knife out with them, had ‘an episode’ and attacked someone, then why were they carrying a knife in the first place?
Psychiatry is not an exact science, and mistakes have been made in the past with people walking the streets who really shouldn’t be.
One psychiatrist could say someone has a "problem" but another could say there is nothing wrong.
I guess it comes down to who is on the jury and who is the judge during your trial, and how sympathetic they would be.
I think my sympathies would lie with the victim and their families.
We often hear the phrase “He was suffering from mental illness”
I think the victims and their families suffer more.
Bigbad - // We often hear the phrase “He was suffering from mental illness”
I think the victims and their families suffer more. //
I don't think anyone regards the measurement of suffering - which is not actually possible - as some sort of superiority contest.
And your observation about the victims and families 'suffering more' shows your absence of understanding of what mental illness can be like - and hopefully you will remain ignorant, but maybe adjust your attitudes about things that carry a simple conclusion, which is actually invalid.
I think the victims and their families suffer more. //
I don't think anyone regards the measurement of suffering - which is not actually possible - as some sort of superiority contest.
And your observation about the victims and families 'suffering more' shows your absence of understanding of what mental illness can be like - and hopefully you will remain ignorant, but maybe adjust your attitudes about things that carry a simple conclusion, which is actually invalid.
Not really sure I know what you mean by “maybe adjust your attitudes about things that carry a simple conclusion.”
I have no intention of adjusting my attitude, and I stand by the opinions I have already stated.
Haven’t you said often enough that you don’t have to have experienced something to have an opinion about it?
So next time we get told that someone who has just committed an atrocity has mental health problems, you can express sympathetic feelings for them if you want. Me? I’ll hope they get to feel the full force of the law and never get to walk the streets again.
I have no intention of adjusting my attitude, and I stand by the opinions I have already stated.
Haven’t you said often enough that you don’t have to have experienced something to have an opinion about it?
So next time we get told that someone who has just committed an atrocity has mental health problems, you can express sympathetic feelings for them if you want. Me? I’ll hope they get to feel the full force of the law and never get to walk the streets again.
Bigbad - // So next time we get told that someone who has just committed an atrocity has mental health problems, you can express sympathetic feelings for them if you want. Me? I’ll hope they get to feel the full force of the law and never get to walk the streets again. //
You appear to see situations as being black and white, and to infer that I do the same.
I do not.
If someone is guilty of an atrocity, and is suffering from mental health issues, my view is that the aspect of mental health explains the action, but it absolutely does not excuse it, and does not absent the perpetrator from the sanctions of the law as appropriate.
You appear to see situations as being black and white, and to infer that I do the same.
I do not.
If someone is guilty of an atrocity, and is suffering from mental health issues, my view is that the aspect of mental health explains the action, but it absolutely does not excuse it, and does not absent the perpetrator from the sanctions of the law as appropriate.
Latest Posts
Shopping & Style11 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago
What If The Labour Party Got Rid Of...
Politics20 mins ago
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |