"Charles Richmond" <richmond at ev1.net> wrote in message
news:3CB4BC21.B50767D4 at ev1.net...
> Chris Hedley wrote:
> > [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
> > Contrary to popular belief, schizophrenics aren't particularly
> > dangerous; any violence that they're "involved" in tends to be
> > directed at them because of their condition, rather than caused
> > by them, at least in most cases. AIUI, schizophrenics are less
> > likely to indulge in violence than "average" members of the
> > population. "Behaving in an unusual or disconcerting manner"
> > doesn't really count as violence IMHO.
> There is a lady here in the U.S. who *drowned* her five
> children. She is supposedly a schizophrenic, although there
> seems to have been some post-partum issues also.
>> Additionally, I have a friend who's brother is in an institution
> because of his schizophrenia. If he is *not* a danger to himself
> or someone else...why is he institutionalize???
The doctor decides if he finds a patient stable or if the
patient should be locked up. Often the news of being
locked up messes up a patient in horror beyond
comprehension. He keeps telling everyone. I am ok,
I am ok. And everyone keeps saying: No, you are
very sick. And the insanity accelerates. A catch 22
situation can evolve. Maybe that serves as an actual
test of self-control.
There is nothing more painful to any person than
being called insane and locked up when not feeling
like one. I think chances are that if someone goes
to a psychiatric facility, they are considered sick
regardless, just because they went. Almost like
a self-sentence. Do something irrisponsible there
or show signs of confusion and you are dead meat
is the impression I get sometimes.