Detained by mental health but culpable for what you say?

[BallaDoc]

I think the confusion arises because, as a society, we are confused about what is a mental health issue.

 

A person who hears voices telling him to kill himself and plans to act on them? Yes, he has a mental health problem and needs to be detained for his own safety and for treatment.

 

A person who hears a voice from God telling him to do good works for the community? Maybe, maybe not, depending on the circumstances. This used to be quite common and accepted as normal a few hundred years ago.

 

A person who compulsively over-indulges in food, alcohol or drugs to their own detriment? Not so much. These people may benefit from professional help, but I am not sure that they are mentally ill within the meaning which most people assign to those words. So I think that, despite the fact that she was in Grianagh Court, this doesn't conclusively prove that she was mentally ill, and the decision of the court to give her a suspended sentence was probably correct.

[Donald Trumps]

Mmmmm..

[Donald Trumps]

I mean

 

Hmmm...

[Albert Tatlock]

This should not have gone to court. Far too much of this happening on this island.

 

Mental health system is a failure here.

[thommo2010]

This should not have gone to court. Far too much of this happening on this island.

 

Mental health system is a failure here.

 

 

so people should be allowed to do and say what they want just because they have a mental health issue?

 

nobody in here knows what issue she had it could be something like anxiety depression or she could have been in there detoxing. just because you have a mental health issue doesn't automatically mean you are incapable of understanding your actions. if there was any suggestion she was not in control of her actions she would have been released

[Albert Tatlock]

 

This should not have gone to court. Far too much of this happening on this island.

Mental health system is a failure here.

so people should be allowed to do and say what they want just because they have a mental health issue?

In a fucking mental institution...yes.

 

I don't know anymore what's more mental, a patient or a system that does this.

[Tarne]

AT is right, she's in a mental institute, it shouldn't have gone to court at all. My previous comment was predicated on the assumption she's on drugs and it's her own fault, where as if she is mental then the drugs are a symptom of a shit mental health policy and care on the island.

[gettafa]

 

 

Too often, on the Island, the judicial system is used to 'control' people with mental health issues.

The figures recently released show an obscene percentage of inmates in Jurby are recieving treatment,(pills not therapy), for mental health issues, many of whom committed their crimes as the result of these issues.

With no secure mental health facility on the Island, Jurby is being used as a substitute and prison officers, with little or no mental health training, prison officers are the ones trying to pick up the pieces and fill in the gaps in the system.

 

There was a case about a decade or so again where a woman was having problems and there was a clear cry for help. There was a fire in her house and when the fire brigade arrived they found her in a daze sitting on the stairs with candles all the way up the stairs. She was found to be in possession of drugs. And so went to court. The illustrious deemster, the one that once told a guy "Keep away from people involved in drugs they are violent, dangerous and evil people" (oh the irony, putting a 20 year old in Jurby for 5 years) decided to pontificate and teach her a lesson and had her locked up for a good period of time. The punishment didn't have much beneficial affect as she some time after stabbed and killed a man.

 

The point being, the judiciary, accountable to no one, if they have a particular bent or dislike, can be as draconian as they wish. Provided it keeps the likes of those that fawn over the deemsters happy in their cosy world (there are plenty of people on this Island who are in that particular sector of our society)

[Lisenchuk]

 

She'll be the victim in all of this though.

 

You know that an inability to show any sort of empathy is a trait common in psychopathic individuals?

 

I wonder where you fall on that spectrum...

 

No point in wondering where there is such an air of certainty.

[rmanx]

 

so people should be allowed to do and say what they want just

 

You do realise that some people with mental health issues aren't making coherent decision...so no...not "doing what they want".

[WTF]

 

This should not have gone to court. Far too much of this happening on this island.

 

Mental health system is a failure here.

 

so people should be allowed to do and say what they want just because they have a mental health issue?

 

nobody in here knows what issue she had it could be something like anxiety depression or she could have been in there detoxing. just because you have a mental health issue doesn't automatically mean you are incapable of understanding your actions. if there was any suggestion she was not in control of her actions she would have been released

 

 

the fact she was actually detained and not on release would suggest she was then in fact NOT capable of controlling her actions????

[notwell]

 

so people should be allowed to do and say what they want just

You do realise that some people with mental health issues aren't making coherent decision...so no...not "doing what they want".

Of course. And some CAN make coherent decisions. Just because someone has mental health issues it doesn't render them void of decision making and understanding the implications of their actions.

[John Wright]

For once I am with notwell on this. There is some jumping to conclusions going on that appears unjustified.

 

The first is that having a mental illness equates to lacking mental capacity. That is not true. The two do not coincide, except in a few cases.

 

"Insanity" is a defence and indicates lack of capacity to make decisions and to form the necessary mental element, or intention, to commit a crime, any mental illness that falls short of the legal definition of "insanity" is not a defence and could only be used as mitigation.

 

There is also an second assumption that the defendant was compulsorily detained at Grainagh Court, but the report, right or wrong, doesn't say that. A lot of the people at GC are there as voluntary patients, either in or out. But the fact they may be being treated under a section order does not mean that they are incapable of knowing what they are doing and that it is wrong. very few patients lose their decision making capacity. They are being treated. You wouldn't assume that someone being treated for a physical illness lost capacity.

 

The police, social workers and medical/nursing staff can have a very difficult time when dealing with challenging people, with illnesses, addictions etc. Each case is no doubt decided on its merits, whether to prosecute, or not, whether to section or not, remove to a place of safety or not. Hopefully it is proportionate to what has happened and what is needed.

 

I've no idea why this case was taken to court, I wasn't involved, or why the sentence was imposed, but I can think of several good reasons why it might have been.

 

Say the person had a history of poor family circumstances, addictions, self harm, personality disorder but was not ill enough to be detained, but in the community did not follow treatment plans. Well a probation order could assist in organising somewhere to live, regular meetings, ensuring attendance a treatment appointments.

[gettafa]

Many of the comments in this thread are general about the system. Mental Health on the Isle of Man, like childcare, is an industry. It helps to keep a lot of people in good employment and that industry is entirely in their control.

 

The same for the so-called justice and legal system on the Isle of Man.

 

Fuck me, for an Island of 85,000 people there is a shitload of people paid a shitload of money.

[woolley]

What we have here is a collision of two branches of political correctness. What is worse? "Racism" or a draconian interpretation of the law? I sympathise with the woman to the extent that I don't see what purpose hauling her before the courts is going to serve, other than to line the wallets of all the stuffed shirts involved.