Misunderstood

This movie was created from the inspiration of CES 440 and all the subsequent information that was gathered for the social justice issue of Mental Illnesses and what WE can do to help minimize this societal issue and create a true justice–acceptance. This video will touch on just a few of the more common mental illnesses and their affects on society and by society. Finally, it will reveal methods to educate yourself and organizations that you can join in order to become a part of the change.

I think we need to redefine what a serious mental illness is.  I think depression should NOT be included in this category.  I seriously don’t think state funds should be allocated for depression.  A serious mental illness to me is a defect in the brain that a person either inherited genetically or though some mutation in their biological function.  I realize that it’s a very hard line to draw considering depression follows the definition of a mental illness in that it “affects the brain and influences the way a person thinks, feels, behaves and/or relates to others and to his or her surroundings” (MedNet) but if you really think about it, what doesn’t affect the way a person thinks or feels.  Isn’t that the beauty of being human–emotion.  Emotion really has yet to be explained and I think this is where people are getting carried away.  They are starting to classify emotion into a mental illness–STOP!!

We have all felt sad, happy, angry, or even furious at times.  And, at each of these times when we felt such a feeling, we make specific decisions that would not have been made the same way if we had felt differently.  Can’t we just consider our decision-making ability to be a part of our individual personalities and not manic depressive.  Maybe define them as personality disorders, just not mental illnesses–it just doesn’t make much sense to me.

An example of such a senerio would be a person feeling so sad about a loss in the family that they stay in a dark cool room all day and miss out on horseback riding camp that they had been looking forward to for the last couple of months (loss of interest in things they once enjoyed); however, had their relative died just a week later, that same person would have enjoyed their horse vacation.  I just think that the ability to become depressed should be considered a personality trait; if society deems it to be a bad or extreme choice call it a personality defect.

Granted some people take it to the extreme in which they are unable to really help themselves and become extremely saddened or vice versa–where a person lacks the ability to really feel any emotion from the death of a close relative/friend.  In these situations a possible mental illness may be considered but under a different category from metal illnesses caused by something that a person inherited genetically like schizophrenia or autism.  These latter serious mental illnesses are incurable but in most cases manageable.  Depression is curable (at least in my opinion)– either with a balanced diet or a change of environment I think depression will dissipate.  For example, if a person is taken completely out of their surroundings and placed in an environment that has no melancholying affects I believe that a person would become “normal,” i.e. their behavior would change.  If the same protocol, however, was given to someone with autism or schizophrenia, their behavior would not change–not even if feed a proper diet.

If it really isn’t practical to remove depression from the mental illness category completely, than at least assign it as a completely different category and emphasize this difference to the public!!

I just recently spotted an article on the Reuters Newsletter from the UK about how visits to a farm can ease mental illness. This article by Alister Doyle an Environment Correspondent, states that a study done by Norwegian scientists, published this last Friday, says that, “spending time on a farm looking after cows, horses, or other animals and experience can help people with mental illness better manage their anxieties and increase their confidence.” This new idea of bringing patients out side in order to lessen their suffering is called “Green Care.”

“Looking after and having contact with farm animals has some positive effects on psychiatric patients with a diversity of serious illnesses,” said lead author Bente Berget of the Norwegian University of Life Sciences in Aas, west Norway.

It has been known and understood for sometime that pets can have a positive effect on a patients; however, pets require a 24-hour commitment which in its self can be stressful. With visits to the farm, the only commitment comes from the amount of time you spend at the farm.

If you are interested in reading the full story, visit uk.reuters.com.

I found this really cool report made by the Mental Health Division (MHD) in 2000 for the adherence to a legislation mandated by, I would assume, the government (Chapter 7, Laws of 2001, E2, Section 204(5)(c) and Chapter 25, Laws of 2003, E1 Section 204(5)(b)). This law instated in 1998 says that a study “shall examine how reasonable estimates of the prevalence of mental illness relate to the incidence of persons enrolled in medical assistance programs in each regional support network area.”

What’s really cool about this 2000 study is the fact that is estimates the prevalence of serious mental illnesses (SMI’s) in Washington state by region.

This file, wa-stats-comparisons.doc, contains the comparisons made by regions within Washington State from the 2000 full US census. It’s interesting to see that areas such as King county and Northern Puget sound have an extreamly high percentage of adults who suffer from a serious mental illness, 29.5% and 16.3% respectively. According to this study Grays Harbor and northeastern Washington have the lowest occurance of SIM’s at 1.1% and 1.2% respectively.

MHD found that 295,884 adult Washingtonians suffer form a SMI and that 133,406 of these people need public mental health services. This means that as of 2000, 5.02% of Washington adults have a SMI but only about 45.09% of those with a SMI need public mental health services.

Not all medical diagnoses are made in your best interest.  I would like to call special attention to Fact #3: No pharmaceuticals actually cure or resolve the underlying causes of diseases. Even successful drugs “manage symptoms”.This fact goes along very well with the previous video of interviews with Psychiatrists who admit that they have yet to successfully cure a patient.

Now, think again of who is really benefiting from the pharmacological treatments of mental illness. The obvious answer–Marketers, Pill Pushers, Pharmaceutical companies, and even your doctor.

These testimonial further support the theory that social support, reduced social stigma, and an over all understanding of the mentally ill will better assist in a achieving an economically strong community, better than any doctor, psychiatrist, or drug can do.

Next time you go to visit your doctor, take a look around and see if thier office is smeared with free pens and magnets or posters that promote specific drugs and think twice when they hand you that expensive prescription and tell you that you need to take this medication to “just to be on the safe side”.

Educate yourself.

First I would like to state the difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist.

• Psychologist: they primarily study the human mind and human behavior.  Their highest degree would be a Ph. D. They are NOT medical doctors!
• Psychiatrist: a physician who specializes in psychiatry and is certified in treating mental disorders. Their highest degree is an M. D. These professionals ARE medical doctors and can prescribe psychiatric medication, conduct physical examinations, as well as order and interpret laboratory tests and electroencephalograms.

The following video contains interviews with PSYCHIATRISTS from the 159th annual APA (American Psychiatric Association) convention in May of 2006 in Toronto, Canada.

So the real question here is… who is really benefiting from the ‘mentally ill’? Certainly not the patient.

The Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) awards grants to States and localities to promote quality, accessible community-based mental health delivery systems with a range of treatment and support services. This means that states are responsible for obtaining grants in order to provide mental health care. If I’m not mistaken, when you apply for something, your usually competing with others for a limited supply of what ever it is you are trying to achieve, in this case its money to fund mental health services. This must mean then that states are competing against each other for ability to provide mental health care for their citizens. Does this seem right? Shouldn’t all people have equal access to health care within the same nation? Why should it vary between states?

In April 2002, President Bush also established the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. The Commission is to conduct a comprehensive study of the United States mental health service delivery system, including both the private and public sector providers, and advise the President on methods for improving the system. To learn more about the President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, please visit the web site: www.mentalhealthcommission.gov.

According to www.mentalhealthcommission.gov the spending for 2002 in the department of Health and Human Services was $459.4 billion nationwide. But is all this money really going to the places where it’s needed most? This department consists of the following divisions:

Food and Drug Administration; Health Resources and Services Administration; Indian Health Service; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Institutes of Health; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Administration for Children and Families; Administration on Aging; Office of the Secretary; Office of the Inspector General; and Program Support Center.

As much money that is going to these health care divisions, people are still paying out of their own pockets just to stay covered by such divisions like medicare. It is my view that because governmental screw up are alot easier to hide then state screw ups, state screw ups are more visible.

Just this last Thursday (February 28th, 200 the U.S. Department of health and human services released to the press information regarding the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) program identifying $371.5 million in improper medicare payments in three states. These payments have been collected from or repaid to health care providers and suppliers as part of a demonstration program using recovery audit contractors (RACs) in California, Florida and New York in 2007. Nearly $440 million has been collected since the program began in 2005.

According to http://www.whitehouse.gov the Health and Human Services (HHS) are putting their efforts mainly into Fighting Bioterrorism, the National Institutes of Health (Research), Community Health, and Medicare and Medicaid enhancing programs. The only mention that they give about mental illness is in correlation with drug abuse, and it is a know fact that not ALL mental illnesses are caused by drug abuse and it sickens me that the government lumps them together like that.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), in partnership with states and local communities, aids the nation’s effort to prevent and treat mental illness and substance abuse. The budget funds the treatment of mental illness and the prevention and treatment of substance abuse.

A recent evaluation of SAMHSA’s Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness (PATH) found that the formula grant is effective in helping states expand community mental health services, alcohol and drug treatment, and support services for homeless individuals facing a serious mental illness. Building on this success, the budget includes additional funds for PATH to reach out to 163,000 homeless individuals to help them recover from mental illness and substance abuse, find housing, and gain meaningful employment.

Out of the entire spending for the HHS Department mental health is only referred to once in correlation with substance abuse.

Mental disorders fall along a continuum of severity. And just as in any continuum there is a group that falls in the severe end of that continuum. That proportion of the population is about 1 out of 17 Americans. According to NAMI.org the World Health Organization has reported that four of the 10 leading causes of disability in the US and other developed countries are mental disorders. If sever mental illness is left untreated the consequences for the individual affected and even for the society in which this individual resides are staggering. Consequences such as unemployment, substance abuse , homelessness, and even suicide are high economic costs. Unproductive members of a society tend to drain the society of it’s wealth and emotional stability. It’s estimated that the economic cost of untreated mental illness is more that 100 billion dollars EACH YEAR in the United States.

The stigma of mental illness is a major contributer of untreated mental illnesses. This stigma is derived from the individuals within the society who feel that other individuals who suffer from mental illness are a drain on their society. This forces a vicious cycle that only makes things worse.

The best treatment as I have stated before is not only the pharmacological treatments but also the psychosocial treatments and supports. According to NAMI, nearly 90 percent of individuals experience a significant reduction of symptoms and improved quality of life.

With the strong stigma for mental illness that is out there however this experience of an improved quality of life is impeded from the erosion of the confidence levels of the individual who suffer from mental illness due to an increased feeling of pressure and hopelessness. We as an American Society have allowed stigma to warrant structural and financial barriers that stunt the ability to recover and be treated. It’s time to take these barriers down.

Psychiatr News February 1, 2008
Volume 43, Number 3, page 1
© 2008 American Psychiatric Association

In government news, supporters of a new gun-control law claim it might have prevented the deaths of 32 people last year in a massacre at Virginia Tech carried out by a student who was mentally ill. Some psychiatrists, however, say the law falls short as a meaningful way to reduce gun violence. The psychiatrists point is further proven with the recent shooting at NIU where the gunman had legally bought all FOUR of his weapons while being medicated for a mental illness.

This debate stems from President George W. Bush’s signing of a measure in January intended to prevent people with serious mental illness from buying guns.

——————————————————————————————————-

FOID is an acronym for Firearm Owners Identification. Residents of the state of Illinois are required to have an FOID card to possess or purchase firearms or ammunitio.

Kazmierczak, the gunman from the NIU shooting, had a state police-issued FOID, a firearms owners identification card, which is required in Illinois to own a gun and that such cards are rarely issued to those with recent mental health problems. However, the only questions pertaining to an individual who is mentally disabled are question 3 and 5 on the FOID application.

Because one would have to “provide detailed documentation” if they answer yes, wouldn’t it be easier to just say no? And why five years? Is it proven that five years after being hospitalized for a mental condition that you are cured of your mental illness? I thought the cure came from the medication. Why don’t they ask if one is currently being treated for a mental illness, wouldn’t that make more sense? Isn’t it wrong then to say that the FIOD is not given out to those who are mentally ill?

In recent news, Steven Kazmierczak, 27, had a history of mental illness and had been off his meds for weeks when he stepped out from behind a screen on the Northern Illinois Universities Cole lecture hall’s stage Thursday and opened fire on a geology class killing himself and five others. It is known that Kazmierczak spent more than a year at the Thresholds-Mary Hill House in the late 1990s. His parents placed him there after high school because he had become “unruly” at home.

The former Thresholds-Mary Hill House manager couldn’t remember any instances of him being violent.

“He never wanted to identify with being mentally ill,” she said. “That was part of the problem.”

According to USAToday.com, he had a short-lived stint as a prison guard that ended abruptly when he just didn’t show up for work one day and he was in the Army for about six months in 2001-02, but he told a friend he’d gotten a psychological discharge.

UsaToday.com also states that Kazmierczak had a state police-issued FOID, a firearms owners identification card, which is required in Illinois to own a gun and that such cards are rarely issued to those with recent mental health problems. And since Kazmierczak’s stay in the mental health center was more than five years ago, it didn’t raise red flags.

Unlike Virginia Tech gunman Seung-Hui Cho — a sullen misfit who could barely look anyone in the eye, much less carry on a conversation — Kazmierczak appeared to fit in just fine.

Ironically, in a post that remains on a Northern Web site, apparently a brief autobiography that he wrote in seeking the treasurer’s post of the Northern chapter of the Academic Criminal Justice Association, Kazmierczak said, “I’ve worked very hard as a student. … I feel that I’m committed to social justice.”

Although they do not disclose his mental illness, I find it ironic that just about every “killer” has a mental illness, or are mentally disturbed in some way like Ted Bundy. According to abolishdeathpenalty.org Ted Bundy’s psychotic episodes were because of his mental illness; he had no fear of punishment. The death penalty, in fact, attracted rather than repelled him from committing heinous acts. He may have gone to Florida to commit murders because he knew it was the place he was most likely to be sentenced to death. Bundy even refused a plea bargain that would have prevented him from being sentenced to death and appeared to thrive on the attention and publicity of the capital case. According to this site, the death penalty may have encouraged his conduct.

Another recent killing possibly due to mental illness was in L.A. where a gunman fatally shot a SWAT officer and three members of his own family on the 9th of February (one week ago). USAToday.com claims that he suffered from “significant mental health problems” and had a juvenile criminal record. Edwin Rivera, who was killed by a sniper as he attempted to flee the house hours later, first showed mental health problems when his mother died about a decade ago, Deputy Chief Gary Brennan said.

Are these people seriously mentally ill or are we just trying to find an excuse as to why a person would kill another. Could our search for an explanation for independent isolated acts of violence led us to assume a correlation of something that can not be disproven–mental illness. I think it’s time that we come to terms with the fact that somethings are incurable and inexplainable and leave it at that.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-17-niu-shooting_N.htm , http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-08-police-standoff_N.htm , http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23171567/, http://www.abolishdeathpenalty.org/TalkingPoints.htm