Mental Health Policy Analysis

Psychological disorders are common in the United States and worldwide. The National institute of mental Health discovered that, “An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year.” Having an uncle who was diagnosed with Schizophrenia in 2003 has changed the way I see people with mental illnesses. After reading and watching the documentary about prisoners who have to undergo medication just to live a “normal” life has given me inspiration to come up with a few ways that will help our justice system deal with these sorts of individuals. While researchers are trying to come up with different medical measures to cure these diseases we as individuals can implement some procedures to help and support mental patients.

If mental illness and related behaviours caused by mental illness, like addiction which we can say itself is a neurobiological disorder, why are we using the legal system? If mental illness was treated as a physical illness, and in the eyes of the court it has. In R v Parks (1992) the case of Kenneth Parks, while sleepwalking attacked his in-laws with a kitchen knife killing the mother and leaving the father seriously injured, he was found not-guilty on account of automatism. Those brought before the MHC should not be placed in the criminal justice system but given time with mental health professionals. It is another way of oppression on an already systematically oppressed group of people. Secondly, like the Drug Treatment Courts which the MHC was based off of, the MHC has a broad mandate that enables them to impose criminal sanctions on non-criminal behaviour, like not taking psychotropic drugs. Which leads to the question if it is morally right to force individuals into psychotropic treatment through the threat of prison sentences. Yes, some might say, and to a point are right in the sense that crimes committed by those who are deemed mentally ill should not be completely overlooked and should be upheld to the letter of the law. But, if the crime is a misdemeanor or completely related to the illness itself, the purpose is completely lost and we once again are criminalizing a vulnerable community in the guise of help. Pushing vulnerable people towards addictive psychotropic drugs, in the mass over pharmaceuticalization of our society. We prioritize fitting into society instead of genuinely being mentally sound. Instead of funding a program which criminalizes and oppresses those that they are trying to help, more funding should be invested into our poor mental health system. Sadly, this is not the case and many mentally ill individuals do end

What is left is that we have many citizens who are mentally ill and are not receiving treatment. However the patients who are able to receive treatment are only able to have some treatment covered. Health insurers are responsible for covering the immensely large cost of substantial treatment, a mixture of medication and therapy; since therapy is highly priced, less reliable, and time consuming; patients typically do not receive treatment for therapy. Health insurers would much rather cover medication because it is cheaper, it heals patients faster, and it is more reliable than therapy. However, medication is not made to heal, but to only coax symptoms of a mental illness (Sandberg).

There are times where severe cases of mental illness are neglected by doctors. When I was younger, I would be dragged to work by my mom. She distributed pills to mainly schizophrenic patients. Her job was to make sure that they would take them as much as they should. The thing about Schizophrenia is that the illness itself can make you stop taking medications. You can become paranoid, And the voices in your head will tell you that your meds are poison. Or that the doctors are tricking you. So the ailment itself is a tough adversary to deal with. But my mom was not a nurse. Or anyone that should be holding medications. I was curious all this time why she had the meds. Eventually she said that sometimes the doctors just do not care

There are several different forms of insurance like health car home and renter's insurance and one of the most important and overlooked things of insurance and there is lots of overlooked people and an overlooked market of people in dire need of insurance and for new people it can be hard to find the right type of insurance for new insurance users there is large need for people and also there are lots of things that are important in how there are lots of people who relied on the affordable care act[thinkprosses 2016]those people are now not insured those people have a natural right of being insured and there is a need and a right to insurance.people should be provided with mental health insurance bease,as a human all people have a natural right to medicion-

However, many individuals who may be mentally infirm or were committed to a psychiatric facility could keep on being fit for directing and controlling their own medical care, including the privilege to consent to treatment or to refuse treatment; legal requirements vary with jurisdiction, so physicians should be generally familiar with the applicable mental health legislation in their

Mental health issues can make anyone have a hard life, they can stem from just a nuisance to taking over your entire life. They are not to be taken lightly, as people can harm themselves or others around them. This is why when someone with a mental health issue commits a mass shooting, they will need to be treated much differently than if it was just a normal person that committed the crime. “Federal gun control policy responses to the Sandy Hook and Aurora shootings strengthen legal prohibitions on gun ownership to individuals with histories of mental illness who are deemed at risk for violence to themselves and/or others” (Rosenberg 2011). With strengthening legal prohibitions it determines who can get a firearm. This keeps everyone a little bit safer, because it can keep those people that have the tendency to act out, not be able to own a firearm. If someone has a mental illness and they are at risk for violence to themselves or others, they should not be able to get a firearm, because that gives them a way to hurt themselves or others and ruin the rest of their

Policies have an important role in regulating and shaping the values in a society. The issues related to mental health are not only considered as personal but also affecting the relationships with significant others. The stigma and discrimination faced by people with mental health can be traced to the lack of legislation and protection of rights (Rodriguez del Barrio et al., 2014). The policy makers in mental health have a challenging task to protect the rights of individuals as well as the public (Swigger & Heinmiller, 2014). Therefore, it is essential to analyse the current mental health policies. In Canada, provinces adopt their own Mental Health Acts (MHA) to implement mental health services. As of January 15, 2016, there are 13 mental health acts in Canada (Gray, Hastings, Love, & O’Reilly, 2016). The key elements, despite the differences in laws, are “(1) involuntary admission criteria, (2) the right to refuse treatment, and (3) who has the authority to authorize treatment” (Browne, 2010). The current act in Ontario is Mental Health Act, 1990.

The critics also disagree with involuntary medication because it forces submission rather then using practices directed at achieving mental health. The question is at what point does someone’s rights have to be violated in order to protect themselves and the individuals around them?

Just last year 1 in 5 Americans suffered from mental illness. Everyday Americans and people in other countries are suffering because of mental illness and they should be treated to matter the cost. Mental health has just as much effect on the body as does physical health. Which that comes to my essential question. Should health care companies cover mental health treatment? One side says yes because that would help millions of people with getting treatment because the cost is too extensive for them. But on one side of the claim some people say that the cost is too severe to cover everyone’s mental health treatment through insurance. Nevertheless, It is extremely essential that no matter the cost that people are being treated for their mental illnesses. Many people are suffering from unfair treatment from insurance companies with mental health issues to prove that I will talk about that people really do suffer, that mental health patients really do want help and lastly that it is legally deemed to be treated the same insurance wise.

Meanwhile, “Hospitalization may happen to occur as the best option to keep a person safe and stabilize severe symptoms.” (Hotline Information) “Any individual may need hospitalization because they need closely monitored and accurately diagnosed, have their medications adjusted or stabilized, or need monitored during an acute episode when their mental illness temporarily worsens.” (Hospitalization) Some people may not want one to put them into a hospital because they claim they do not “need to go there.” However, making the right choice and sending them there will only save them in the long run. There are two types of hospitalization: voluntary and involuntary. “Voluntary takes places when a person willingly signs forms agreeing to be

Yes, not being exposed to such "dynamic" since currently we are in the student boat, it is hard to take stand although voicing our opinion and advocate down the road, it does matter. Also, I think it depends on where and what agency you are going to work. Like in a school setting, I don't think as a counselor you will accouter with such issue like reimbursement...I think. However, regardless of settings, health care problem should not be an ongoing issue. I am noticing more-and-more mental health needs is emerging in today's society...said.

When one is unable to make their own conscious decisions, medication should be administered with the oversight of a professional and a caretaker. In a situation where a child has a medical condition that requires medication for treatment, the decision on whether that child takes what is prescribed is up to the parents of the child. Also, adults with mental handicaps should also have their pills regulated by a caretaker. Also, adults with mental handicaps should also have their pills regulated by a caretaker. In neither of these situations should the government interfere. The government should, however interfere when a patient become a threat to the public. For example, hypothetically, if someone with preexisting mental issues and is not on medication, put imitate danger on those within proximity of him/her this person should be detained and given medication to help them calm down.

Mentally ill patients are placed to death, most of the time they don’t know what they’re doing. Many people are just born with defects to their brain with the intention that causes them to act a certain way. No amount of drugs, schooling, treatment, or positive reinforcement will change them. It isn’t fair that someone should be murdered only because they were unlucky enough to be born with a brain defect. Although it is precisely unconstitutional to put a mentally ill patient to death, the rules can be indistinct and you still need to be able to convince a judge and jury that the defendant is mentally ill. There isn’t a way for the government to

“Davison a 21-year-old boy had a history of mental health problems and repeatedly tried to kill himself. […] He was jailed after going into a police station and threatening to kill himself” (Topping, 2014) [1]. Instead of letting a mentally disabled person go to jail where no proper treatment would be given, it’s better to send him to a mental institute to get proper treatment. Davison then killed himself in his prison cell because the prison staff was not able to look after him the proper skills required to take care of a mentally unstable patient. This just shows that by unnecessarily imprisoning someone of mental health or any other minor problems, could lead to the possibility of suicide. Suicide in prison cells is not something new and this could lead to the rise of death tolls in prison. Before one could prosecute a person to be sentenced, the severity of the offence should be taken into consideration and not merely based on what the person has done, just to keep the streets safe. “Obama’s efforts to reduce sentences for nonviolent offenders…” (Yuhas, 2015) [2]. Indeed criminals should face the