Texas investigators stunned by child dismemberment

Just schizophrenia and psychosis, or including disorders like PTSD and bipolar disorder?

Click to expand...

I believe the possibility would be worth exploring, yes.
What I would want to see studied first is how detrimental it is to a child to be raised by a parent suffering from these disorders (for the sake of the study, a single parent) versus how detrimental it is for a child to be raised by someone other than a biological parent (for the sake of the study, a non-relative, ie a foster situation).
I would want both the mentally ill and the adult children of mentally ill people involved in the study and having input into it.

Of course, it will never happen. But, you know... in a perfect world.
Yes. I'd want the option explored.

1069 said:

I believe the possibility would be worth exploring, yes.
What I would want to see studied first is how detrimental it is to a child to be raised by a parent suffering from these disorders (for the sake of the study, a single parent) versus how detrimental it is for a child to be raised by someone other than a biological parent (for the sake of the study, a non-relative, ie a foster situation).
I would want both the mentally ill and the adult children of mentally ill people involved in the study and having input into it.

Of course, it will never happen. But, you know... in a perfect world.
Yes. I'd want the option explored.

Click to expand...

Why, though? Those with such illnesses are no more likely than others to be violent towards their children, and with proper treatment and maintenance, there's absolutely nothing stopping them being happy, functioning parents. I mean, yes, if one's actions are harming one's child then I do support intervention, but that's something that needs to be assesed on a case by case basis, regardless of the parent's mental state.

Anima said:

Can I ask what you mean by "serious mental illness"? Just schizophrenia and psychosis, or including disorders like PTSD and bipolar disorder? I think a fact pertinent to this discussion is that absent schizophrenics and those suffering a complete psychotic break, the mentally ill are no more likely to commit violent crimes than the general population.

Click to expand...

The signature challenge of schizophrenics and those afflicted with severe bipolar disorder is that the nature of their illness is a major obstacle towards compliance with medical treatment. I have known both schizophrenics and people with bipolar--medicated, they were quite capable of taking care of themselves and handling responsibilities, but if there was any disruption in the regimen, it was next to impossible for them to get back on it on their own.

In-patient care would guarantee compliance, but is costly and treads dangerously on the individuals civil rights. Out-patient care respects their liberties but creates the new danger of letting them fall through the cracks.

Both approaches leave a lot to be desired. Damned if I know which way is better.

celticlord said:

The signature challenge of schizophrenics and those afflicted with severe bipolar disorder is that the nature of their illness is a major obstacle towards compliance with medical treatment. I have known both schizophrenics and people with bipolar--medicated, they were quite capable of taking care of themselves and handling responsibilities, but if there was any disruption in the regimen, it was next to impossible for them to get back on it on their own.

In-patient care would guarantee compliance, but is costly and treads dangerously on the individuals civil rights. Out-patient care respects their liberties but creates the new danger of letting them fall through the cracks.

Both approaches leave a lot to be desired. Damned if I know which way is better.

Click to expand...

It is a conundrum, that's for sure. But if one is mostly or completely compliant with their treatment regimen, and is open to receiving help and assistance from social services, surely this is the best option for both mother and child?

Why, though? Those with such illnesses are no more likely than others to be violent towards their children, and with proper treatment and maintenance, there's absolutely nothing stopping them being happy, functioning parents.

Click to expand...

Well, in that case, the study would find there's no reason for them not to be parents, and that in fact they should adopt a whole bunch of kids- possibly from the schizophrenics down the hallway- because they're ideally suited to being parents.

:shrug:

I don't really know much about these disorders, although I've heard of them. Are they curable? What are the symptoms of them? What limitations, if any, do they place upon those who suffer from them?

I mean, yes, if one's actions are harming one's child then I do support intervention, but that's something that needs to be assesed on a case by case basis, regardless of the parent's mental state.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's pretty much the system we have in place now, but diagnosed mentally ill mothers like Otty Sanchez and Andrea Yates had no documented history of violence toward their children which would have elicited said intervention under the system we have in place today.

1069 said:

Well, in that case, the study would find there's no reason for them not to be parents, and that in fact they should adopt a whole bunch of kids- possibly from the schizophrenics down the hallway- because they're ideally suited to being parents.

:shrug:

I don't really know much about these disorders, although I've heard of them. Are they curable? What are the symptoms of them? What limitations, if any, do they place upon those who suffer from them?

Click to expand...

Neither is curable per se, in the sense that very few mental illnesses can be cured, but both are managable with medication and therapy. I'm generally not a huge fan of linking to Wikipedia, but the entries on both illnesses are actually fairly good, andthey deal with the symptoms and effects on the sufferer's lives that generally occur.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipolar_disorder"]Bipolar Disorder[/ame]

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PTSD"]PTSD[/ame]

1069 said:

Yes, that's pretty much the system we have in place now, but diagnosed mentally ill mothers like Otty Sanchez and Andrea Yates had no documented history of violence toward their children which would have elicited said intervention under the system we have in place today.

Click to expand...

That's true, but under a system like the one you suggest, many mothers with no capacity for violence towards their children would be seperated from them without cause. The current system is imperfect, for sure, but it can be improved upon without taking extreme steps like pre-emptively taking away the children of the mentally ill, wo quite often lead productive lives and make great parents.

Anima said:

It is a conundrum, that's for sure. But if one is mostly or completely compliant with their treatment regimen, and is open to receiving help and assistance from social services, surely this is the best option for both mother and child?

Click to expand...

Honestly? I don't know.

From what I've seen of schizophrenics, compliance with the treatment regimen ends up being more of an either/or proposition--there's not a whole lot of "mostly." Once they stop taking their medications, things can go awry fairly quickly.

An unmedicated schizophrenic or severely bipolar person is quite easily a danger to himself or herself, as well as to any child given into his or her care. Properly medicated, they are as fit as you or I to be parents.

The challenge is the speed with which they can oscillate between medicated and unmedicated.

celticlord said:

Honestly? I don't know.

From what I've seen of schizophrenics, compliance with the treatment regimen ends up being more of an either/or proposition--there's not a whole lot of "mostly." Once they stop taking their medications, things can go awry fairly quickly.

An unmedicated schizophrenic or severely bipolar person is quite easily a danger to himself or herself, as well as to any child given into his or her care. Properly medicated, they are as fit as you or I to be parents.

The challenge is the speed with which they can oscillate between medicated and unmedicated.

Click to expand...

I'd say that the correct course of action in such cases would be for a social worker to establish a close relationship with the family in question soon after the child's birth. This would allow the child's welfare to be monitored, as well as the mother's mental state. If there's any indication that the mother has become non-compliant with her treatment to the point that her child is suffering, the child is placed in foster care, with it's return contingent on the mother finding a viable treatment plan and showing willingness to stick to it.

celticlord said:

Unlike you, I'm not comfortable with the idea of being "rid of her" as a solution to the problem of the mentally ill.

Click to expand...

It seems like a pretty good solution to the problem of infantivores, whether they're mentally competent or not.

celticlord said:

The more intellectually honest position for you would be to advocate capital punishment--if you are so eager to be rid of the mentally ill, you should at least be willing to exterminate them yourself, not ask them to spare you that burden.

Click to expand...

I am inclined to agree here, but there is something to be said for a society that offers its condemned the option of an honorable suicide before executing them. Especially compared to a society that actively denies its condemned this option and will use force to prevent them from committing suicide before their appointed time.

Coolguy said:

This is a great example of why sterility/abortions should be forced on segments of society.

Click to expand...

1069 said:

I don't believe in forced abortion or sterilization for the diagnosed mentally ill; I do believe their children should be removed from their custody at birth, and perhaps they should be allowed supervised visitation, if it isn't harmful to the child.

Click to expand...

Which segments? I would be extremely hesitant to endorse such a policy regarding the "mentally ill" or even the "seriously mentally ill" given the rapidly expanding definitions of both terms and the political exploitation thereof. While I am open to pursuing active eugenics policies, I am suspicious of any policy which is not based in clear and firm boundaries, especially when it pertains to reproductive rights-- given that between our two major political parties we've got one obsessed with Malthusian environmental idiocy and one that believes that intergenerational poverty is caused by the poor themselves.

Between the two of them, we'd end up sterilizing ourselves into a negative birth rate and still manage to fail to curb the effects of dysgenic breeding.

No, thank you.

celticlord said:

I'm reluctant to say that arbitrarily taking children away from mentally ill parents is a good idea--that strikes me as a level of government power too easily abused or misused.

Click to expand...

Maybe if it weren't for the fact that the definition of "mentally ill" is awfully vague, and the government and the mental health industry alike have both a powerful incentive and a demonstrated tendency to expand it arbitrarily.