Slashdot Mirror


A Review of the "Mental Illness" Definition Might Prevent Crime

An anonymous reader writes "Following a BBC report showing abnormal variation in the number of people taken into police custody with mental health problems, concerns have been raised about the legal definition of "mental illness". Prof. Steve Fuller argues that a much sharper legal distinction is required to ensure criminals with mental disorders are not released without appropriate treatment. Fuller distinguishes between two cases: a 'client', who pays a therapist and enjoys a liberal, level-playing field in face-to-face interactions, and a 'patient' who is being treated by a doctor for a particular disorder. If the former relationship cannot be established due to person's mental state, then the latter one should be enforced. Thus, Fuller calls for 'a return to institutions analogous to the asylums of the early 19th century.'"

1 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Need more mental health centers not prisons by gallondr00nk · · Score: 4, Informative

    How long until "disagreeing with the politics of the ruling party" becomes a mental illness?

    Perhaps, but more likely is how long before we start lowering the threshold for which someone requires "help". Especially if the facilities were private, which is 99% certain these days.

    In 2008 in Pennsylvania two judges were convicted of accepting bribes from Robert Mericle, who owned private youth detention facilities. In return, they would sentence kids to incarceration in his facilities for such heinous crimes as shoplifting a DVD from Wal-Mart, trespassing, or in one case making a video on Myspace mocking the principle of a school.

    Considering that mental health is so subjective and still poorly understood, could you imagine the amount of abuse that would occur? I would measure in seconds the time between such a facility opening and doctors being bribed to incarcerate patients, "for their own good".

    This is a problem which has become endemic in private prisons. When it becomes profitable to incarcerate someone, the last real barrier to simply incarcerating anyone deemed undesirable is removed.

    It has been long argued that drug laws in the US are mainly only used to convict unemployed, poor and predominantly black men in large cities, for whom there are few prospects and no jobs. With meth, this has extended to white people in the same position, in the same way opium laws did to the Chinese in the past.

    How long before a new system of mental health facilities serve precisely the same purpose?