(no subject)

[atrypical.livejournal.com]

All right, so we go to a psychiatrist, named Dr. C.

Dr. C saw my friend and his mom for a time. My friend is also multiple.

Dr. C told my friend's mom that he should be locked up because of the voices in his head.

What should we do? We don't want to not tell her, but we also don't want to be told that we should be locked up.

Any suggestions?

Please also keep in mind that the body is a 16 year old female...

Comments

[chaostiny.livejournal.com]

Keep in mind that every person is different and possibly he was concerned for your friend's safety... You can't be locked up just because you're multiple or have voices... you have to demonstrate some sort of self harming behaviour or behaviour that could harm others in order to get locked up so if you feel you can trust your psychiatrist then go for it:)

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

This is not true in the case of people under 18. In many states (presuming you're in the US), parents have the ability to commit underage children without any kind of judicial proceedings. They do not have to display self-harming or violent behavior in order to be institutionalized-- they just need the word of someone who says they should be locked up. In the case of adolescents, this is done far more often than most people think on the basis of family disputes-- the parents find the child troublesome to have around, and simply arrange with the authorities to have him/her 'taken off their hands.' This happened to a family member of ours; I suspect the only reason it didn't happen to us was because we expended a lot of energy trying deliberately to cover anything that might be seen as 'crazy behavior.'

Some doctors have also been known to press institutionalization on children and adolescents (and adults) due to the insurance benefits-- for instance, diagnosing people with schizophrenia because their insurance company will pay more for a diagnosis of schizophrenia than for depression or anxiety. (A certain amount of MPD diagnoses a few decades ago, when it was considered a diagnostic 'fad,' were due to insurance fraud.)

Additionally, even in many adult cases, sometimes just the act of *talking* about sometimes wanting to harm yourself or hurt others is considered a sufficient pretext. You don't have to *demonstrate* the behavior-- you just have to have someone *believe* that you might harm yourselves or others, or to claim you might; for instance, "he might be dangerous" has been used as a way of getting homeless people "off the street" by putting them in psychiatric wards.

[chaostiny.livejournal.com]

You're right... I was way too general in my reply. As an adult I often forget that the juvenile system is different and in many cases as you pointed out can be used for the parents convenience rather than the child's health. And you're also right about talking versus demonstrating behaviour... I myself have been hospitalized based on what I said rather than what I did, although in my case it was a good thing:)
thanks for the really well put clarification and correction!

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

No problem. I thought the original poster ought to know because she said she (the body, anyway) was 16. :)

-B

[confractions.livejournal.com]

Wrong...Parents cannot lock a kid up just because they feel like it. The person has to be an immenet risk to themselves or others or their condition is such that they will deteroiate signifigantly without treatment.

[chaostiny.livejournal.com]

Just on a side note... when I was 16 I was placed in an adolescent psych ward for 6 weeks, signed in by my mother, because I was "causing trouble"... I think it really depends on the parents, the doctors, the hospital and how the kid presents...

[confractions.livejournal.com]

I hear what you are saying. I did time time at a psyche hospital from age 13-17 1/2. What were you doing that was "causing trouble?" A parent cannot just take a child to a shrink and say, "Put them away" If a shrink does that without any evidence that you may be at risk of harming yourself/someone else or your condition worsening, is bad ethics. If anything the law falls on the side of the child. Did he question your mother or what was going on that was distressing to you? When you were signed in your parents would have had to go to probate court.

[chaostiny.livejournal.com]

I was taken to the emergency room after running away... I told the police what was going on in my house and THEY sided with my mom. I did end up going to court and my mom signed over custody of me to the state... basically I was causing trouble by speaking out. Also, the laws have changed a lot... this was 16 years ago!

[chaostiny.livejournal.com]

OK... i dont know what happened to my original reply but I will try to reiterate what I said.... darn LJ's been eating my posts!
Basically I ran away from home so I could tell someone what was going on in my house. I ran TO someone I knew and they called my mom and she said to take me to the hospital. When I got there my mom fed them some story about MY behaviour and when I was given the chance to talk, she was in the room so it wasn't until a week later that I finally told someone why I ran. Eventually we did go to court and my mom signed me over to the state so I could live in a group home for older teens, one that was mainly for abused kids. So I was eventually believed but initially I was locked up cus I was the troublemaker.

[confractions.livejournal.com]

Wow that sucks ass. I'm sorry that happened to you. Unfortunately running away is seen as dangerous behaviour and grounds to get a child locked up, until, a court hearing or released to their parents. Yeah it sucks but as a juvie that's how it goes.

[sethrenn.livejournal.com]

"In many states, a minor may be hospitalized at the initiative of a parent or guardian, without the consent of the minor and without judicial review." (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3882/is_200401/ai_n9383805) The 1979 Parham v. J.R. (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=442&invol=584) decision reversed a federal district court ruling that Georgia's commitment laws for adolescents deprived them of due process.

The laws do vary from state to state-- for instance, in Florida, in order for a minor to be admitted to an institution on voluntary status, he or she must consent to the admission which their guardian applied for-- and some states (such as California) have differing laws for admission to public versus private institutions.

In many states, however, risk of harming self/others is not a necessary condition for the institutionalization of a minor-- for instance, in New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina. In New York, the only criterion required is that the adult applying for the minor's admission must understand that the child is being admitted to a psychiatric facility.

[confractions.livejournal.com]

Yes it does vary from state to state, hence Federal laws and state laws.

[ksol1460.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes, they can, and they do it all the time. Kids can be locked up on any pretext whatsoever, and thanks to the Supreme Court decision in Parham vs JR, they have no legal recourse whatsoever.

Of course, there has to be an excuse, and this is where the diagnoses come in; "reactive problem of childhood", "oppositional defiant disorder", etc., etc. The shrink knows what is really going on, and so do the parents, but the official word has to be that the kid is a risk to self or others or will deteriorate without treatment (mind control, physical and emotional abuse, drugs, and electroshock, among other things).

Children have been locked up for everything from wearing pentagrams or spraypainting graffiti to being gay or getting bad grades. It's for his own good, after all!

[confractions.livejournal.com]

That was my point, that there has to be a stated reason, or excuse in your terms.

[luwana.livejournal.com]

Dude. Your country smells :P

Here jumping around and saying "HEY I'M SUICIDAL" won't even get you an in patient place. I know, I tried :P you have to like, actually make a very serious attempt to off yourself. Parents get stared at in a patronising fashion if they say you should be committed :P

[pengke.livejournal.com]

That has more to do with how health care is funded than with the quality of the country/care. It's pretty easy to hospitalise someone if they have a liberal insurance policy or if they're rich enough to pay for themselves. For the majority, it's closer to your experience.

[luwana.livejournal.com]

Hrm. It certainly seems to have something to do with the *morals* of the system. Locking somebody up just because you can is a bit 'tarded, as well as outright sick.

[luwana.livejournal.com]

Yeah I tried to specially word what I was saying to avoid that in particular, because I know that having the option of committing yourself isn't strictly speaking a bad thing.

I was more speaking of how crap it is that if parents have too much money they can just lock their kids up. *that* is sick I think :(