There are "Outpatient commitment" laws that force people to take drugs

[thucythucy]

against their will if a court rules they are otherwise a danger to themselves or others.

These laws are very often abused, and the drugs people are forced to take have serous, indeed sometimes fatal side effects, including tardive dyskinesia and increased incidence of suicidal thoughts and action. I know of a recent case where a man was forced to take dozens of electro shock treatments against his will, until a nationwide effort forced the authorities to reconsider.

And yet to my knowledge refusing to take a Covid vaccine--which is beyond any doubt a risk to self and others--has yet to trigger any of those laws. I haven't even seen this suggested, let alone any attempt at implementation.

Just to be clear--I'm critical of "outpatient commitment" since I see how often it's abused in the case of people who are considered mentally ill. So I'd be uncomfortable seeing those laws expanded or used for this purpose.

Even so, to me the discrepancy here is notable. I guess people labeled mentally ill simply have less rights than others, even when those others pose an enormously greater threat to public health and safety, that is to say, to all of us.

I'll put it another way: as a society we seem to have no problem coercing marginalized people to "take their medicine"--with or without their consent. But for those refusing what is clearly for their own good and everyone around them who aren't marginalized, well, the equation seems to be entirely different.

I wonder what others here might think about this.

[twin_ghost]

1. This post promotes stereotypes about the mentally ill and their medication.

People that are a danger to themselves or others need court intervention to prevent a suicide or murder(s). This is demonizing side effects of mental health medications. Statin medications for high cholesterol sometimes causes liver disease. The views in this post about mental health care make out Doctors to be the boogeyman. No one would say things like this about heart attacks and medication for the heart.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

2. That's weak ... OP did no such thing and you missed the point entirely (nt)

[thucythucy]

4. The side effects of certain psychotropic medications

have been very well documented. This is not "demonizing"--it is simply citing what has been medically proven.

I would also like to point out that to the best of my knowledge no one is ever court ordered to take statins, or diabetes medication, or any number of other medications that may prevent self-injury. So the analogy between the treatment of people with those health conditions and people with a mental health diagnosis fails at least in that regard.

Which is to say that in general it is only people labeled with a mental illness that fall under such sanctions.

This contrast is now all the more stark given that we are faced with a significant number of people who are actively risking harm to themselves and the general public. And yet, as I point out in the OP, I have yet to hear anyone suggest that the outpatient commitment laws be applied in this instance..

But given your support of forced medicating, would you support applying such measures to people who refuse to be vaccinated? Should the courts use the outpatient commitment laws to force people to be vaccinated?

[abqtommy]

3. As a survivor of mental health diagnosis and treatment I have no problem with this op.

To survive mental health diagnosis and treatment takes a lot of strength and courage and a
national vaxx mandate should be a no-brainer. For what it's worth, I got fully vaxxed as soon as I
could because I learned long ago to value my life.

[thucythucy]

5. Thank you for this post.

I also have a mental health diagnosis, which is probably why this issue occurred to me as it did.

The contrast between how people labeled mentally ill are treated, and how we are now treating those who refuse to vaccinate is rather jarring to me.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this--my opposition to the abuse of outpatient commitment would seem to preclude my favoring the use of court ordered coercion in this instance. But I just wanted to point out what I see is a marked difference in regards to civil rights for some people as opposed to civil rights for others.

Best wishes to you and yours, and thank you again for your reply.

[abqtommy]

6. I did survive and continue to do so. It's sad that some mentally ill people died while

undergoing treatment just as it's sad that some people have died as a result of covid vaccines. But
the odds are in favor of survival in either case.

[Sgent]

7. I think the real issue

is that psychiatrists are the only ones familiar with the statutes. Your average family physician might issue a 72 hour hold once or twice in a career, but even then its so they can see a psychiatrist. ER docs more often, but they aren't responsible for ongoing treatment, just getting them to the psychiatrist.

With the success of prior vaccines (Polio, smallpox, measles, etc.) our public health system has been much more about tracking than enforcing. Combine that with the way we as a society have tried to move away from paternalistic healthcare, and the system is no longer setup to enforce such issues like it might have been (for better or worse) in the 40's / 50's.