Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a difference though- if their boss finds out that they did this, in the private sector they'd be rewarded, and in the public sector they'd be fired.
That's a pretty bold assertion, do you have any basis for it?
Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
31–40 of 89 posts
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correction: psychiatric stays are generally very short with private insurance, and months long with state insurance. May vary with the level of corruption in your area.
I don't know of anywhere that has average stays anywhere near a month. Please provide a citation.
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#33Two items, this is nothing new, although it is good to see it getting news and federal attention. 20 years ago, as a minor, I was subjected to delayed releases as well as odd provocations from the care workers. In the end it took a parent rebelling and pulling me out against medical advice. Secondly, go fuck yourself, don't try to cover up involuntary restraint and criminal behavior.
I'm not trying to cover up anything. Abuses happen, and they should not be tolerated.
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not trying to cover up anything. Abuses happen, and they should not be tolerated.
Your comment implies the situation is less bad than the article suggests. To someone held under shady practices, you look like one of 'them'. I wouldn't outright deny that person's point of view. Are you sure you are a psychologist?
If you are going to be all edgy, please read carefully and be accurate and precise.
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#35This is one of my greatest fears: that I'll be labelled as insane, then taken away and locked up against my will, and when I try to plead sanity, nobody will believe me. Because they "know" I'm insane.
I'm not sure of the law in the US, but I think you have to pose an active danger to yourself or other people for them to detain you, and they can only hold you for short times.
Abuses do happen (which is why you need to talk to your nearest relative and get and advance directive in place) but they're rare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_commitment_interna...
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correction: psychiatric stays are generally very short with private insurance, and months long with state insurance. May vary with the level of corruption in your area.
I don't know of anywhere that has average stays anywhere near a month. Please provide a citation.
I trust that you're a psychiatrist but you could be spewing old or incorrect numbers just as easily as anyone else who may unknowingly make a mistake.
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#37This is an appropriate article to comment with the Rosenhan Experiment. From Wikipedia: The study involved the use of healthy associates or "pseudopatients" who briefly feigned auditory hallucinations in an attempt to gain admission to 12 different psychiatric hospitals in five different states in various locations in the United States. All were admitted and diagnosed with psychiatric disorders. After admission, the…
Literally everything about mental health treatment has changed.
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#38I'm a psychiatrist, and there are a few things to consider about this story: 1. The bulk of people in a psychiatric hospital are there voluntarily. They can walk out the door at any time. 2. When a patient is in a hospital involuntarily, their stay is subject to state laws about involuntary hospitalization. This, as far as I know, universally requires 2 independent professional opinions that a patient is actively sui…
It troubles me, however, to to give a government the capability to detain citizens based on the (forgive the scare quotes) "medical" expertise of a psychiatrist. This has been abused [1] and I find significant issues with the credence given to testimony by psychiatrists in the US court system [2]. The lack of science in ever-shifting diagnosis criteria is saddening, and these diagnoses will mirror the prevailing social and political winds. Within some of our lifetimes, of course, homosexuality was a pathology in the DSM.
I'm not sure of the answer here. We do need a way to keep people who are a threat to themselves and others in a safe place, but psychiatry has been and is such a troubling and far-too non-scientific endeavor, long drawing profit from conclusions far beyond our true capabilities to understand the human mind and behavior. I don't want people in the field with anything other than an attitude utter humility and possibly shame exerting control over others' lives.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry_...
[2] http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/09/07/trial-by-fire
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not trying to cover up anything. Abuses happen, and they should not be tolerated.
Your comment implies the situation is less bad than the article suggests. To someone held under shady practices, you look like one of 'them'. I wouldn't outright deny that person's point of view. Are you sure you are a psychologist?
Do you know the difference between a psychiatrist and a psychologist? Many people don't, but in the context of this conversation it's pretty important.
Re: Feds probing psychiatric hospitals for locking in patients to boost profits
#40This is one of my greatest fears: that I'll be labelled as insane, then taken away and locked up against my will, and when I try to plead sanity, nobody will believe me. Because they "know" I'm insane.