Forced Drugging

[Wirey]

Provide an "honest answer" to this question: Do you know of any psychotropic drug that has been shown to make an incompetent person competent?

Remember when I said I didn't have my medical license like you? I don't know of any drugs like that. I'll bet doctors do. My lack of medical training doesn't prove your intellectual dishonesty, comparing illness and hygiene. Couldn't make a cogent argument so went for the false comparison. Sad, really, what happens when someone has no intellectual character.

https://aeon.co/essays/the-intellectual-character-of-conspiracy-theorists

 

[columbus]

No. The government should not have the right to force a medication into someone's body, just as they should not have the right to prevent someone from using a medication.

Here's where the many and varied ethical dilemmas come in.
Suppose you have solid data about an individual's behavior. Off meds they have a tendency towards senseless violence. On meds they don't. Do you have the right to inflict the danger you know about on the unsuspecting public?
Tom

 

[VioletVortex]

Here's where the many and varied ethical dilemmas come in.
Suppose you have solid data about an individual's behavior. Off meds they have a tendency towards senseless violence. On meds they don't. Do you have the right to inflict the danger you know about on the unsuspecting public?
Tom

No one should have the right to alter someone's personality. I'd rather be killed than be forced to take medication.

 

[columbus]

No one should have the right to alter someone's personality. I'd rather be killed than be forced to take medication.

That's how it used to work. People just did whatever and then got executed when they were a social problem.
I want us to do better than that.
Tom

 

[Wirey]

No one should have the right to alter someone's personality. I'd rather be killed than be forced to take medication.

I'd rather have you medicated and not able to kill my children. So social speaking, that argument is a wash.

 

[Nous]

Obviously no one here has been able to name any psychotropic drug that make an incompetent person competent. Nor does the peer-reviewed literature provide any evidence of a drug demonstrating such an effect. Thus, even using the Court's criteria, there is no circumstance in which it is constitutional to forcibly drug a person with a psychotropic substance.

 

[Lyndon]

Obviously someone doesn't know a thing about mental illness.......

 

[Wirey]

Obviously someone doesn't know a thing about mental illness.......

Oh, I don't know about that.

 

[Wirey]

Obviously no one here has been able to name any psychotropic drug that make an incompetent person competent. Nor does the peer-reviewed literature provide any evidence of a drug demonstrating such an effect. Thus, even using the Court's criteria, there is no circumstance in which it is constitutional to forcibly drug a person with a psychotropic substance.

Yes, since a few people on-line don't know something, it must be you who's right, and the rest of the medical community that's confused. Great logic. But, if you were to put some character into your thought process, your first thought might be "What do trained jurists and medical professionals know that perhaps I don't?" I know, it would mean using rational thought, and that kills conspiracies faster than dick rash kills a hand job, but try it. Ask yourself "What did that doctor possibly learn in his eight years in medical school plus all the time he spent being a doctor that I don't know?" See what kind of answer you can come up with.

 

[Lyndon]

Drugs that make incompetent people competent; anti psychotics, anti depressants, anti manic depressants, anti anxiety to name a few

 

[Nous]

Obviously someone doesn't know a thing about mental illness.......

I will match my knowledge with yours on any topic on any day.

The issue of mental illness is irrelevant to the topic here. The Court has not held that being judged to have a "mental illness" is a prerequisite for forcible drugging. The criteria for determining whether forced drugging is constitutional only apply to cases in which a person has been found to be incompetent to stand trial for a serious offense, or is a danger to himself or others.

 

[Wirey]

I will match my knowledge with yours on any topic on any day.

Intellectually dishonest. Assumption of knowledge and ability. Again, closed minded and a lack of character. @Lyndon has stated that he has suffered from a mental illness, and for all you know he's been reading and studying about it for the last 20 years as a result, but you dismiss his ideas out of hand because they disagree with yours. News flash: You ain't a doctor or a lawyer, and you have no idea what you're talking about. Lyndon has been there and done that, and I'll take the word of an experienced person over that of someone who suffers from a lack of intellectual character any day. You should learn to process new information rather than be so closed minded. You might actually learn how to think rationally and stop believing Jimmy Morrison and Elvis got plastic surgery and founded Apple (that one is true, btw).

 

[columbus]

The issue of mental illness is irrelevant to the topic here.

I cannot take seriously the opinion of someone who can make such a poignantly ignorant statement.
Mental illness, and how to deal ethically with sufferers, is the whole point to this.

I am not claiming to have the answers. I see it as a terribly serious issue that just doesn't fit our old ethical codes. The issue didn't exist a few decades ago, much less when the constitution was being written. The Founding Fathers were utterly clueless. We have to grapple with it in a way that works out the best for everyone without their help.
Tom

 

[jeager106]

In your opinion, when, if ever, should the government (i.e., someone acting on behalf of the government) be allowed to forcibly administer a psychotropic drug to persons?

(“Forcibly” just means “contrary to a person's consent”.)

No.
Does anyone in our government force such drugs on anyone?
I don't know if that is so.
Not in recent decades at least.
Enlighten me as I don't know.
Perhaps if a known violent person in a mental institution?
I don't know of such being done outside a secure institution for the protection of inmates/patients/or the person perhaps?
Examples of such?

 

[jeager106]

I have p.t.s.d. and am an alcoholic in remission.
Do I need institutionalized?
I WAS in a mental hospital in Fla. a few years back AGAINST my will.
I had a pancreatic attack and uttered "oh I'd rather die than go through this" in the E.R.
Cops took me straight to a nut house for 3 days!!!!!
Shrink interviewed me and said "Nothing wrong with you at all. Go home."
Florida's Baker law.
Nothing I could do about it.
It WAS fun however to interact with the real whackos.
Food was o.k and the drugs they gave me were wonderful!
I was in "happy" land.
10 mg Librium every 6 hours.
WHO CARES about anything!
I wish I had more! Yummy, happy land in the funny farm.
Don't take the drugs? Don't get out!
Met several good looking chick inmates and was scolded by the staff for flirting.
That's the SECOND time I've been a nut house.
Years ago I went on a really bad alcohol binge and the only hospital that had a bed was a funny farm.
24 hours AFTER my last drink my blood alcohol was STILL at .40% which is normally an alcohol
induced coma prior to DEATH!
Doc said my b.a.c. likely was over .50 % and "why aren't you dead"?
Bawwwwww-hawwwwwwwwwwwww.
Wait! GULP! I was almost dead!
Needless to say I do not drink anything stronger than cola.
I also PRAY and give thanks daily for my sobriety and attend A.A. at least 5 X a week.
Docs say one more binge and "good bye".
I drank myself into severe diabetes too.
Off injections now but take Metformen (sp?) 3 X daily to stay alive.
Don't eat sweets either and alcohol will kill me quickly.
Am I grateful to the God of my understanding?
Yup.

 

[columbus]

Perhaps if a known violent person in a mental institution?

I keep going back to my late friend Randy, mainly because I knew him better than most of my psychotic acquaintances
He wasn't terribly violent, like rape/murder violent. But when he was off his meds he was perfectly capable of coldcocking a stranger on the sidewalk believing that they'd insulted him or something. He periodically did a day or two in jail for that sort of thing.
He was a danger. He could have killed someone. He didn't, but it was mostly luck. I think Indianapolis would have been safer, and Randy too, if someone had the authority to keep him on the meds whether he wanted to or not.
I also hate the idea of some politico deciding to drug people into submission with government authority.
I really don't have an answer, but I do see a problem that isn't being dealt with very well.
Tom

 

[jeager106]

Back in the day as a young copper we had the authority to arrest under "suspicion of dementia" and
we did.
We took the suspected person to the E.R. where a doc would evaluate and "pink slip"
to the State mental hospital an hour away.
That took two cops off the street for at least 5 hours total or more.
We can't to that any more.
The intake doc at that "hospital" was a drunk.
I never, ever, saw him sober.
He was also our coroner.
The intake doc once tried to admit my uniformed partner. HUH?
I suggested to the doc that the sick person wasn't wearing a police uniform.
One poor chap I "arrested" was on his hands and knees lapping water from a mud puddle
like a dog.
Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm????
We took him away.
Two years later he killed his elderly mother by repeatedly stabbing her in the face with a
BUTTER KNIFE!
ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Man I've seen some horrendous things.
Like the mental that stabbed a fat retired school teacher to death with a pen knife (blade 2") then
had sex with her while playing in the blood while she was conscious and bleeding to death.
He got out and kidnapped an infant in the cold of Jan. and left it on someones door step.
Baby froze to death.
I HOPE he's still in an institution.
P.T.S.D. anyone?
I earned it!

 

[Nous]

I cannot take seriously the opinion of someone who can make such a poignantly ignorant statement.
Mental illness, and how to deal ethically with sufferers, is the whole point to this.

Read slowly and carefully:

The issue of mental illness is irrelevant to the topic here. The Court has not held that being judged to have a "mental illness" is a prerequisite for forcible drugging. The criteria for determining whether forced drugging is constitutional only apply to cases in which a person has been found to be incompetent to stand trial for a serious offense, or is a danger to himself or others.

 

[Nous]

Intellectually dishonest. Assumption of knowledge and ability. Again, closed minded and a lack of character. @Lyndon has stated that he has suffered from a mental illness, and for all you know he's been reading and studying about it for the last 20 years as a result, but you dismiss his ideas out of hand because they disagree with yours. News flash: You ain't a doctor or a lawyer, and you have no idea what you're talking about. Lyndon has been there and done that, and I'll take the word of an experienced person over that of someone who suffers from a lack of intellectual character any day. You should learn to process new information rather than be so closed minded. You might actually learn how to think rationally and stop believing Jimmy Morrison and Elvis got plastic surgery and founded Apple (that one is true, btw).

If you ever think of something intelligent and relevant to the topic to post, be sure to bold it.

 

[Nous]

No.
Does anyone in our government force such drugs on anyone?
I don't know if that is so.
Not in recent decades at least.

It isn't at all uncommon. About a week ago the Connecticut Supreme Court upheld a lower court order for the forcible drugging of a doctor charged with murder in order to make him competent to stand trial. It's the case that prompted this thread.

So do you know of any psychotropic drug that has been shown to make incompetent people competent? No one has been able to identify any such drug here.