Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

Should we be allowed to legally force mentally ill persons to take medication against their will?

What if their mental state puts others in danger? And who gets to decide what constitutes as putting others in danger, their condition label or their actions?

Answer Question

Asked by SabrinaMBowen at 11:34 PM on Sep. 2, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 40 (122,988 Credits)
Answers (22)
  • no matter what they still have the right to choose not to take the meds. it is our human right to refuse treatment of any kind. we just have to work with them to see what other things you could do.

    Answer by mommything03 at 11:38 PM on Sep. 2, 2010

  • I read a book once called The Soloist and it tells the story of a mentally ill homeless man and the reporter who tries to help him. I thought it was a good book and it opens the same questions you did here.

    Answer by luvsmysonjames at 11:40 PM on Sep. 2, 2010

  • I didn't read the Soloist, but I saw the movie... I actually got this question from an SVU episode tonight! lol

    For the record, I'm BiPolar II, and I'm not medicated. However, I can't imagine I wouldn't be willing to medicate if my condition ever put someone else in danger or even myself...

    Comment by SabrinaMBowen (original poster) at 11:43 PM on Sep. 2, 2010

  • Ok if we are talking Hannibal Lecture. Yes he needs meds and should be forced. If we are talking some one with ptsd, depression,etc. that may end up being harmful however are not, no.

    Answer by hot-mama86 at 11:47 PM on Sep. 2, 2010

  • If they are ill enough to cause harm they should either have to take the meds or be locked up. My Aunt is bi polar and takes meds.

    Answer by momof030404 at 11:51 PM on Sep. 2, 2010

  • it should be there choice to take meds or not

    Answer by vampire2007 at 11:56 PM on Sep. 2, 2010

  • Well, for this I look towards Kendra's Law. Which I think is supposed to expire this year. But any way... I like this law because it has different stages and has a 6month expiration. A plan is written out by a Dr who observed the patient, then there is a hearing, then if the court finds they are a candidate for AOT an order is issued to the DCS, Who then provides the "plan" which the order is effective for up to 6 months or extended to 1 year. So I like this because there is a lot that has to be proven, there is a list of criteria that has to be met before they are eligible for AOT, and then it isn't a "life sentence".

    Kendra's law is named after a young woman who was pushed in front of a subway train by a person who had a mental illness, living in the community, and was not receiving treatment.

    Answer by Crissy1213 at 11:57 PM on Sep. 2, 2010

  • We had to do this for a family member. The first step was obtaining a legal conservatorship Next a medical doctor was involved. Mental illness is so debilitating for the person, family and society.


    Answer by Sisteract at 12:53 AM on Sep. 3, 2010

  • I think that those who choose not to take their meds should be made to stay in hospital until they will take care of themselves. I have many personal dealings with people like this, and it is NOT good.

    Answer by NightPhoenix at 1:05 AM on Sep. 3, 2010

  • "However, I can't imagine I wouldn't be willing to medicate if my condition ever put someone else in danger or even myself... "

    And hopefully you can remember that at all times. Some can't. A high school friend's bi-polar brother went unmedicated and DIDN'T control himself. Went to jail for attempted rape.

    Answer by gdiamante at 1:14 AM on Sep. 3, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.