02 March 2005 @ 12:45 pm
 
I shouldn't watch daytime television.

I really shouldn't. Just watched an attempt at a witch-hunt and it's just made me so angry that I have to vent.

The story - a man murdered whilst out cycling. His killer had been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic with violent tendancies in the past. The pople in the strudio were the brother of the victim, a woman who heads up a support group for victims of this kind of crime, and a clinical psychiatrist there to give his professional opinion. It all starts with an overly dramatised thing with bullet points saying how many times the killer had been in and out of secure units. By the time the voice over got to "he voluntarily went to such-and-such a hospital for treatment, but tellingly wasn't sectioned." I was already scowling at the screen.

Of course he wasn't sectioned, the point of being 'sectioned' is when people with mental illness are a danger to themselves or society and are not aware of that danger. This guy knew he needed help and sought it out. The fact that he then walked out of the hospital without getting that help and committed murder is a sign that the treatment system as it stands is not working, not that he should have been locked away the minute he was diagnosed.

That's the point the psychiatrist tried to make, he pointed out that mental health hospitals are under such pressure to 'treat and street' the patients that there unforunately are a lot of cases where people are released who don't get the treatment they need and end up committing crimes such as this.

Valid point, you'd think, but oh no. The presenters jumped on him and did the whole pulling on the emotions to get the viewing audience to agree with their viewpoint that everyone with a history of metal illness should be locked up and out of harms way. Fern Britton sat there and said "we don't want to go back to those times, but there used to be places to put these people."

Despite the fact that I was fuming at the way they tried to demonize the psychiatrist, I watched the whole segment, I sat through the whole thing and I'm shocked that the presenters apparently can't see that they're actually making an already bad situation worse.

Care in the community doesn't work? No, because idiots like these presenters make damn sure it doesn't. They're furthering the stigmatization of mental health patients. I fully agree that the current mental health system doesn't work, but the reasons it's not working are far too many to be listed on a ten minute segment on a daytime television show. Hospitals, psychiatrists, social workers, care workers, they all are under so much pressure that of course things are missed, the psychiatrist on the show made the point that they don't have the time they need with each patient, they can miss the warning signs because sometimes there aren't warning signs.

I'm ranting, sorry. My heart goes out to the victim's brother, to the family of the girl who was found murdered in the train station in my village whose killer was a mental health patient in a community care house, to the families of all the victims. But to react in the way these presenters did, to advocate a return to draconian measures, what next? It wasn't that long ago that single girls who dared to get pregnant were locked away in asylums, it wasn't that long ago that a Glaswegian called RD Laing was advocating trepanning as a cure for all mental illness. (drilling holes in the skull to 'relieve the pressure on the brain') We've moved away from that now, we can see how short-sighted and wrong these actions are - but the presenters on this show seem to indicate that we should be going back to those times.

Oh, and the next segment on this show? Has Posh Spice had a boob job.
 
 
Current Mood: pissed off
Current Music: stopped -
 
 
( Post a new comment )
[identity profile] acrazywench.livejournal.com on March 2nd, 2005 07:41 am (UTC)
So what percentage of the population (and their audience) have the presenters just condemned for having/having had mental health problems? (It's got to be quite a reasonable percentage since mental health covers all forms of depression etc.) I thought those Kilroy type days where the presenter has a view and makes damn sure it's either everyone else's view or talks over any opponenets were over, but it seems ITV have taken on the mantle:(

Beck.
[identity profile] whiskyinmind.livejournal.com on March 2nd, 2005 08:07 am (UTC)
I hope most people watching the show were sensible enough to see how the tack the presenters were taking - and it has to be said it was mostly Fern who was doing it.

The way she kept saying the same thing over and ovre again to contradict the expert was just ridiculous. I'd hope most people can see through it, but the horrible thing is I don't know that they will.

You're right, the percentage of people with some form of mental illness in this country is so high that she/they have no doubt offended a huge part of their audience.
[identity profile] rileysaplank.livejournal.com on March 2nd, 2005 10:48 am (UTC)
25% of people are affected by mental illness according to the adverts they're currently running in Scotland.
[identity profile] smhwpf.livejournal.com on March 2nd, 2005 08:04 am (UTC)
Yes, if you read the Guardian or the Independent or something, it's always a bit of a shock when you see that sort of programme. That is pretty ghastly. "There used to be places to put these people." What with the government's plans to lock us up in our houses, and Home Office Minister Hazel Blears saying outright that Muslims are going to be targeted by stop and search etc. and that's OK, and the ongoing demonisation of aylum seekers... "First they came for the Jews..." This country is getting seriously scary. (Though not yet US levels of scary).
[identity profile] whiskyinmind.livejournal.com on March 2nd, 2005 08:19 am (UTC)
We're supposed to be well-educated in this country, so to see things like this - this kind of sheer manipulation of ignorance, it just scares the hell out of me.

There was a time, not that long ago, when the Daily Express and Daily Mail readers seemed to be an out-dated minority. Now, especially since 2001, those attitudes seem to dictate policy decisions at a government level. How did it happen, that this country has come to this? Especially when such an uproar was created about the treatment of Muslims and those of Middle East origin in the US after 9/11. Now, instead of making a fuss, we seem to be going down that same route - be it the mentally ill, aslyum seekers or 'suspected terrorists'. And in an election year as well. Or is that it? Is it because of the election, is it to draw attention to the fact that there seems to be more troops in Iraq in what is meant to be peace time than were there during the conflict?

I just don't get it.
[identity profile] smhwpf.livejournal.com on March 2nd, 2005 08:58 am (UTC)
Hmm. A number of things spring to mind. One is certainly 9/11 - that has made a lot of people very fearful, to some extent rationally concerned, but such fears always grow out of proportion to the threat, real as that may be. So a lot of people are willing to sacrifice liberty in favour of 'security'. But more than that, I'm very suspicious of governments generally, I tend to think they are inclined to take as much power as they can, and that 9/11 gave them the excuse.

A rather more worrying fear I have is that we may be seeing the beginnings of a much longer-term move away from the very notion of freedom. For several hundred years, civil liberties and human rights were, to a large extent, seen as being something we all benefit from, something to be fought for. Now, I wonder if there has been a fundamental paradigm shift, where human rights are seen as something that apply to an awkward and, for many people, dispensable minority, and not to themselves. Maybe most people just no longer see the right to protest, the right to a fair trial, and so forth, as something that concerns them; just the 'other people'. And that 9/11 represents a watershed, where instincts of fear and suspicion have become dominant over those of fairness and the desire for freedom. I suspect that is too pessimistic, but I wonder.