Re: High court supports mentally-ill physicist

Posted by mattdds on June 8, 2003, at 11:54:30

In reply to Re: High court supports mentally-ill physicist » Irene56, posted by Larry Hoover on June 8, 2003, at 10:34:27

>>"Although the patient did not conceive of his condition as an illness, he was quite aware that his brain did not function normally," Mr. Justice Jack Major wrote.
This is great! This is why I have a problem with the DSM-IV and psychiatric labels in general. Diagnoses sometimes help in a very broad sense to describe patterns, but when used as a decision on whether to medicate or not, I believe they can be a bit presumptuous. I mean, did they think to ask the guy if his "illness" was bothering him? Or was he harming someone else? If neither, then leave him alone!
Matt

Thread

High court supports mentally-ill physicist Irene56 6/7/03
Re: High court supports mentally-ill physicist » Irene56 Larry Hoover 6/8/03
Re: High court supports mentally-ill physicist mattdds 6/8/03
Re: High court supports mentally-ill physicist » mattdds xjs7 6/10/03
Re: High court supports mentally-ill physicist mattdds 6/10/03
Re: text of the Supreme Court decision » mattdds Larry Hoover 6/10/03
Re: text of the Supreme Court decision (opinion) Larry Hoover 6/10/03

Post a new follow-up

Notify the administrators

Start a new thread

poster:mattdds thread:232273
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20030529/msgs/232389.html

	for
in