• Top Posts

Mental health profiling and the struggle for civil rights

The public mental health system serves as a second arm of police-force for the federal government. People who break the law are contained by the criminal justice and penal system. People who break rules not necessarily even written into law are contained by the mental health state hospital system. Our legislators have written this loophole into law, mental health law, that allows for exceptions to be made to the rule of law. Let’s call these unwritten rules, these exceptions, pseudo-law.

Pseudo-laws are laws pertaining to violent pre-crime, in other words, the threat of future violence. The legal definition of insanity invariably targets suspected potential dangers “to oneself or others.” No crime need be committed if one is deemed “mentally ill”, that is, of a violent pre-criminal disposition. People are not locked up because they have any illness, people are locked up because they are perceived of as threats to the public. There is an all too often ignored contradiction here as well in that members of the public are being detained, by a government agency that may be perceived as a threat to them, as a threat to the public.

You cannot separate a section of the population unfavorably from the population at large without resorting to alienation. The proper term for this alienation is dehumanization. This minority population, in other words, must be perceived as somehow different, and therefore, less worthy and deserving than the majority population. Difference is a matter of the degree of unfamiliarity, for this separation is a separation from the basic units of which the larger society is made. Those people are not our families. Those people are the shadows in the closets of our families.

The mental health system is a social control system. The system ensures conformity with certain social rules and regulations by holding over people’s heads the threat of institutionalization if they misbehave. Violence is only the convenient excuse for locking people up. People are not locked up because they actually are violent. People are locked up for having behaved in ways that are deemed unacceptable. The mental health system constitutes a system of rewards and punishments used in order to get these errant individuals back into the conformingly acceptable fold.

Alienated dehumanized second class citizens do not have the same rights as full citizens because we have made laws bypassing constitutional protections with regard to people who fit that category. An obvious example of this demotion of rights can be seen in the case of the military service veteran who must petition the court for the right to own a gun due to a history of mental health treatment. Although our laws may have been envisioned as serving all citizens equally the reality is anything but equal treatment. This circumstance inevitably makes the struggle for equality under the law crucial in the redemption of people damned by professional opinion.

The government now states that it wants universal background checks on all people purchasing firearms. The problems this action is creating are twofold. The names of all people outlawed from gun ownership are to be listed in a federal database that contains the informational ruse used for depriving them of their second amendment citizenship rights. This breach of confidentiality is going to end up harming people in court cases. This also creates a situation where people with histories of one sort or another are literally being targeted for profiling by law enforcement.

Given all the talk about erasing “stigma”, here is another example of reinforcing negative stereotypes and, thereby, creating “stigma”. This is also a matter of prejudice, discrimination, and what both of those movements of mind and body entail, a denial of civil rights. Any denial of civil rights means a struggle to regain civil rights for the people who have had their rights denied. People who have been through the mental health system, and come out on the other side, know this intimately.  Their struggle for equality under the law, far from being over, is far from ending.

2 Responses

  1. Due to our mentla illnesses, our rights are being taken away. The law passed concerning no mental person to get gun permits. So if you are ill mentally and live where your safety requires a gun be carries like large cities, Guess you loose the right to defend your life and person. Guess the criminal gains the legal right to kill harm mame abuse etc you just because you are mental and cant be allowed to carry fire arms for protection. Hope a cop is near by. LOL . With this right alone being taken from us, we all know it is just the beginning to a greater loss of our rights. I wish I was paraniod. LOL. But History is repeating itself only in a different country. Now it’s here in the USA not Germany years ago. Socialism, then communism. All the unfair, undesirable persons being aillianated, exterminated, and inilated. It may be time to find out what your rights are as of right now 2013 january. You may be surprized.
    I personally dont carry or want to carry a gun. But the right to be able to should the need arise this is important to me as a mentally ill person. I hate to see honest people struggling with an illness that clearly marks them as unsavory in our society lose the right to bare arms in a world so full of crime and degridation. It puts us at great risk and danger as a whole.This makes me very disappointed with our national lawmakers and governing people. SHame on them for removing our civil right to bare arms!

    • A little clarification might be called for at this time. Yes, the law represents an attack on our civil liberties. Yes, the law could deprive some people of their right to defend themselves from violence or the threat of violence. Yes, the law would disarm people who are more innocent than guilty. No, you can’t get on this list by merely having been given a “mental illness” label. It takes a court order to get on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) list. This law may not apply to many people who think it applies to them. According to the law it affects people who have “been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution.” The problem is that there are many lack of due process issues attached to the civil commitment process. We’re not talking about jury trials, we’re talking about hearings before a magistrate, and often without adequate legal representation. As they are civil cases, the reasonable doubt requirement doesn’t apply. The primary evidence is expert opinion, and the opinions of experts can be as mistaken as the opinions of anybody else. When it comes to predicting violence, even the experts draw a blank. As I pointed out in the post above, the perpetrators of recent mass violence are not, and wouldn’t have been, in the database. This database is merely an excuse to harass and hassle innocent citizens. Through this database, people who have known forced mental health treatment are made the scapegoats for this countries violence. They are not guilty of violence because they have been victims of state sanctioned violence; they are innocent of violence. The violence was committed by specific individuals, and not an abstract category of humanity. We should be working on the causes of violence, blaming violence on “mental illness” is nothing but a ruse. People kill people, and kooks are no more likely to kill people than non-kooks, in fact, according to the evidence, they are less likely to kill people.

Leave a Reply to sharon helms Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: