Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 9:10 AM ET, 01/14/2011

The real issue in Arizona: Schizophrenia (Part 1)

By Jennifer Rubin

Missing from much of the wall-to-wall coverage of the horrific Arizona shooting have been credible facts regarding schizophrenia. Bizarrely, the national debate has raged on almost everything but the issue of schizophrenia. In fact, had reporters and pundits alike had some expert information on the subject before debating whether a political graphic or, more generally, the "political atmosphere" set off accused shooter Jared Loughner, the entire debate might have been short-circuited. And instead of a raucous argument over phenomena unrelated to the mass murder, we then might have had a serious discussion about mental health.

On the off chance that it's not too late to introduce actual science into the punditry, I spent several hours yesterday talking to some experienced mental health professionals.

On the most basic question as to whether political discourse, even utterly inappropriate rhetoric, affects schizophrenia, the answer is virtually certain: no. Dr. Stephen Marder, one of the country's premier experts on schizophrenia and the Director of the Section on Psychosis at the UCLA Neuropsychiatric Institute, explained in a telephone interview: "Schizophrenia is an illness that arises during brain development." And, yes, he continued, "there is a strong genetic element." For example, with identical twins, if one twin is a schizophrenic, there is a 50 percent chance the other twin will be. "That tells us that genetics isn't everything," Marder said. Among the other factors that may contribute to the abnormal brain development, "we do know that some infections of the mother" may be one, he said.

That assessment does not seem to be seriously in dispute in the mental health field. Charles Currie, a former administrator of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), confirmed in a separate interview: "This is about fetal brain development. It is biologically based." He pointed out that in addition to being a danger to others, schizophrenics are at risk of being the victims of crimes, since they are often are unaware of, or have a distorted impression of, their surroundings.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal this week, E. Fuller Torrey, the founder of the Treatment Advocacy Center, echoed these findings:

Mr. Loughner's delusions fixated on Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, one of 12 seriously injured in the shooting. Some have speculated on the possible relationship of our acrimonious political climate to the incident. It is, however, unlikely that there is any such relationship, since similar tragedies occur in politically harmonious times as well

The motivation for such killings is usually based on psychotic thinking, not political thinking. Dennis Sweeney killed Allard Lowenstein [Sweeny's mentor in the civil rights movement] because he believed that Lowenstein had implanted a transmitter in his teeth that was sending messages to him. Russell Weston stormed the Capitol [in 1998, killing two] because he believed the government had hidden a machine there that could reverse time.

If we looked at a group of schizophrenics and a group of healthy people, would their brain scans look different? There is variation among individuals, but yes, Marder confirmed, a trained professional could looks at the two sets and see a difference.

Is the patient's immediate life experience -- parenting, child abuse, etc. -- a contributing factor in the illness? Marder said, "maybe a small one." But again, he emphasized: "The most risk is in fetal development." There is some evidence, he said, that child abuse may be an influence. (One can surmise that this is because abuse can result in brain trauma which may aggravate or heighten schizophrenia.) Currie also noted that the use of recreational drugs does make schizophrenics much more likely to become violent. (And media reports have disclosed that Loughner was a frequent marijuana user.)

Do external factors, such as violent media or politics, contribute to schizophrenia? There is powerful evidence that there is no connection. Marder explains: "The prevalence of schizophrenia is pretty uniform" across countries. In other words, the percentage of schizophrenics in the U.S. is no greater than that in Australia or Iceland.

Although the percentage of schizophrenics who commit violent crimes is small, their violence tends to be more "bizarre, unpredictable and with a focus often on celebrities," according to Marder. That is because of the nature of the disease. Schizophrenics are sometimes plagued by "self-referential thinking," which converts ordinary events or experiences into episodes with personalized, "special meaning." For a schizophrenic, the TV is not merely on. The TV is speaking to him. This makes the illness incredibly difficult for "tormented" family members who are trying to help the loved one, only to see interactions converted into diabolical threats and dangers in the patient's mind.

In that regard, an interaction with a politician or celebrity can set a schizophrenic on "a mission." Marder declined to speak on the Loughner case specifically. When I gave a hypothetical, "Would an interaction with a famous figure who gives the schizophrenic a disappointing response be a trigger for violence?" He answered without hesitation, "yes." We do know, as The Post reported:

[Bryce] Tierney, described as "an old and close friend with whom he had gone to high school and college" in the Mother Jones report, said that Loughner had repeatedly called Giffords a "fake," and that his hatred of Giffords intensified after he attended a campaign event where he posed a question to the congresswoman. According to Tierney, Loughner's question was, "What is government if words have no meaning?"

"He said, 'Can you believe it, they wouldn't answer my question,' and I told him, 'Dude, no one's going to answer that,'" Tierney recalls. "Ever since that, he thought she was fake, he had something against her."

That certainly seems like a schizophrenic's potential motivation for a horrid crime.

Schizophrenics also suffer from anosognosia, the medical term for the inability to have insight into one's own mental illness. It is not simply that schizophrenics are being difficult or are in denial when they refuse treatment; they actually don't see that they are sick. For this reason, many resist treatment or imagine that those trying to help them are actually conspiring to harm them. This puts an enormous burden on family, teachers and administrators to spot the illness and get treatment for the schizophrenic.

I'll come back to the subject in a second post today, looking at how capable lay people are in recognizing the illness, what changes in the mental health system, if any, are needed and whether schizophrenics, once treated, can function normally without endangering themselves or others.

By Jennifer Rubin  | January 14, 2011; 9:10 AM ET
Categories:  Arizona shooting  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Mitch Daniels's error
Next: Cut defense, ask questions later

Comments

It is interesting that Rubin who has protested that liberals have jumped in with unsupported claims seems to have diagnosed that Loughner is a schizophrenic.

The FBI reports that about 10% of mass killers are insane.

Posted by: lensch | January 14, 2011 9:23 AM | Report abuse

"I'll come back to the subject in a second post today, looking at how capable lay people are in recognizing the illness, what changes in the mental health system, if any, are needed and whether schizophrenics, once treated, can function normally without endangering themselves or others."

Before you do,I beg you,read Mr. Early's book.
Crazy : a father's search through America's mental health madness / Pete Earley.

Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 9:30 AM | Report abuse

I would also beg you to challenge these supposed experts' opinions in an environment considerably LESS panicked than the one you are in now. Challenge biology-based assessments of mental health. Torrey in particular is into forced drugging.

This is not a road we want to go down.

Posted by: sugarstreet | January 14, 2011 9:58 AM | Report abuse

Oh, and the topic of schizophrenia is most certainly being talked about. Torrey is in slate and salon and now the Post. So I'm not sure where you're getting that no one is saying schizo is not being discussed. It is. In a one-sided manner, sure. But it's being discussed.

Posted by: sugarstreet | January 14, 2011 10:01 AM | Report abuse

Oh, and the topic of schizophrenia is most certainly being talked about. Torrey is in slate and salon and now the Post. So I'm not sure where you're getting that no one is saying schizo is not being discussed. It is. In a one-sided manner, sure. But it's being discussed.

Posted by: sugarstreet | January 14, 2011 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Schizophrenia reaches its full clinical spectrum in males between 18 and 25. This guy has a classic trajectory. It is sad. The Left should be ashamed of itself in this right wing blame game.

Posted by: MartinChuzzlewit | January 14, 2011 10:09 AM | Report abuse

"The FBI reports that about 10% of mass killers are insane"

Insane is a legal term related to the Mcnaughton Ruling,which deals in terms of knowledge of right and wrong. The weakness of the ruling is that it doesn't account for subjectivity. "I know that you believe this is right/wrong,but I believe something different,and just because you have the power of the State on your side,that doesn't make you "Right". Thus,Mcnaughton has little clinical,or philosophical significance.
The correct framing of this question should be, did the perpetrator of a crime have "Free Will". That's a tougher issue,because even if I know the difference between right and wrong,if I have no free will,how can I be responsible?
We can say that everyone has free will,but that doesn't fit in with reality. People aren't equal in terms of intelligence,looks,physical/athlectic ability,family history etc etc,so who says we all have the same amount of free will?
So my question is,(if free will actually exists,and is not just an opinion that exists for society's convenience?A LEGAL FICTION)did Loughnor have free will?

Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 10:12 AM | Report abuse

There is no way we can answer that Caruth. The only way to know is to sit down and have a conversation with the guy. You'll have to ascertain that in the hours, days and weeks leading up to the murder were there any big decisions he had to weigh. Talk that through with him, and maybe that way your question could be answered.

Posted by: sugarstreet | January 14, 2011 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Schizophrenia reaches its full clinical spectrum in males between 18 and 25. This guy has a classic trajectory. It is sad. The Left should be ashamed of itself in this right wing blame game.

Posted by: MartinChuzzlewit

Correct Martin,but also it is not a static condition,it is degenerative,so it gets worse without treatment. If Loughnor had P/S,he had little/no free will,and no ability to take care of it himself. And the system can't begin to help him unless he actually hurt himself or hurt others. Catch22. Well,I guess it's time to start treatment.

Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 10:23 AM | Report abuse

Wow, did you cherry-pick your facts. Schizophrenics are highly susceptible to outside influences, which become twisted in the mind of the ill person. Now Jennifer, are you and your ilk willing to spend much more money on the diagnosis and treatment of the mentally ill?

Posted by: jckdoors | January 14, 2011 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Schizophrenia reaches its full clinical spectrum in males between 18 and 25. This guy has a classic trajectory. It is sad. The Left should be ashamed of itself in this right wing blame game.

Posted by: MartinChuzzlewit

Correct Martin,but also it is not a static condition,it is degenerative,so it gets worse without treatment. If Loughnor had P/S,he had little/no free will,and no ability to take care of it himself. And the system can't begin to help him unless he actually hurt himself or hurt others. Catch22. Well,I guess it's time to start treatment.

Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 10:27 AM | Report abuse

There is no way we can answer that Caruth.
Posted by: sugarstreet

If he has full blown,untreated P/S,he won't have enough free will remaining to be held responsible in any "rational" legal system. However,I'm not implying that our legal system is rational,anymore than our mental health system is rational.

Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Thank you so much for this, Jen. I have been waiting for this discussion in regards to this particular case, but also as a general social commentary. We who have a schizophrenic family member recognize the symptoms discussed and agonize at our inability under the current legal structure to help the schizophrenic. As your post says, the paranoid will only become suspicious and resentful at the family's suggestion that intervention is needed. The law, which on paper seems willing to help, is in practice willing to pass on the problem. A sincere deficiency, legitimately within the purview of government, has been brought to light by the Giffords shooting. I hope we can settle into a serious review of schizophrenia (and bipolar disorder) so that these tormented people can get help, and so that the rest of us can be a little safer.

Posted by: kafbst | January 14, 2011 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Wow - and you completely forgot the FACT that persons who abuse drugs and alcohol are more likely to commit violent crime than persons with schizophrenia who do not use recreational drugs or alcohol.

Posted by: ChrisaHickey | January 14, 2011 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Thank you so much for this, Jen. I have been waiting for this discussion in regards to this particular case, but also as a general social commentary. We who have a schizophrenic family member recognize the symptoms discussed and agonize at our inability under the current legal structure to help the schizophrenic. As your post says, the paranoid will only become suspicious and resentful at the family's suggestion that intervention is needed. The law, which on paper seems willing to help, is in practice willing to pass on the problem. A sincere deficiency, legitimately within the purview of government, has been brought to light by the Giffords shooting. I hope we can settle into a serious review of schizophrenia (and bipolar disorder) so that these tormented people can get help, and so that the rest of us can be a little safer.

Posted by: kafbst | January 14, 2011 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Wow - and you completely forgot the FACT that ANY person who abuses drugs and alcohol are more likely to commit violent crime than persons with schizophrenia who do not use recreational drugs or alcohol.

Posted by: ChrisaHickey | January 14, 2011 10:46 AM | Report abuse

“Missing from much of the wall-to-wall coverage of the horrific Arizona shooting have been credible facts regarding” whether the alleged gunman even has schizophrenia.

There are those in the media who are speculating that he does, based on their interviews with “experienced health professionals.” But, as of yesterday, Ms. Loughner had yet to be directly diagnosed by any of these “experienced health professionals.” So it’s all an educated guess at best and utter speculation at worst.

So why is the supposedly responsible fact-based Ms. Rubin even bringing this hearsay subject up in connection with last Saturday’s shootings?

Disclosure: I had a family member with schizophrenia, now deceased.

Posted by: MsJS | January 14, 2011 10:48 AM | Report abuse

kafbst

I have a question kafbst,does your family member have what is called drug resistant schizophrenia? If so,make them use clozapine,it has risks,and side effects,but it is a lifesaver.

Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 10:48 AM | Report abuse

The blame lies mostly with the parents, no matter what the ultimate diagnosis.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 14, 2011 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Why is that, 54465446?

Posted by: MsJS | January 14, 2011 10:55 AM | Report abuse

I am looking forward to Part II, and maybe other parts of this discussion. Its high time that the laws regulating emergency and involuntary psychiatric commitment be revised in all states and jurisdictions to ensure that those with mental illness receive appropriate and timely care, and that safety for the mentally ill and the public is the first consideration. We also need to address access to care at the appropriate level of for the mentally ill. These decisions are currently in the hands of insurance company and state government bean counters, administrative judges and extremist 'civil rights' folk who have pushed the mentally ill out onto the streets. This is outright neglect and shameful. Treatment decisions need to be made by psychiatrists.With modern and humane treatments(yes we can do this!) many mentally ill people will be able to live in the community.However, a significant portion of those with mental illness will need ongoing intensive supports, and some will need 24/7 inpatient treatment and supports.I hope that there is honest discussion of these issues and appropriate action taken by our lawmakers to help bring needed humane treatment to the mentally ill in every community.

Posted by: 10bestfan | January 14, 2011 11:12 AM | Report abuse

The blame lies mostly with the parents, no matter what the ultimate diagnosis.
Posted by: 54465446

Before you blame anybody,read
"Crazy : a father's search through America's mental health madness / Pete Earley"

Let me give you one example,even if the parents are fully engaged in helping,if the doctors prescribe the "wrong" drug,or even the "correct" drug in the wrong dosage,it will be a disaster. The doctors don't know upfront what will work,so it's trial and error,and since the current generation of anti-psychotics contains at least ten different meds,and each med takes several weeks to a month to begin working,and each time the "wrong" drug is prescribed,it's a setback(Are you getting the picture?) Also,psychiatrists,if the patient is in a hospital,try multidrug "coctails",and the problem there is figuring out which drugs in the coctail are helping,which are detremental,and they are battling against each other. So Just can the blame,OK? Please!


Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 11:13 AM | Report abuse

msjs and rc:

In every state you can still make an involuntary committal for a period of observation, usually 72 hours. It's a public health issue, and won't cost you any money. After that, the shrinks are in charge, so that's always a crap shoot. However, properly paperworked (never a given) an involuntary committal should prevent the legal purchase of a gun (also not a given).

In other words there was an existing legal framework to stop this, but given what we have read about the parents the acorn didn't fall far from the tree.

No parent ever wants to admit that their children have a mental illness, let alone a violent one, but because they didn't face the obvious fact, 6 people are dead and one more will be in a couple of years.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 14, 2011 11:46 AM | Report abuse

54465446, this has obviously touched a raw nerve with you. And it would appear that Arizona's involuntary commitment law is one of the country's least restrictive.

The phrase you used that stands out for me is "crap shoot." Although you seem to claim that Mr. Loughner wouldn't have allegedly done what he's been accused of had he been involuntary committed, that assumption is itself something of a crap shoot.

Posted by: MsJS | January 14, 2011 11:59 AM | Report abuse

msjs:

Not a raw nerve, as much as it's an area that I am very familiar with.

There IS a system in place, that SHOULD have been capable of dealing with this. You can never guarantee that any psych will provide the necessary diagnosis. If you want that, create a different system.

However the parents were at ground zero on this, just like in the V Tech massacre. We always want to say that the system is at fault, but every system depends somewhere along the line in one or two people doing what's necessary.

If you look at the mug shot, more importantly the change in his pictures, you can see the Travis Bickle-like progression. All we're missing from the picture is some Jodie Foster obsession that may turn up later if he talks. The parents simply could not have missed all this.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 14, 2011 12:14 PM | Report abuse

54465446, how would the parents know what to look for? How would they know what "the Travis Bickle-like progression" looked like, or whether it was a reasonably good indicator of future violent behavior?

I'm not attempting to absolve Mr. Loughner's parents, or "the system", however you choose to define it. But even if Mr. Loughner had been involuntarily committed for a spell, how would that have prevented the tragedy? According to Time,
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2041448,00.html
Arizona was waaaaay behind in submitting names of its mentally ill residents into the 'no gun ownership' database.

Posted by: MsJS | January 14, 2011 12:29 PM | Report abuse

"...the percentage of schizophrenics in the U.S. is no greater than that in Australia or Iceland." Ah, but in Australia or Iceland a schizophrenic might find it a somewhat harder to get ahold of a gun.

Posted by: metonimo | January 14, 2011 12:30 PM | Report abuse

msjs:

If you can read about the family and see the pictures and still ask how would they know what to look for then we're not having a serious discussion.

As to AZ falling behind, that's exactly the point I made above, that nothing is a given, BUT you HAVE to start somewhere, and that somewhere was the parents.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 14, 2011 12:46 PM | Report abuse

As you wish, 54465446.

I thought I was having a serious discussion. Since you don't, I will cease and leave you to it.

Enjoy your day.

Posted by: MsJS | January 14, 2011 12:52 PM | Report abuse

This debate is about mental health and guns. We won't spend money on the mentally ill. We won't regulate guns any more than they are now.

This is what happens. This is how we as a country ARE exceptional.

Posted by: danw1 | January 14, 2011 1:27 PM | Report abuse

This is what happens. This is how we as a country ARE exceptional.
Posted by: danw1

I think you would appreciate an opinion piece by Conrad Black that I found at NRO. CB is one of the most mature/serious commentators representing the Right.

Conrad Black
January 13, 2011 4:00 A.M.
Tucson and the Failure of the Political Class
"It’s not the rhetoric that’s to blame. The problem is a more serious one"

"But the political class has failed, and abrupt tidal changes of office-holders — 1992, 1994, 2002, 2008, and probably 2010 – aren’t improving standards of public service. If the system isn’t working changing the rhetoric won’t help, any more than dismissing Krugman as a Times columnist would. The rate of violent crime is generally declining. Deranged people need treatment, and the whole country needs better government. It’s conceptually quite simple"
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/257045/tucson-and-failure-political-class-conrad-black

Posted by: rcaruth | January 14, 2011 1:50 PM | Report abuse

msjs:

I'm sorry to offend you, but if you think the parents are blameless, then we just have no basis for common ground. It doesn't make either one of us bad people, but ultimately we can't walk away from our responsibilities toward our children, if there is a danger to others.

Posted by: 54465446 | January 14, 2011 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I'm not offended, 54465446. And I said I wasn't attempting to absolve Mr. Loughner's parents.

I don't have enough facts to know whether and for what they are to be blamed. You disagree. Fair enough.

Enjoy your day.

Posted by: MsJS | January 14, 2011 2:30 PM | Report abuse

Scientific research is our answer

There are many myths about schizophrenia and these myths too often have muddied the waters of knowledge about serious mental illnesses like schizophrenia, manic depression and related psychoses.

I lost a beloved schizophrenic son who killed himself when he was 20. I have looked into the face of schizophrenia and have personally witnessed the ravages of schizophrenia on a human personality.

That's why we so want a cure for this terrible centuries-old disease so that others do not suffer as our precious children have.

But we can only find that cure through dedicated scientific brain research--and the myths divert knowledge of this fact.
This means that we must become more scientific literate and determine to do that scientific research to stop schizophrenia's assault on the brains of our loved ones.

Carefully conducted scientific research, although not always foolproof, is an invaluable gift because it is our best safeguard against human error. Science that is the only weapon that can eradicate the serious mental illness that beset our children.

Thinking people will understand this and demand we use science, not words, to free civilization from the clutches of schizophrenia.

Posted by: juneconwaybeeby | January 14, 2011 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Rubin writes:
"I'll come back to the subject in a second post today, looking at how capable lay people are in recognizing the illness, what changes in the mental health system, if any, are needed..."

I am very interested to see more comments from Rubin on this last point. As a conservative she will be opposed to any kind of improvement to the mental health system because 1) those improvements cost money and increase, rather than reduce, the size of government and 2) its another government handout to those who can't pull their weight. So what to do when she learns there are gross inadequacies in the system? Can't wait to see!

Posted by: rgray | January 14, 2011 2:40 PM | Report abuse

Loughner was 22 and covered by his mother's very generouse public sector medical plan. The plan covered mental illness as it would any other illness. There was not lack of resources, and the promixity to University of Arizona means a massive quantity of qualified doctors to address this situation.

Ms. Giffords is a very attractive woman. Loughner's obsession with her, and his complaints about not having girlfriends might have a connection. However, given that he had pictures of himself taken with a red garter belt, something else might be going on.

Posted by: Cornell1984 | January 14, 2011 6:33 PM | Report abuse

This promises to be a fascinating discussion. The events of the past weekend helped me make a decision I had been on the fence about for a while, so that now I am going to pursue a Master's degree in Forensic Psychology. I have a Doctorate in Political Science, and I was deeply ashamed of the pundits and politicos' stubborn refusal to deal with any of the actual facts of this case.
It was almost immediately clear that there was a mental illness component to this event, yet they continued to run with the "heated political rhetoric" theory.
My other studies tell me that the things we do know about this young man point very clearly to a psychotic break in a kid who should have been treated years ago. There must be some way to head these things off, to isolate those who are clearly dangerous without doing violence to their civil rights. So that's what I'm going to study to try to do.
I look forward to part two.

Posted by: seanmom | January 14, 2011 6:51 PM | Report abuse

The bigotry of the left never ceases to amaze. Here' is a perfect example:
===================
I am very interested to see more comments from Rubin on this last point. As a conservative she will be opposed to any kind of improvement to the mental health system because 1) those improvements cost money and increase, rather than reduce, the size of government and 2) its another government handout to those who can't pull their weight. So what to do when she learns there are gross inadequacies in the system? Can't wait to see!

=============================

Here ya go folks. Let's talk PC for a moment. Political Correctness is aimed at being inoffensive. Liberals wish to avoid giving offense to everyone BUT thier political opponents.

The snide cynicism dripping from rgray's comment should give the author cause for shame. Unfortunately what we learned last week is that liberals HAVE no sense of shame.

That said, let's look at this for a second. It is a comment made by a psychiatrist to Rich Lowry, the Editor of National Review. this is a snippet:

"The state hospital system collapsed as a result of a weird synergy between legal activists and budgeters. The deinstitutionalization experiment proceeded with the belief that liberating the mentally ill would also reduce the cost of their care.

“the politics of deinstitutionalization was generally facilitated by the fact that fiscally `conservative Republicans sought a way to save money… [and] the liberal Democrats sought a way to expand civil rights. The promise of doing good by saving money was irresistible’ (Isaac and Armat, 1990:15). (as quoted in Powers, Rothman, Smith College. Center for the Study of Social and Political Change, “The Least Dangerous Branch? Consequences of Judicial Activism,” 2002)

In the ‘90s I worked at a civil state hospital in Florida that was later closed (G. Pierce Wood.) Within a few years, lawsuits emerged to move a newly developed list of mentally ill persons accumulating in jails – adjudicated incompetent to proceed to stand trial.

Lo and behold … under lawsuit pressure, new state hospital beds were opened – forensic beds – in an amount nearly equal to the civil beds that had been closed. And so Florida policy shifted to require that the mentally ill commit crimes to receive sustained services. The civil side had failed the sickest.

Ironically, the same advocate culture that fomented for “liberating” deinstitutionalization now fomented for re-opening institutional beds. Oops.

I watch the same thing now unfold in Texas. It’s a national problem. The U.S. Congress passed the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act (2004) as a token recognition of this.

But, can we continue the ongoing “devil’s pact” between liberals and conservatives to deprive those with serious mental illness of the services they must have?"

Grow up rgray, your bigotry is childish and counter productive

Posted by: skipsailing28 | January 17, 2011 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company