When I was an approved social worker assessing people under the Mental Health Act, I consoled myself with the thought that if I wrongly prevented someone from killing themself, by admitted them, to hospital they retained the option of killing themself later but after they were dead it was too late for them to change their mind
andrew bolger
--- On Thu, 1/4/10, Larry Arnold <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: Larry Arnold <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Intervening behind closed doors
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Thursday, 1 April, 2010, 11:34
> It's all John Stewart Mill isn't it.
> The right to do something to the extent
> that it is not harming anyone else.
>
> All the same if I were about to walk onto a railway track
> inadvertently I
> would appreciate it if someone yanked me back, even if it
> were a bit
> forceful, if the alternative were being run over by a
> train.
>
> In the real world though everything is not that clear cut,
> and laws have
> little to do with what actually happens concerning mental
> capacity as
> assumptions are made and acted upon (or not) all of the
> time with no
> 'policeman' or 'speed camera' to enforce them, so what is
> more important is
> social practice than the actual written law, which only
> provides a framework
> for custom and practice anyway. (Which is why Tony Blair is
> still a free
> man)
>
> Mental capacity is a convenient fiction for everybody, in
> that we exist in
> four dimensions, and have different opinions regarding what
> we have or have
> not done at various times. For instance one day it may be
> my decision, at
> the time not to go to Paris with my friends. At another
> time later hearing
> what a good time they had, I might regret that I did not
> allow myself to
> more forcefully persuaded to go with them. On the other
> hand, I might have
> allowed myself to be forcefully persuaded to go with them
> on a camping trip
> on a miserable wet weekend, and regret that for ever, so it
> is all unknown
> and often informed by hindsight. Notwithstanding that I
> might not prefer a
> camping trip on a Sunny weekend to a hectic drunken binge
> in Paris where I
> am too hungover to appreciate the sights if you see what I
> mean.
>
> I definitely live sub optimally, and I would appreciate
> more help with it.
> The reason I don't receive it has nothing to do with my
> capacity, estimated
> or otherwise, it is because the help is not there. If that
> help suggested
> however that I do not need forty cameras gathering dust all
> about my living
> room, or that my carrier bag collection should go, then I
> would get all OCD
> uppity about it even if the number of artefacts and there
> disposition in a
> small flat makes life a bit difficult to keep it all clean
> and orderly.
> Having had a fire brigade inspection and being warned about
> any number of
> hazards I was able to state that I was well aware of them
> and even that the
> perceived electrical hazards were not as they might
> perceive because there
> is never overload on any one socket despite the number of
> daisy chained
> power strips demanded by modern computing and technology,
> because they can
> never exceed 13 amps at the original socket without blowing
> a fuse. However
> I given a written warning by the landlord not to use my
> open grate, not that
> I do consider it a risk being more experienced in this
> aboriginal craft than
> modern folk are who think all fire comes from gas.
>
> Larry
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:DISABILITY-
> > [log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Colin REvell
> > Sent: 31 March 2010 23:32
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Intervening behind closed doors
> >
> >
> > Bertha
> >
> > If I had allthe answers to these questions then I
> would be a rich man
> (human rights
> > lawyer/judge LOL ).... All human rights have to be
> proportionate and the
> individuals
> > human rights should be fully protected and safeguarded
> from 'the-state'
> and 'their agencies
> > (public bodies).... If this gentleman choice was not
> to accept any
> support, then do you and
> > others think 'the state' (public bodies) have a duty
> of care to protect
> people from 'self
> > harm/neglect' and force care and support onto the
> individual?
> >
> >
> > Colin Revell
> >
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the
> Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in
> to this web page.
>
________________End of message________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
