Should gun owners now be advised NOT to seek mental health help?

[leadcounsel]

There are definately deterrants to self-reporting problems, when you realise you can become ward of the state, stripped of rights, loss of job, etc.

Good arguments for a crazy person to NOT seek help if he wants to retain his freedoms.

When my mom died it was a devestating loss. We were very close. I had a good job and was entitled to 5 free sessions with a counselor, who happened to be a pyschologist or pychiatrist. I really didn't have significant issues, but wanted to learn good stress and coping skills. I felt that was to maintain good mental health balance and confidentiality. I did my 5 sessions and learned some good stress and coping skills.

To get into the Army, some recruiter made me jump through serious hoops to PROOVE that I was okay. I had to get a note from the Doctor, who wanted to have me pay for an hour session at $200 to sit down with me before he'd sign off on anything. It was a real hassle for me. I learned then that it was not beneficial to me to go to the counselor.

I wouldn't make that mistake again.

Mental healt professionals are conflicted between having their patients good health in mind, but also society's safety.

They can breach confidentiality under certain circumstances too.

And it is likely that if you end up on a list and it is later determined you are 'unfit' by some arbitrary decision maker, you could lose rights.

Similar thing happened back when people accused of domestic violence pled guilty to misdemeanors and light penalties, only to later have Lautenberg hit them retroactively and unfairly.

 

[rdhood]

In the current legislative climate in which it is likely that more mental health checks will be placed on the exercise of our rights, are we now in a situation in which gun owners should be advised to not seek mental health counseling, lest they inadvertently lose their 2nd Amendment rights under future legislation?

I strongly suspect that this (mental health) and ammo will become the next line of attack in the coming gun control legislation. If you can't outlaw the gun, making ammo nearly impossible to purchase and making people unfit to purchase is the next best thing.

 

[Skribs]

I think the OP is right, but people already do that. I know that I see the world differently than everyone else, but I'm a functioning member of society. I don't plan on seeking mental health, because while there is a slight chance I might be "better", there's also the chance of repercussions associated with being legitimately crazy.

 

[22-rimfire]

Social sciences are very ... well social, and subject to a great deal of interpretation. For my part, unless I was really having major issues, I would avoid any kind of psychological counseling.

I went through marriage counseling years ago and I can tell you that it was a total waste of time beyond the initial two visits. Basically they do provide you a path to evaluate yourself if you're honest. That is a good thing. But implementing some of the "suggestions" was beyond my willingness to change.

Years ago I had some meds perscribed to me for anxiety due to job stress. I was young. I took two pills because the doctor told me to and I was obedient. The funny thing was the perscription was for unlimited refills for as long as I wanted. Crazy. Unlimited supply of barbituates for pennies.

I live in the South which is the most medicated region of the US. I won't even take pain pills that are perscribed after surgery unless I am in debillatating pain.

 

[freyasman]

Ragnar, as a guy getting ready to retire after 20yrs in the Army, I agree EMPHATICALLY with what you said

 

[22-rimfire]

Ragnar, great post on reality. The Army is going to do what is best for the Army, just like the government is going to do what is best for the govenment. What is the purpose of government? Control and enacting and enforcing laws for the "common good" which in reality is often for the good of those in power. Beware!

The problem is individual rights and privacy and the "rights" of the community or society. Anti gun pundits are already insisting that the military provide psychological information to NICS. The individual has no say on what is placed in their file or on their record.

Mental health issues are very important, but politicans need to tread very carefully. The problem is too much power is given to too few people who can impact the rest of your life. Do you think the data collected on patients in the future via ObamaCare is going to be private?

 

[The Red Hot Rider]

"Psychologist can and will twist what is said every which way that you could imagine."

"I could find some reason to diagnose anyone, and i do mean anyone, with some type of mental health disorder."

Dr Red Hot, I think you've just proved Walkers' point, and @ the same time made your entire profession look like a gaggle of witch doctors. If everyone has a mental health disorder, then surely they're not disorders & you're robbing your patients blind @ $100/hr & should be in prison for a flim-flam job.

Trent, here, suffered depression to the point that he realized he should seek professional help, and chose not to do so under EXISTING legislation. What do you say to him, Doc? If you have folks actively avoiding you now, how do you think you'll fare under tighter mental regulations for RKBA?

Well, first of all, thank you, backbencher for your kind, high road words. Nice of you to tell another high roader and rkba supporter they should be in jail and are a flim flam artist and that their profession was on par with that of witch doctor. My initial reaction was to not waste mytime time in replying to your vitriole, but someone else did ask me, in a high road way, to elaborate.

I was simply agreeing with the notion that denying gun rights based on mental health disorders is a very slippery slope. A person with depression, a learning disorder, or obsessive compulsive disorder all have mental health diagnoses. However, they are a very different animal than someone who is actively psychotic or has antisocial personality disorder. However, painting with the broad brush of "mental health disorder", they would all be denied firearms. In my opinion, that is not good.

Next, the fact is indeed that anyone could be diagnosed with some kind of mental disorder of some kind. If you had carefully read my post, you would notice that i said "can" not "will be" or "should be". A practitioner worth his salt would think about the ramifications of haphazardly applying diagnoses to people.

Granted, there are some practitioners who do not apply enough wisdom in their decisions, but tbat does not include all of us. By putting me into the same box as "witch doctors", you are pigeonholing me just like the rkba opponents do when they call all of us on this forum "gun nuts".

All of that being said, i am a psychologist. I am a strong supporter of 2a just as it is written:" "...shall not be infringed". I humbly suggest that before you attack a person or their profession again that you make sure you understand their post and their position on a topic

 

[steveracer]

I can tell you this: I know many individuals in uniform who have avoided treatment for PTSD to make sure they can redeploy and keep their jobs.

 

[22-rimfire]

Granted, there are some practitioners who do not apply enough wisdom in their decisions, but tbat does not include all of us. By putting me into the same box as "witch doctors", you are pigeonholing me just like the rkba opponents do when they call all of us on this forum "gun nuts".

Wisdom? Who's wisdom? How can you expect wisdom from a 25 year old PhD (psychology) when mostly what they know was taught in college by mostly very liberal professors. The same applies to MS level pschologists +1. It is a very slippery slope in terms of diagnoses of mental disorders other than in extreme disorder cases relative to firearm ownership "qualification".

Is a disorder controlled by meds? Does that make ownership of guns okay? Or is the disorder the disqualifier? I think current law already deals with this and reporting may be the weak link.

 

[9mmforMe]

Ok, let's clear the air some. There is no doubt that some
psychiatrists/pyschologists are not up to par with their clinical and experiential skills, but there are many who are bright, competent, compassionate people who have helped many from the walking well to the most grossly psychotic. There most certainly is abuse in the field to include the military. Also, there most certainly are conservative MH proferssionals as well. If you feel the need to see someone you have to investigate, as any consumer would, your choice and if that person is not right for you...most people can tell in one visit...then you find another who is more in alignment with your needs...and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to determine this. Trust your gut. Typically make sure they are skilled in CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) and go from there. To answer a question from above...yes we can break confidentiality...but we must be compelled legally...client must either be a threat to themselves or others (see Tarasoff and duty to warn)
I'm very sorry for the extremely poor interactions some of you had with some of those who share my field, but plug on and get the help you need when you need it..we are not all bad eggs.

FWIW: (I am a Master's level prepared therapist who graduated with a 3.8 in 2000 from George Mason University, I am 42 years old now and was working in MH long before I got my Masters. I graduated cum laude with a BA in psych from GMU as well and still had quite a few years in the field before that endeavor. I have worked at suicide hotlines, residential living for chronically mentally ill, out patient facilities for co- occurring disorders (that's both mental illness and substance abuse issues) and as a behavioral specialist for developmentally disabled adults and children...the list goes on but I won't bore you much more. Finally, I would humbly consider myself to have some wisdom.

 

[Motega]

the short answer is if you need help get it, and if you can work it out on your own don't just see a shrink because insurance will pay for it. I live in a state where any visit - marriage counseling, insomnia, etc. will most likely make you forever ineligible.

 

[Cosmoline]

Should gun owners now be advised NOT to seek mental health help?

If you're sane enough to ask the question, the answer is DO NOT TALK. Keep your lips together. If you're dreaming of killing kids or hearing aliens in your head telling you to murder, then it's extremely unlikely you'll even ask the question.

Want stress relief? Take up meditation. That's extra great because you remain SILENT throughout. Silence is golden. Silence is never evidence.

The problem is the mental health community doesn't want to do much with people like him UNTIL something happens. IMHO the system for handling mentally ill folks is broken and a pro-active approach is needed. The potential for violence should set off alarms but I've seen differently.

That's the problem in a nutshell. Deinstitutionalization served a valid purpose, but it let loose some people who really SHOULD have stayed in the bad old asylums. We have no place for them now other than prisons after they've done something. And the prisons are ill-equipped for them, too. I think serious reform and a revival of protective detention for the violent mentally ill is in order. Not for the merely depressed or suicidal, but for those who've aliens giving them instructions.

 

[backbencher]

Dr Red Hot, my intent was not to pigeonhole you or denigrate you or your profession - I have used mental health services in the past, and have recommended your colleagues to my soldiers. However, your statement that you could diagnose everyone you meet w/ a mental disorder does imply that your profession has no clear idea of what mental illness is - if everyone is abnormal, then clearly abnormal IS normal. Hence my witch doctor comment.

I don't think you're a flim-flam job, but if your diagnoses are as purely subjective as you posit, you're not selling folks on the help you offer. You're hearing from a number of soldiers here who have actively avoided your help in the past - telling them you can diagnose even healthy people w/ mental disorders is not going to get those folks to come see you.

 

[22-rimfire]

9mm, you can certainly help people if they are willing to be helped. My comments were more rhetorical in nature by the way rather than pointed toward you or Red Hot personally.

 

[barnbwt]

Just FYI...
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/18/fear-being-committed-may-have-caused-connecticut-madman-to-snap/

“From what I've been told, [shooter] was aware of her [mother's] petitioning the court for conservatorship and (her) plans to have him committed"

A friend of mine had an extremely trying and emotionally draining experience just getting their senile parents to move to a nursing/assisted living home; it must have been terrifying to deal with a hormonal young male in such a scenario alone.

Why should every gun owner have a safe? I live in a RV, & keep a loaded shotgun above the dash, & the AR & Beretta in back. What do I want a safe for?

Well, if a resident of your RV is emotionally unstable or mentally impaired, it would be the height of foolishness to grant them unfettered access to firearms (and illegal if they are restricted persons). Moreover, a safe can grant (some) protection from theft in the event you ever decide to leave said RV unattended for more than five minutes. They also keep firearms out of view of the odd (and impulsive) passer-by. I'm not sure if your particular RV could fit a safe, but small pistol-sized lock boxes are available for affixing beneath car seats. There may be low profile long gun safes as well that could be mounted at the back of a closet or cupboard, as well.

TCB

 

[guitarguy314]

I worry when people talk about new mental health regulations. I worry about witch hunts in our classrooms. I myself was a quiet loner in high school. I was bullied because of a disability. I played violent video games.

I'm exactly the like these mass shooters. But I am not a murderer. I have committed no crime. I worry about quiet kids like me getting swept up and irreparably damaged through the process.

There are people who are in danger of going over the edge. These people have a sickness through no fault of their own. The asylums of the past are no more, but would a modern institution or modern medicine be much better?

Just some thoughts guys.

Also, barnbwt: No, you should not leave firearms within easy access of disturbed/mentally individuals, but consider that this boy lived in the house, and was smart/together enough to commit a crime like this. Do you think that he wouldn't have known a safe combination or where a key was kept?

 

[The Red Hot Rider]

Dr Red Hot, my intent was not to pigeonhole you or denigrate you or your profession - I have used mental health services in the past, and have recommended your colleagues to my soldiers. However, your statement that you could diagnose everyone you meet w/ a mental disorder does imply that your profession has no clear idea of what mental illness is - if everyone is abnormal, then clearly abnormal IS normal. Hence my witch doctor comment.

I don't think you're a flim-flam job, but if your diagnoses are as purely subjective as you posit, you're not selling folks on the help you offer. You're hearing from a number of soldiers here who have actively avoided your help in the past - telling them you can diagnose even healthy people w/ mental disorders is not going to get those folks to come see you.

My friend, you are totally missing the point i am trying to make. I am simply saying there is no "normal". Everyone has neuroses at the very least. I am saying that to start precluding gun rights based on the mere presence of any mental health problem at all would preclude anyone from owning a firearm. It is more a question of quality than quantity. If anyone's private life, including mine, were scrutinized clozely enough, then a mental health practitioner could find SOMETHING to diagnose. It could be something as benign as anxiety related disorder NOS (not otherwise specified), which is a way of saying "this guy has some anxiety problems, but nothing major". But, he still technically has a mental health disorder. This poor guy would then be unable to buy a gun if the criteria were simply whether he had a mental health disorder or not.

Let's look at it this way. What if a law were passed that said anyone who has ever committed a crime cannot own a gun? Well, we would all be up the proverbial creek because we have all broken the law at some point...even getting a simple traffic ticket or getting a loitering citation for hanging out in in a parking lot at 18the means you have broken the law. My point is that those lawbreakers are not like serial murderers or rapists or drug czars and should not be treated the same, but laws that prohibit based solely on whether you have broken the law would treat them exactly the same...which is a bad thing. See what i mean now? I am not saying everyone is crazy and should be billed $100/hr to see me (even though it might be tempting...lol). I am saying this kind of thing is verryyyy slippery because anti rkba lawmakers could use it very easily to exclude practically anyone from their 2a rights. I hope this clarifies. I do truly sympathize with our servicemen and women who suffer from mental health issues, and i think that kind of legislation would indeed alienate them from their 2a rights because it would misused and overly applied. I think you and are really on the same side but havent a way to mutually say it yet.

Sorry for typos and such...i am typing on a smart phone and i gots big ole thumbs.

 

[Certaindeaf]

It's all fuzzy and open to interpretation. If you don't understand that, yer crazy. lolz

 

[backbencher]

barnbwt, fortunately, I don't have a mentally unstable person in my RV - got rid of the fiancee 6 months ago : ) A friend of mind had a son w/ severe mental issues - decided to keep the guns out - and was killed by the son - 3 shots to the back of the head w/ a .22" LR rifle, from what I understand. The son is now in a Texas institution, and my friend is in the Veteran's cemetery just south of Ft Hood. In such a case, yes, a safe would be advisable.

I'm parked @ Wal-Mart right now, & about to go in, & I have every expectation my guns will be here when I get back - along w/ the laptop I'm typing this on. The RV is my safe - just like the car is the safe for millions of Americans who carry a gun in their car. If someone really wants to get my guns, they'll just steal the whole van & find the guns later.

Dr Red Hot, I think we're entirely on the same page working towards the center from different ends. My apologies for the confusion.