Spoken like someone who has never been in one. They’re completely different places. It’s incredibly difficult to hold someone more than a day or two in an institutionalized setting. Even SCOTUS has ruled it violates your rights (Olmstead 1999). You pretty much get to a judge within a few days of an involuntary commitment (assuming it’s the weekend, less if it isn’t) and then again within a week or two. Long term holds are insanely rare.
I’ve been in them only to visit, but I’ve heard descriptions from staff (friends) and patients (former clients of mine) and it’s nothing like the 70s. The industry went through massive reforms, partially in response to One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, but insiders had been pushing since even before that in some cases.
Spoken like someone who assumes every institution is held to these standards. The quality and treatment varies WILDLY in the US across different states, or even different counties. Some are arguably borderline torture, with patients having no autonomy nor rights.
Regardless of the quality of an individual facility, it’s a myth that people are held long term. Also, the quality of the worst facilities today are still a far cry from the 70s. There’s a large amount of legal protections around people being involuntary held. Nothing is comparable to legitimate torture.
To be clear, you can ONLY be held if you continue to be a threat to yourself or others. The only rights you can lose are those that involve stopping damage, violence, suicide, homicide, etc. and the more extreme the case, the more extreme the intervention. I’m not going to lie and say that people who are physically violent and attempt to harm staff don’t get chemically sedated.
It is absolutely not a myth, long term involuntary holds do continue to this day. In my state, you get a 72 hour hold to determine if you’re a danger to yourself or others, followed by up to 3 month holds which can be repeated indefinitely. I can quote exact laws if that will help you grasp what I’m saying. I just got done with clinicals in a psychiatric hospital, I can assure you what you’re saying is categorically incorrect.
Sure, I’d love to see a quote from a state law where the 90 day hold is authorized after 72 hours. Never heard of such a model in any state I’ve lived in
However, the psychologist providing treatment can recommend further care. If they think you are gravely disabled or are a threat to yourself or others, they can certify you for more treatment. If you do not agree to this treatment, it will trigger a court process under CRS 27-65-107. If you get certified for more care, it can last up to 3 months.
Pretty wild, never seen a state where they do 90 days right out of the gate. Still, in reviewing Colorado’s own data, it seems like it’s rarely invoked (roughly 3-4K times per year). Definitely not a good model for involuntary commitments, but it also sounds like the holds rarely extend for the full 90 days, although I don’t see data on that
I’ve actually met psychiatrists who work in these facilities and medications are notoriously difficult to balance. I’m sorry that you felt condescended to, but considering the insanely high legal threshold for commitment and the fact that you were approved for an entire week reflects how extreme your situation probably was.
This is condescending. Instead of listening to the lived experience that the OP gave you, you’re telling them that they must have been really sick to have to stay for a week.
Going from a 72-hour hold to a 7-day hold is relatively easy, especially in the south where I worked as a crisis responder. All you need is for a doc to recommend the additional days. Judges typically will grant the extension to 7 days with minimal input from hospital staff. Now, 14- and 21-day holds, a judge is usually going to want more. But 7? That was almost always a given if the first 72-hour went through.
Anyway, none of that really matters beyond the technical. What matters is not saying “I’m sorry you felt that way, but you probably deserved it.”
Or, hear me out, I’ve seen way more than a sample size of 1 and have heard a bunch of people use that commenter’s complaint. Every one of them was held with good reason. I also don’t support fearmongering about vital treatment that saves lives, so it needed to be said.
That damage to society by people bashing mental health treatment is far greater than the damage to one person’s ego by me explaining that treatment doesn’t happen unless it’s necessary.
Spoken like someone who has never been in one. They’re completely different places. It’s incredibly difficult to hold someone more than a day or two in an institutionalized setting. Even SCOTUS has ruled it violates your rights (Olmstead 1999). You pretty much get to a judge within a few days of an involuntary commitment (assuming it’s the weekend, less if it isn’t) and then again within a week or two. Long term holds are insanely rare.
I’ve been in them only to visit, but I’ve heard descriptions from staff (friends) and patients (former clients of mine) and it’s nothing like the 70s. The industry went through massive reforms, partially in response to One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, but insiders had been pushing since even before that in some cases.
Spoken like someone who assumes every institution is held to these standards. The quality and treatment varies WILDLY in the US across different states, or even different counties. Some are arguably borderline torture, with patients having no autonomy nor rights.
Regardless of the quality of an individual facility, it’s a myth that people are held long term. Also, the quality of the worst facilities today are still a far cry from the 70s. There’s a large amount of legal protections around people being involuntary held. Nothing is comparable to legitimate torture.
To be clear, you can ONLY be held if you continue to be a threat to yourself or others. The only rights you can lose are those that involve stopping damage, violence, suicide, homicide, etc. and the more extreme the case, the more extreme the intervention. I’m not going to lie and say that people who are physically violent and attempt to harm staff don’t get chemically sedated.
It is absolutely not a myth, long term involuntary holds do continue to this day. In my state, you get a 72 hour hold to determine if you’re a danger to yourself or others, followed by up to 3 month holds which can be repeated indefinitely. I can quote exact laws if that will help you grasp what I’m saying. I just got done with clinicals in a psychiatric hospital, I can assure you what you’re saying is categorically incorrect.
Sure, I’d love to see a quote from a state law where the 90 day hold is authorized after 72 hours. Never heard of such a model in any state I’ve lived in
Here’s a summary with the referenced law.
Pretty wild, never seen a state where they do 90 days right out of the gate. Still, in reviewing Colorado’s own data, it seems like it’s rarely invoked (roughly 3-4K times per year). Definitely not a good model for involuntary commitments, but it also sounds like the holds rarely extend for the full 90 days, although I don’t see data on that
deleted by creator
I’ve actually met psychiatrists who work in these facilities and medications are notoriously difficult to balance. I’m sorry that you felt condescended to, but considering the insanely high legal threshold for commitment and the fact that you were approved for an entire week reflects how extreme your situation probably was.
This is condescending. Instead of listening to the lived experience that the OP gave you, you’re telling them that they must have been really sick to have to stay for a week.
Going from a 72-hour hold to a 7-day hold is relatively easy, especially in the south where I worked as a crisis responder. All you need is for a doc to recommend the additional days. Judges typically will grant the extension to 7 days with minimal input from hospital staff. Now, 14- and 21-day holds, a judge is usually going to want more. But 7? That was almost always a given if the first 72-hour went through.
Anyway, none of that really matters beyond the technical. What matters is not saying “I’m sorry you felt that way, but you probably deserved it.”
Or, hear me out, I’ve seen way more than a sample size of 1 and have heard a bunch of people use that commenter’s complaint. Every one of them was held with good reason. I also don’t support fearmongering about vital treatment that saves lives, so it needed to be said.
That damage to society by people bashing mental health treatment is far greater than the damage to one person’s ego by me explaining that treatment doesn’t happen unless it’s necessary.