Monday, August 12, 2013

Mental health impact


The Virginia Tech shooting clearly illuminates the flaws in our background check system, more specifically on the question of a person’s mental health.  The Gun Control Act we currently have in place restricts people from purchasing a firearm if they have been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital or adjudicated as a mental defective (which today has almost no clinical meaning and is offensive).  With such an obvious loophole in the area of mental health, it seems as though it should be easy to mend this, right?  The main thing to think about is how do we amend the disqualifications?  What happens when we do?

When talking about people with severe mental illness, we must keep in mind that it is a statistically rare and virtually unpredictable event.  Furthermore, even when comparing crimes committed by people with mental illness only chalks up to 3-5% of all total crimes (not just gun-related crimes).  So what could we change?  What could make it so that people like Cho don’t slip through the loopholes of background checks?  If we change the restrictions to anyone with a mental illness or on medication cannot purchase a firearm?  That would be a huge part of the U.S. being restricted; keeping in mind that depression is considered a mental illness.

                Mental disorders are common in the United States and internationally. An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year.1 When applied to the 2004 U.S. Census residential population estimate for ages 18 and older, this figure translates to 57.7 million people.”  According to the National Institute of Mental Illness.  If we put ‘flags’ on people because they have a treatable mental health issue, what would that do to the person?  That’s like saying a person is never allowed to go outside again once they get the chicken pox, because it is contagious when you have it.  It’s absurd!  This would cause a sense of alienation, loss of privacy, and could potentially cause someone to not seek help for a treatable health condition without the “social cost”.  The right to privacy is there for a reason, and with so many conditions being considered a mental illness, it is hard to put specific guidelines on what needs to be shared.  Gun violence in mental health patients is practically impossible to predict who to watch more closely.





http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=1707738


 

No comments:

Post a Comment