Mental Health

Mental Health

Most people have seen or at least heard the usual
talking points on this subject.  Insane
killers will  find ways to kill.  Oklahoma city was homemade bombs, 9/11 was
box-cutters and planes.  Disarming law
abiding citizens only make them easier targets for the criminals, and so on.

Every time an insane person does something insane
with a gun the knee-jerk reaction is gun-control.  Most rational people who have seen the 2a
under fire for some time realize at least some of the opposition is politicizing
the tragedy to further their public disarmament initiatives.  It is so obvious to the point that the media,
and sadly many citizens first concerns in these attacks is to rush to find out
what race the shooter was, what religion, what political party, and so on.

Why isn’t the other side of the equation, and
arguably the most important being discussed, why did they go insane to begin
with?  If they were known to have mental
issues, was there a professional that could/should have put them on a watch
list, committed them, changed their meds, etc?

We can understand the liberal media not wanting
to touch the mental health subject, we know their narrative.  However, why aren’t our legislators (Rep and
Dem) all over this.  The immediate answer
there could be they are in the pocket of Big Pharma.  Or maybe they don’t get paid enough to tackle
such a far-reaching issue (sarcasm). 

Maybe it’s just easier to throw out a red-flag
law and take the responsibility off of them, away from the insane person and
the processes that failed them, and put it on “us” who failed to
notice and report said person.  This will
inevenitably result in one action, over-compensation.  No judge/official is going to be “that
one” that didn’t act on a tip. 
Evert tip will be viewed as a worst-case scenario leading to an
abundance of false-positive actions. 
Innocent people targeted and destroyed by a flawed process.

I don’t know what our politicians problem
is.  I do know they need to get over it.

There have been significant advances in gene
testing for adverse reactions to psychiatric drugs.  Previously a Doctor would prescribe a drug
and then monitor it for a period of time, perhaps months.  If the drug didn’t properly treat the
condition, or produced even worse side effects, then the doctor would try
another drug, possibly taking another month or two, and so on till they find
one that works. 

Psychiatric Pharmacologic Testing analyzes 11
genes and reports on 83 prescription drugs that are commonly and routinely
prescribed for mental health conditions. 
This list includes but is not limited to drug used to treat depression,
anxiety, ADHD, and several other mental health conditions. 

The blood test can be performed at your local
doctor and sent off with results in about 2 weeks.  The results takes out most of the trial and
error phase by giving the Doctor a list, based on the individuals genes, that
clearly says which drugs are most likely to work, which ones may work with some
side effects, and which drugs should be avoided at all costs.

Media, politicians, doctors, insurance companies,
government… WHY is this test NOT MANDATORY for users of these drugs?  Why is this opportunity to reduce/improve
mental health issues not near the top of your list of “things to do”?

I’ve stayed away from the gun control side of the
argument because, as I stated earlier, the downfall of red-flag laws,
disarmament without due process, and all of the other pre-Communist actions
will only hurt us (the lawful individual). 
Those points, and their counter-points (if any) have been beaten
repeatedly with a stick.  Disarmament of
lawful citizens in a nation does not lead to a happy ending, for the citizens
that is.

If you have higher rates of insanity, then
address the insanity.  Require this
genetic testing.  Look at the HIPAA laws
and make it easier for a qualified mental health professional (not your Ex or
angry political opposite) to put potential problem people on a watch list,
perhaps blocking, or requiring extra steps (extended wait-times and evaluation,
etc) to purchase guns for those individuals instead of throwing an snare net
over every citizen. In extreme cases, maybe look at seizure of existing
property… again, this coming from a medical professional as part of an agreed
upon and documented process.  (At this
point I would question if institutionalization would not be the best action, as
killers will find a way to kill.)

If you are a legislator, you are getting paid for
your service.  Sometimes the easy way is
the best way, sometimes it’s not. Look beyond the tool and address the user of
the tool.

– Lan