You are NOT your diagnosis

I have not personally seen any discrimination regarding mental illness. I know people have misconceptions of mental illnesses thinking that they can't function "normally" in society which could be their own naive opinion based on what they've seen or read about with mental illnesses such as schizophrenia or autism. I think most people get their information from television, movies, or books and no one is interested in how well people are doing in their lives all people care about is what is entertaining. I think having people with a mental illnesses on shows like Dr. Phil or even the news who aren't held back by their diagnosis would help bring awareness to the world and show everyone that each person is different and just because you have a mental illness doesn't mean you have to be debilitated by it or withdrawn from society.

Based on the three different forms of discrimination identified by Bruse Link and Jo Phelan (direct, structural, and internalized) certain interventions could be appropriate for each to eliminate discrimination from happening. Direct discrimination is described as a stereotypical approach of someone with a mental illness where someone was directly discriminated against. If this happens to someone that person or a person working with them should speak up and say something. They may be able to explain to the person their diagnosis and the strengths that the person has despite their mental illness. Structural discrimination involves someones social environment which can influence their mental illness based on inadequate funding, dangerous environment that could effect their health, sources of care and be harmful to them. I think bringing people with mental illnesses out to the community and having people see that there's a need and sharing with them the inhibiting factors that they have because of what they are surrounded by would help bring awareness and potential help to the facility. Internalized discrimination is caused by socialization of people that learn as children the negative attributes of people with mental illnesses. Therefore, people are more hesitant to seek help if they have a mental illness for fear that they will be ignored or perceived differently. Support from loved ones and the community would help those get treatment and feel accepted by society regardless of their mental illness.

There are resources out there that help reduce the stigma of mental illness and speak out about what's right when it comes to treating those with certain diagnoses. Connecticut Clearinghouse talks about what it's like for someone dealing with a mental illness and some Do's and Don'ts about how to portray someone with a mental illness.

http://www.ctclearinghouse.org/topics/customer-files/Stigma-and-Mental-Illness-061305.pdf

SAMHSA- What a different a friend makes; again talks about some myths associated with mental illnesses and how important it is to have support from loved ones and the community so someone could experience a good quality of life.

http://www.whatadifference.samhsa.gov/learn.asp?nav=nav01_1&content=1_1_mythsfacts

Wisconsin United for Mental Health, shows how the advocate to help stop discrimination of mental illnesses. They also explain some myths about mental illnesses and how they speak out in the community to try to reach out to society.

http://www.wimentalhealth.org/combatingstigma/myths/

Being proactive in reducing discrimination is very important to those with mental illnesses because they can live a happy and functional life, but having support and understanding is key to making that happen.

No different than me and you

A lot of people don't understand mental illness. And, unfortunately, most of them probably never will. While everyone knows February is black history month, I doubt anyone realizes April is National Awareness Month for Autism (http://www.autism-society.org/about-us/national-autism-awareness-month/). I was lucky enough to have been presented with a job that allows me to work directly with the developmentally disabled. Before this job though, I too thought April was only for Easter and rain showers.
I've personally gotten to experience mental illness discrimination within my current work environment. One of the things we do is take our clients into public in order for them to learn how to act in social situations. Just like the public, if they don't go out, they wouldn't be aware of a life outside of their house. The client I work now is a little boy who is just precious. He doesn't have a problem with walking or drooling, or any other features of the face that allows one to immediately know he is dev. disabled. However, he's autistic and can't talk and just does what he wants to do. Sometimes when out in public he'll begin screaming and people look at me like I've just hit him or something. But honestly, most of the time I have no idea why he's screaming. I have had clients that do "look" different too. And it sucks to go out in public at times. One of the places we like to go is the mall, which, so does everyone else. And a lot of people will run out of the way to purposely avoid us like that if they were to get to close they would "catch" the disease. I quickly learned not to care about those that stare at us. My client's don't care, so why should I. However, not everyone who is diagnosed with a mental illness can just ignore those around them, or have no idea what is being said or that they are being judged and stared at differently.
There are three forms, according to Bruce Link and Jo Phelan, about discrimination (http://www.ahrn.net/Lancet-Stigma_and_its_public_health_implications.pdf). Direct discrimination is purposely going out of ones way to not do something because of the other person, such as not allowing someone into a restaurant for an unjustifiable reason. Fortunately, I've never had anyone blatantly discriminate against me or one with me. Structural discrimination is a bit different, because one might not even realize they are being discriminating. Link and Phelan demonstrate this by saying a a white man is given a job opportunity by another white man, then when it is the guys chance to hire someone, he hires a white man. This shows both racism and gender discrimination. One has to be careful to avoid this and really think about what they are doing in order to reduce this type of discrimination. There is also internalized discrimination, which is almost like learned or placed discrimination (a mental institution in the poor areas of a city).
There needs to be a lot of change before discrimination is ever erased and it is something that will most likely never disappear. Some individuals will always feel that they are better than others. But it is up to everyone else to change the way we are. I believe that there needs to be more awareness in the school system. There are some programs now that try to help, such as having dev. disabled students placed into certain classrooms. But there needs to be a much bigger change. I believe a lot of discrimination still exists because people are unaware. I know I didn't know much until my job.

The Equal Educational Opportunities Act of 1974, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Educational_Opportunities_Act_of_1974, opened up the public school system to everyone. This was a huge step toward opening the doors of understand those that are different. But, once inside the school, these students were placed out of sight. In my hight-school, the mental ill students were locked away in a classroom and we never really saw them. If we did it was just in the hallway and everyone would stare and avoid them. I think the teachers need to provide a better understand and the fact that these are just people, like everyone else. Just like a sex ed class, there needs to be communication about those that are diagnosed. I believe the first step to understanding that we truly are equals is having the knowledge about each other. If we talk about stigmas, the general public could understand that they don't have to be afraid and go to the other side of the store to avoid 'catching' what these individuals are diagnosed with. They deserve a chance to be heard and to have friends and to go shopping just like everyone else. There are programs set up to educate others in the mentally ill. One particular group has a program just to educate teachers so that they may educate their students (http://www.camh.net/education/Resources_teachers_schools/TAMI/index.html). I believe discrimination can be decrease if we educate the young before it gets set into their heads or before they enter the world on their own. If just one person learns that these are people like everyone else, then that's one more than what there is today.

Reducing stigma associated with mental illness

I personally don’t recall observing discrimination toward people with mental illness (M.I.), other than being in public and seeing people staring at others or ignoring them because they seem to be different.  Just as people might stare at someone with a physical disability because he doesn’t look like them, so people might stare at someone with M.I. because he doesn’t act the way they do.

Link and Phelan describe internalized discrimination as something learned at an early age.  I believe that providing education about mental illness at an early age is one of the best ways to help to prevent this type of discrimination.

A conference was held in May 2001 which included the National Institutes of Health as one of the sponsors.  It examined the causes and consequences of stigma regarding various types of physical and emotional illness.  It indicated that this type of stigma would continue to increase.  Individuals with stigmatizing diseases are less likely to seek appropriate professional assistance.  Social stigma, therefore, is a global health concern.  A video of the conference is available online and is a good resource to help educate people who want to avoid being guilty of stigmatizing others.

Through socialization, people learn at a young age about stigma toward those who are different.  Again, education can help to prevent this.

Another Web site offers ways to support people with M.I.  I feel that some of the ideas listed at this Web site represent excellent ways to intervene on behalf of people with M.I.  Advocacy is one example of working to prevent direct discrimination.

Policy makers can provide specific financial support to help people with M.I.  Thus, policy makers can intervene by being advocates on behalf of those who are mentally ill.

Other examples of advocacy include promoting participation in formulating care plans and crisis plans for people with M.I., creating user-led and user-run services, and developing peer-support worker roles in mainstream mental-health care.

One good way to provide structural intervention for people with M.I. is by encouraging employers to make appropriate adjustments for them – for example, by allowing them to use headphones to block out distracting noise, having a quieter workplace with fewer distractions, and offering flexible work schedules so that employees can work at their peak levels and have time off for medical appointments when needed.

My daughter is an SLP and is an excellent advocate for people with various types of physical and mental disabilities.  She has told me about children who are teased or have difficulties in school because of their disabilities.  She strives to provide the best possible care for all of her patients, regardless of their conditions.  Even outside of her job, she works as a volunteer with children experiencing a variety of disadvantages and tries to improve their situations.

Good resources for people who are interested in advocating for people with M.I. include the following Web sites.

www.stigmaconference.nih.gov

www.ijmhs.com/content/2/1/3

Justice for all...?

                                        
Recently the Supreme Court has been hearing cases for & against the sentence of life without parole (LWOP) for juvenile offenders.  I have included here a link that reviews the arguments that are being reviewed that include two completely different cases of juvenile offenders who received the same sentence of LWOP.  Juvenile #1 beat his neighbor & than set his house on fire leaving him to die of smoke inhalation.  This same young man NINE years later has no remorse for his crime.  Juvenile #2 was party to a store robbery where the clerk was shot & killed by another person.  He is very remorseful & has made progress in the prison system that he is currently incarcerated in.  Here's the link. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/jan-june12/scotus_03-20.html

Parole = conditional release of a prisoner, conditioned on good behavior and regular reporting to the authorities for a set period of time.
Juvenile = physiologically immature or underdeveloped. young; not fully grown.
*Definitions courtesy of Merrian - Websters online dictionary.

So according to these definitions juveniles aren't necessarily at the cognitive level they need to be, to be held accountable for the rest of their lives in my opinion.  Parole is considered on a specific criteria of events after a time deemed accordingly suited per each offender.  So would it be beyond the spectrum of reason that these offenders be given the chance of parole after a set amount of time to be reconsidered according to their present, rehabilitated behavior?  Surely after say for instance; 10, 15, or even 20 years there could be some significant changes.  The law as is stated in at least 38 states, states that a heinous crime has the consequence/sentence of LWOP no matter the age of the offender.  That is very broad considering each case is supposed to be held individually.  Far be it from me being uneducated of all the forms of law but common sense says otherwise.

Some financial aspects of housing an inmate per year in California range from $44,563 - $47,102.  That is an astronomical amount of money that falls on the taxpayers of each state to pay out.  Of the average annual cost of an inmate only $1,612 goes toward rehabilitation efforts to the inmates.  Considering these are supposed to be "correctional facilities", that doesn't quite add up.  To find out more on the cost of inmates per year check out this link as the average amount per year increases substantially as the inmates age increases. 

http://www.mountain-news.com/news/crime_log/article_4f1e45f8-5630-11e0-93da-001cc4c002e0.html

Overall there should be consequences for a persons actions, but according to the 8th Amendment of the constitution we as Americans should not be subject to "cruel and/or unusual punishment.  At the link below is a raw, tip of the iceberg testament of what goes on in life at a "correctional institution".  It is only my opinion (again) that sending a kid into a place with ruthless criminals & repeated sex offenders where he is considered "fresh meat" (this term should need no explaination I hope), is cruel & very unusual , The video is about a 17 yo boy who from the age of 10 was selling drugs & was in & out of the juvenile correctional facilities.  By age 16 he was convicted of 2nd degree murder & is now incarcerated at an adult, maximum security prison with adult males with life, or other lengthy prison sentences.  It begs to question is this kid really a hardened criminal or is he the product of his environment which influenced him from such an early age onto the wrong road in life?  Did the system he was thrown into nurture him as a child needs to be cared for appropriately or was it just another placement & paperwork for an overworked employee?  In the facility this young man is at currently it describes how prison life is; fighting, rapes, thievery to mention only a few.  This is a recipe for an even bigger, stronger convict & potentially as one inmate reports "creation of a monster." Check out the video here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DII1uVbf83U&feature=fvsr

I don't want to fail to mention the justice the families effected by these crimes deserve.  It is definitely a sensitive area for all parties involved.  Each case should be considered individually & not fall under these blanket laws so justice can better be served for everyone.  Rehabilitation should be priority #1 in correctional institutes with an expectation of each inmate to transform their life not become worse. 

Save the Children!

It will be interesting to see what decision the Supreme Court makes about this topic. Even though the crime that the child committed was a terrible "adult" crime, but the child is still a child. I agree with a lot of what they said in the article that "It's not a guarantee of parole. It's the opportunity for parole," said Lawrence Wojcik,  "A juvenile has a less developed sense of right and wrong. They should have the opportunity to prove that, at some point, they have been rehabilitated and they are fit to rejoin the community"(Richard Serrano of the Tribune Washington Bureau contributed).

There are so many screwed up things about our jurisdiction, people like Casey Anthony are free in this world but this kid doesn't even have a chance to have freedom after doing something he did when he was a child, a CHILD. The legal age of an adult is 18 years old, so why was he getting treated like an adult at 14 years old. It doesn't take away from his crime, but the fact that he was so young he did not have a clear distinction of right and wrong.

This case is different from others I'm sure, since the kid was more convicted based on association with the crime but we have to look at juveniles imprisonment as a whole. I do believe that people can change, especially youth to adulthood, if these children are given the right sources needed to be a member of society than why not at least give them a chance to be free. As quoted above, just because they have the opportunity for parole, does not mean that they will get it. A child is more vulnerable to situations like this because a lot of time they are influenced by peer pressure or they are troubled by an unstable home life.

The website below talks about the psychology aspect of juvenile delinquents and the developmental stages of the brain that an adolescent goes through. It's very informative about how a child's brain can be influenced by outside factors and a child struggles with knowing right from wrong especially if they are not taught that from the beginning.

http://www.hgexperts.com/article.asp?id=5279

Wow this blog hates me...

This will be the 2nd time I've tried to post this and the 3578926 time I've tried to figure this blog out... Anyways, this is my post about NAMI since I have had a heck of a time trying to get on here. I really enjoyed listening to them talk about their experiences it really helps to hear it first hand rather than reading it in the book. It helps us as OTA's see a person as an individual and not the diagnosis. It shows how important it is to get to know the person because a lot of what they are going through is influenced on their past experiences. It's amazing how much both Shane and Samual have overcome in their life and their motivation to speak and help others experiencing simular troubles. It was interesting learning about the "dark days" because I think whether someone has a diagnosis or not, you experiencing those low times once in a while. It's important for patients to know that and know that it's okay to have those feelings, but what can we as therapists do to help them cope when they have those tough times. I'm glad we got to meet them and hear about NAMI.

Only the good die young

Juveniles being tried as adults is a very delicate situation. The courts try to look at all sides of an even to justify trying a "child" as an adult. This situation is about to be tested in which the Supreme Court will try to decide if the courts are being to strict and not giving juveniles the chance for probation if they have been found guilty of severe crimes. It's very difficult to think that someone at the age of 14 could commit a crime so heinous that the courts find them guilty and slap on a charge of life without the possibility of parole. How does one get to choose who is considered a juvenile and who is moved up to the adult category. Or to what extent a crime has to be to make one put such a young child behind bars for the rest of their life.

I personally don't know where I would stand on such a case if I had to pick either-or. There can be so many factors involved that one would definitely have to look at each individual separately and not clump them together. Some of these cases they are looking at, the person of interest was just a driver of a get-away vehicle or was just present, yet did not do the shooting, beating, etc. I agree that some of these deserve to get a second chance at life, yet others wasted theirs. I know I needed a few chances and was fortunate to get those, but I also didn't take a life from this earth. I didn't deprive a family of their son, daughter, father, mother, and of their future together. I didn't make anyone have to suffer through the thoughts of their pregnant daughter in the basement with her husband and their last looks at life were pleading for mercy at the end of gun held by a 16 year old.

Two cases are affecting the Supreme Courts decision, Evan Miller v. Alabama and Kuntrell Jackson v. Hobbs (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-court-juvenilesbre82j13e-20120320,0,367928.story). These are two separate cases in which the convicted had two different responsibilities in the crime that they were convicted of. Kuntrell (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/10-9647) was with his cousin when his cousin shot and killed a shop attendant. Evan (http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2011/2011_10_9646) helped beat a man with a baseball bat and then light his trailer on fire. Both of these cases are trying to use the cruel and unusual punishment argument about being locked away for pretty much their entire life. Honestly, I don't see how the courts can even compare these two cases in a decision that could effect as many as 2300 inmates. In the case of Kuntrell I can see how he would want to fight the decision. He was with his cousin, yet did not do the shooting. But Miller aided with the murder of someone. And yet he wants to say being locked away is cruel and unusual....what the heck does he think lighting someone's house on fire after beating him is... So overall, i'm split... I just want those who deserve punishment to be punished, and those who can come from a mistake and make a difference in this world to do exactly that. But pulling a trigger or stabbing a person multiple times, to beating with a bat is a very physical and cognitive thing. I believe they know what they are doing and know of the consequences associated, unlike someone who is with their cousin when they shoot a person, or drives a vehicle away from a scene of a crime.

In relations to psychosocial, the class this blog is for, it could be very difficult to try a child as an adult. Most mental illnesses aren't diagnosed until later in their life. So someone who is mentally unstable may commit a crime while in a episode related to their condition and never get the chance to live a 'normal' life.  I think that if a violent crime is committed and later they are diagnosed with a severe mental illness, they could have the chance for a second chance. Maybe get them in a different setting with meds and see how they react after several years. It is no way an excuse to plead guilty to insanity, but some folks truly can't control what is going on with their mind and bodies at certain times. I guess asking for a fair judgement that puts people exactly where they should be is like asking for World Peace....it's just not going to happen, someone will always be on the other side of a decision.