Hacker News Reader

Comment by matt_wulfeck | Hacker News Reader

I read the article and can't help but wonder where the family is in these situations. Why are doctors forced to commit someone against their will? Isn't that a decision better left to a family member?

More and more we're asking society to take on the role traditionally held by family members. The author is describing a symptom to a greater issue, which itself is probably a symptom to some other issue as well. It's symptoms all the way down.

View on HN

Not to attack you, but that's a little closed minded.

Not everyone has a family structure to depend on. Many times, that's a contributing factor to the predicament that disturbed person is in.

We're usually there, but helpless. When you watch somebody slipping, even into dangerous territory, you're left with a limited set of options. Unless the family can prove "Imminent Danger to Self and others" or the person in question consents to treatment, we're just as helpless as the doctor here, even in concert with the person's care provider. So, much like the recent Michigan "poisoning" case (http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2016/07/man_ac...), you just have to watch until the person crosses a line where they can be legally held. And often, that's after somebody's hurt.

I suspect that in many of these situations, particularly where a person has lost touch with reality, but not quite at the "I am the angel of death" level, the family is in the background and well aware, but simply out of legal options to help.

Thanks for reminding me that I need to do explicit legal documentation that my parents should have nothing to do with my medical or psychiatric care, ever.

Some roles should not be held by some people, tradition be damned.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com