Testing Psychological Normal VS Abnormal
Most cases are not nearly so clear-cut. Indeed, many cases test the
very meanings of normality and abnormality that were discussed in another article. Abnormal by
whose standard? Recall that some people believe themselves depressed for
good reason, but "society" finds them "mentally ill" and in need of treatment.
Others enjoy the relaxation and "highs" conferred by recreational
drugs, yet society views them as addicts who require psychiatric attention.
Still others radically alter their life styles on discovering a "true religion,"
but society may designate that discovery as psychotic and commit the discoverer
to a psychiatric facility. Mayock v. Martin" illustrated this issue well:
Mr. Mayock was hospitalized in July, after he had removed his right eye.
He was subsequently diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, eventually released on
probation, and finally discharged three years later. Three days after discharge,
Mayock removed his right hand, and was committed once again to the state hospital.
At the time of trial, some twenty years later, Mayock was still confined involuntarily
to the state hospital with the diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia.
At his trial, Mayock insisted that there was nothing mysterious or crazy about
his self-maiming. Rather, he is a deeply religious man who believes that society's
attempts to establish peace by force are entirely misguided. God's way, he says, is
to encourage peace through love. If society continues on its present path, many
lives will be lost through war. Mayock believes that one man has been chosen to
make a peace offering to God; that he, Mayock, is that man; and that it is better for
one person to accept a message from God to sacrifice an eye or a hand than it is for
society to suffer a great loss of human life.
During the twenty years that he had been hospitalized, Mayock had had complete
freedom of the hospital grounds: He had not once maimed himself. Yet, he
acknowledged that he would gladly do so again either as a significant freewill offering
or in response to divine revelation.
Beyond this single symptom, there was no further evidence that Mayock was
disturbed. He had risen to a position of considerable responsibility in the hospital,
news stand. There was ample evidence that he could handle financial matters and
take care of himself in all other respects.
Psychiatrists at the hospital contended that his prophetic view of himself was
"grandiose," that his religious beliefs were "grossly false," and that the diagnosis
of paranoid schizophrenic was entirely warranted by the facts. Mayock contended
that he is religious, not mentally ill, and that his First Amendment constitutional
rights ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...") had been violated.
Mayock lost. Some will feel that he should have lost, for only the truly
mad would gouge out their eyes and chop off their arms. Others will feel that
Mayock's loss is tragic, for he was acting with courage upon deeply held religious
beliefs and harming no one but himself. Perhaps the tragedy lies in
that ambiguity, for Mayock can be seen as quite abnormal by some standards,
and not abnormal at all by others. Given a large area of doubt, how
did it happen that he 'was involuntarily hospitalized, and for so long? In
order to understand Mayock's case, as well as literally thousands of other
commitments that occur involuntarily, we need to know something about
the laws that regulate commitment procedures. Our focus will be on laws in
the United States.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Looking for treatment?
If you are ready to schedule a FREE Consultation...
I encourage you to access this website
for the treatment I recommend here:
http://www.TheLiberatorMethod.com/
very meanings of normality and abnormality that were discussed in another article. Abnormal by
whose standard? Recall that some people believe themselves depressed for
good reason, but "society" finds them "mentally ill" and in need of treatment.
Others enjoy the relaxation and "highs" conferred by recreational
drugs, yet society views them as addicts who require psychiatric attention.
Still others radically alter their life styles on discovering a "true religion,"
but society may designate that discovery as psychotic and commit the discoverer
to a psychiatric facility. Mayock v. Martin" illustrated this issue well:
Mr. Mayock was hospitalized in July, after he had removed his right eye.
He was subsequently diagnosed paranoid schizophrenic, eventually released on
probation, and finally discharged three years later. Three days after discharge,
Mayock removed his right hand, and was committed once again to the state hospital.
At the time of trial, some twenty years later, Mayock was still confined involuntarily
to the state hospital with the diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia.
At his trial, Mayock insisted that there was nothing mysterious or crazy about
his self-maiming. Rather, he is a deeply religious man who believes that society's
attempts to establish peace by force are entirely misguided. God's way, he says, is
to encourage peace through love. If society continues on its present path, many
lives will be lost through war. Mayock believes that one man has been chosen to
make a peace offering to God; that he, Mayock, is that man; and that it is better for
one person to accept a message from God to sacrifice an eye or a hand than it is for
society to suffer a great loss of human life.
During the twenty years that he had been hospitalized, Mayock had had complete
freedom of the hospital grounds: He had not once maimed himself. Yet, he
acknowledged that he would gladly do so again either as a significant freewill offering
or in response to divine revelation.
Beyond this single symptom, there was no further evidence that Mayock was
disturbed. He had risen to a position of considerable responsibility in the hospital,
- Mayock v. Martin, 157 Conn, 56,245 A.2d 574 (2008).
news stand. There was ample evidence that he could handle financial matters and
take care of himself in all other respects.
Psychiatrists at the hospital contended that his prophetic view of himself was
"grandiose," that his religious beliefs were "grossly false," and that the diagnosis
of paranoid schizophrenic was entirely warranted by the facts. Mayock contended
that he is religious, not mentally ill, and that his First Amendment constitutional
rights ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...") had been violated.
Mayock lost. Some will feel that he should have lost, for only the truly
mad would gouge out their eyes and chop off their arms. Others will feel that
Mayock's loss is tragic, for he was acting with courage upon deeply held religious
beliefs and harming no one but himself. Perhaps the tragedy lies in
that ambiguity, for Mayock can be seen as quite abnormal by some standards,
and not abnormal at all by others. Given a large area of doubt, how
did it happen that he 'was involuntarily hospitalized, and for so long? In
order to understand Mayock's case, as well as literally thousands of other
commitments that occur involuntarily, we need to know something about
the laws that regulate commitment procedures. Our focus will be on laws in
the United States.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Looking for treatment?
If you are ready to schedule a FREE Consultation...
I encourage you to access this website
for the treatment I recommend here:
http://www.TheLiberatorMethod.com/