Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

Studies of mental functions, behaviors and the nervous system.

Moderators: Calilasseia, amok, ADParker

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#81  Postby Matt_B » Jan 16, 2012 8:59 pm

Median wrote:Also, despite what you guys are saying, those who are morbidly obese will probably eventually get to the point of having an emergency. Whether it is someone who has a heart attack or needs a heart transplant, or a diabetic who is unconscious, etc. If those who have emergencies from being too skinny have to receive physical and mental treatment, then if you're consistent, the same should apply to those who are morbidly obese.


Just as it happens, my father-in-law is obese, diabetic and has had heart surgery. The thing is, he's lived like that for the past twenty years since he retired. Sure, it's not an ideal state of affairs health-wise but, despite all the medical complications associated with it, he's not even close to being at the same risk as the sort of anorexic who would get sectioned, and that's pretty much the point I'm trying to make.

Now, that's one person and that doesn't constitute a study, but I'd be surprised if there are that many morbidly obese people who are genuinely at the same level of risk as anorexics whose condition is severe enough to be sectioned. Of course, those who are should be given appropriate medical treatment psychiatric or otherwise, but I maintain that the argument as first stated is flawed.
User avatar
Matt_B
 
Posts: 3340
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#82  Postby MoonLit » Jan 16, 2012 10:06 pm

Median wrote:
MoonLit wrote:
Median wrote:
NineOneFour wrote:


Yeah, that doesn't happen.

Premise false.

Thread over.


With as much as I've brought that up, I would think if those who didn't self-harm weren't put in mental hospitals, someone would of said so way before you.


The only way they would be is if they were caught doing it, and even than they may just be sent to a regular hospital, go under a 48 hour evaluation and than sent back home. :coffee:


Why would they have to get caught in the act? What if they weren't caught, but admit it?


Something tells me cutters don't normally walk up to a hospital and say "Hey, I'm depressed. Please send me to a special ward for treatment!". :eh:
And if they admit it, they may still not even go to the hospital. They can be told that they should go see help; but unless they actually try to kill themselves, there's nothing anyone else can do about it. It's done case by case basis; it's not black or white, clear cut.

Either way, it doesn't matter, someone who self-injuries can be put in a mental hospital against their will.


Can, but it doesn't happen all that much. It would have to be pretty damn severe injury. Sometimes just letting them stay home, with friends and family is better medicine than being stuck in a building with white walls and hospital gowns. :grin:

Going back to obesity. As others have stated, a person can be obese and yet still damn happy with themselves. Sticking someone like that into a treatment against their will is a great way to not only piss them off, but make them feel like shit. Rather counter productive.
Image Image Image Image
Click the eggs please!
User avatar
MoonLit
RS Donator
 
Name: Andi
Posts: 3417
Age: 25
Female

Country: Peyton, CO
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#83  Postby Rilx » Jan 16, 2012 10:42 pm

Median wrote:If those who have emergencies from being too skinny have to receive physical and mental treatment, then if you're consistent, the same should apply to those who are morbidly obese.

No one is committed to treatment just being skinny or obese. Actually you are speaking of anorexics and food addicts. Even though you may see "consistency" in their physical appearances, their mental states are essentially different. An anorexic emaciates because she believes that she is too fat. She has a disordered sense of reality; that's her mental problem. And that's not the case with addicts. Have you ever heard of anybody obese who eats because she believes she's too skinny? No, addiction is not like that. Addicts may occasionally lie to themselves or make up some stupid explanations but generally they live in reality; they are not mentally disordered. That's the difference which makes the difference.
In the life, there are no solutions. There are forces in motion. Those need to be created, and solutions follow.
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery, "Night Flight"
Rilx
 
Posts: 325
Age: 66
Male

Finland (fi)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#84  Postby logical bob » Jan 16, 2012 11:46 pm

The majority of people who cut themselves or self harm in other ways do not have a mental illness and as such cannot be detained in a mental hospital.
It's got nothing to do with your Vorsprung durch Technik, you know, and it's not about you joggers who go round and round and round.
User avatar
logical bob
 
Posts: 3443
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#85  Postby Mr.Samsa » Jan 16, 2012 11:48 pm

Median wrote:Isn't sex addiction a recognized mental disorder? People enjoy sex just like they enjoy eating food. It's all natural, yet their comes a point where it becomes recognized as a mental problem.


Yes, and there are disorders regarding addiction to food. People aren't thrown in mental hospitals, or rehab facilities, simply for having an addiction.

Median wrote:Whether you guys agree with it or not, there are enough of your mental health leaders who believe "Binge Eating Disorder" is real enough for it to possibly make it into the DSM V.


Nobody has debated the fact that binge eating disorder is valid. Binge eating and being fat are not the same thing. Most obese people will not meet the requirements for binge eating, even those in the top 1%.

Median wrote:Also, despite what you guys are saying, those who are morbidly obese will probably eventually get to the point of having an emergency. Whether it is someone who has a heart attack or needs a heart transplant, or a diabetic who is unconscious, etc. If those who have emergencies from being too skinny have to receive physical and mental treatment, then if you're consistent, the same should apply to those who are morbidly obese.


If someone with a disorder, like binge eating, reached the point where their size has presented an immediate risk to their health, then they will receive treatment.

Median wrote:
NineOneFour wrote:
Median wrote:If people who cut themselves are forced in mental hospitals for treatment,



Yeah, that doesn't happen.

Premise false.

Thread over.


With as much as I've brought that up, I would think if those who didn't self-harm weren't put in mental hospitals, someone would of said so way before you.


I missed the point when you brought it up, but 914 is right - people aren't hospitalised for self-harm. This is because self-harmers rarely try to commit suicide, and there are no immediate risks to it.

Median wrote:Well the kind of morbidly obese person I'm thinking of (the top 1%) or so, would probably be diagnosed with BED. So it's good to know you guys are somewhat consistent.


I don't think many obese people would meet the criteria for BED. Some certainly would, but so would many normal sized and skinny people.
Image
User avatar
Mr.Samsa
Suspended User
 
Posts: 11370
Age: 28

Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#86  Postby Median » Jan 17, 2012 12:33 am

Matt_B wrote:
Just as it happens, my father-in-law is obese, diabetic and has had heart surgery. The thing is, he's lived like that for the past twenty years since he retired. Sure, it's not an ideal state of affairs health-wise but, despite all the medical complications associated with it, he's not even close to being at the same risk as the sort of anorexic who would get sectioned, and that's pretty much the point I'm trying to make.

Now, that's one person and that doesn't constitute a study, but I'd be surprised if there are that many morbidly obese people who are genuinely at the same level of risk as anorexics whose condition is severe enough to be sectioned. Of course, those who are should be given appropriate medical treatment psychiatric or otherwise, but I maintain that the argument as first stated is flawed.


Yes, he's lived a long time because he got physical treatment. However, if someone who is starving themselves has a life threatening emergency they can't just go to a regular hospital and get an IV. They are also forced to into getting psych treatment. If someone has a life threatening emergency from eating too much (unconscious or whatever) they can just go to a regular hospital for treatment and psych treatment is not mandatory. They are both in life threatening emergencies, so saying the difference is one of emergency doesn't make sense.
Median
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 104

Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#87  Postby Median » Jan 17, 2012 12:41 am

Rilx wrote:
Median wrote:If those who have emergencies from being too skinny have to receive physical and mental treatment, then if you're consistent, the same should apply to those who are morbidly obese.

No one is committed to treatment just being skinny or obese. Actually you are speaking of anorexics and food addicts. Even though you may see "consistency" in their physical appearances, their mental states are essentially different. An anorexic emaciates because she believes that she is too fat. She has a disordered sense of reality; that's her mental problem. And that's not the case with addicts. Have you ever heard of anybody obese who eats because she believes she's too skinny? No, addiction is not like that. Addicts may occasionally lie to themselves or make up some stupid explanations but generally they live in reality; they are not mentally disordered. That's the difference which makes the difference.


Someone here already agreed that mental illness fuels obesity. So while an anorexic may have a disordered sense of reality concerning what is fat, the top morbidly obese have a disordered sense of self-worth (e.g. depression) or some kind of emotional problem that leads to extreme "emotional eating" or BED.

As I said, sex addicts are considered mentally ill, so for the same reason, someone who can't control themselves when it comes to food should be considered mentally ill as well if it is causing significant problems with their life.
Median
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 104

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#88  Postby logical bob » Jan 17, 2012 10:31 am

Median, I think you're in danger of defining almost anything outside normal behaviour as a mental illness. This isn't good. As well as being a means of social control much used in totalitarian states it belittles the difficulties faced by people with real mental illnesses.

Re your claim that anorexics are forced into "psych treatment" - what form do you think this treatment takes? You can't helpfully compel someone to undergo psychological therapies because they only work if the person buys into the process and makes them work.
It's got nothing to do with your Vorsprung durch Technik, you know, and it's not about you joggers who go round and round and round.
User avatar
logical bob
 
Posts: 3443
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#89  Postby Matt_B » Jan 17, 2012 12:16 pm

Median wrote:Yes, he's lived a long time because he got physical treatment. However, if someone who is starving themselves has a life threatening emergency they can't just go to a regular hospital and get an IV. They are also forced to into getting psych treatment. If someone has a life threatening emergency from eating too much (unconscious or whatever) they can just go to a regular hospital for treatment and psych treatment is not mandatory. They are both in life threatening emergencies, so saying the difference is one of emergency doesn't make sense.


That's simply not the case. If, after receiving emergency medical treatment, an anorexic is fit enough to leave hospital they're free to go. It's only in cases where potentially life-saving treatment is refused that sectioning would be considered; it really is a means of last resort, and often comes too late to save many people as it is.
User avatar
Matt_B
 
Posts: 3340
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#90  Postby Median » Jan 17, 2012 12:52 pm

logical bob wrote:Median, I think you're in danger of defining almost anything outside normal behaviour as a mental illness. This isn't good. As well as being a means of social control much used in totalitarian states it belittles the difficulties faced by people with real mental illnesses.

Re your claim that anorexics are forced into "psych treatment" - what form do you think this treatment takes? You can't helpfully compel someone to undergo psychological therapies because they only work if the person buys into the process and makes them work.


No, I'm just following the current logic of people in psychology. They say toddlers who cry a lot are mentally ill, people who have too much sex are mentally ill, people who eat too little are mentally ill etc. So if you're consistent, those who eat too much should also have a point where they are considered mentally ill. That is not a step forward in considering everyone who is not normal as mentally ill, it's just following the same logic that people in psychology have been using for years.

I don't know what form of treatment anorexics receive. I would think therapy, I don't know, but they and are forced to receive psych treatment or else they wouldn't be forced in a mental hospital.
Median
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 104

Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#91  Postby Median » Jan 17, 2012 12:55 pm

Matt_B wrote:
Median wrote:Yes, he's lived a long time because he got physical treatment. However, if someone who is starving themselves has a life threatening emergency they can't just go to a regular hospital and get an IV. They are also forced to into getting psych treatment. If someone has a life threatening emergency from eating too much (unconscious or whatever) they can just go to a regular hospital for treatment and psych treatment is not mandatory. They are both in life threatening emergencies, so saying the difference is one of emergency doesn't make sense.


That's simply not the case. If, after receiving emergency medical treatment, an anorexic is fit enough to leave hospital they're free to go. It's only in cases where potentially life-saving treatment is refused that sectioning would be considered; it really is a means of last resort, and often comes too late to save many people as it is.


So anorexics can eat as little as they want until they die, just as long as they follow the doctors advice such as taking a pill or getting an IV? Just like the morbidly obese can eat as much as they want until they die, just as long as they follow the doctors advice to get a heart transplant and take pills?
Median
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 104

Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#92  Postby Paul G » Jan 17, 2012 2:06 pm

Median wrote: They say toddlers who cry a lot are mentally ill,


Who are they and what exactly do they say?

people who have too much sex are mentally ill


Who are they and what exactly do they say?

people who eat too little are mentally il


Erm, you've been corrected on this a few times now.

So if you're consistent, those who eat too much should also have a point where they are considered mentally ill. That is not a step forward in considering everyone who is not normal as mentally ill, it's just following the same logic that people in psychology have been using for years.


Only if you simplify, strawman and removal all nuance from what they're actually saying. See above.
User avatar
Paul G
 
Name: Beef Joint
Posts: 9836
Age: 31
Male

England (eng)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#93  Postby Matt_B » Jan 17, 2012 2:14 pm

Median wrote:So anorexics can eat as little as they want until they die, just as long as they follow the doctors advice such as taking a pill or getting an IV? Just like the morbidly obese can eat as much as they want until they die, just as long as they follow the doctors advice to get a heart transplant and take pills?


That's more or less the case. About the only caveat would be that anorexics who refuse to eat whilst hospitalized could be counted as refusing treatment. Still, so long as they don't mind temporarily putting on a few pounds, they'd be allowed to lose it again when no longer under medical supervision, regardless of the likely consequences. You certainly don't have to look hard to find stories from people who have done precisely that in order to escape psychiatric treatment.
User avatar
Matt_B
 
Posts: 3340
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#94  Postby Sityl » Jan 17, 2012 3:33 pm

This whole thread dances around one salient point. Medical danger =/= psychiatric danger. People are sent to psych wards psychiatric pathologies, not medical ones, even if the medical pathology is caused by a person's action. The ultimate question is, are the actions being caused by a psychiatric problem? If so, then it's because of the psychiatric problem that they are sent to a mental ward.

TLDR: People are sent to psychiatric wards for psychiatric reasons.
Stephen Colbert wrote:Now, like all great theologies, Bill [O'Reilly]'s can be boiled down to one sentence - 'There must be a god, because I don't know how things work.'


Image
User avatar
Sityl
 
Name: Ser Sityllan Payne
Posts: 5101
Age: 33
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Why are the morbidly obese not "committed to treatment"

#95  Postby Mr.Samsa » Jan 18, 2012 2:21 am

Median wrote:No, I'm just following the current logic of people in psychology. They say toddlers who cry a lot are mentally ill, people who have too much sex are mentally ill, people who eat too little are mentally ill etc.


Nobody at all in psychology says this. If somebody has told you that they have said this, then they are liars.

Toddlers can cry as much as they like, people can have as much sex as they like, and people can eat as little as they like. None of those things are mental disorders in themselves.

Median wrote:So if you're consistent, those who eat too much should also have a point where they are considered mentally ill. That is not a step forward in considering everyone who is not normal as mentally ill, it's just following the same logic that people in psychology have been using for years.


So if psychology is consistent (based on the corrections I made to your logic above), it won't consider someone who eats too much as being mentally ill.
Image
User avatar
Mr.Samsa
Suspended User
 
Posts: 11370
Age: 28

Print view this post

Previous

Return to Psychology & Neuroscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest