Many psychiatric conditions are incurable. As a result, these lifelong conditions can only be treated by the lifelong administration of medicine.
I agree with you.
And I’m willing to entertain that maybe the word ‘addiction’ has a connotation that I’m not seeing, but as far as I can tell, there is certainly a physical dependence upon SSRIs. No one is abusing SSRIs or getting high, but if they cause the same withdrawal symptoms as drugs of abuse, and as severely, what would you call it if not addiction? Honestly asking, because I’m willing to be educated here.
What happens to those people if they ‘voluntarily’ agree to go to a labor camp but never wind up ‘cured’?
I would certainly hope that such a facility would be staffed by medical professionals who would be able to recognize “Nope, you need medication” in those cases.
Now, whether that’s what RFK is envisioning here is debatable. And it wouldn’t surprise me if he thought you could just put people to work and they wouldn’t need meds anymore. I have no desire to defend RFK or anyone else tapped to be in the next administration. I just don’t think it’s necessarily a bad idea to have a safe place available for people who need to deal with withdrawals for anything.
Addiction has a medical definition, not a connotation.
As previously shown, SSRI’s do not cause addiction, even if they can cause withdrawal or physical dependence for some people.
I guess I’m wondering if support of this policy has to be riddled with asterisks and accompanied by statements that express hopes of how the programs will be run, then why express any support at all for them?
And finally: There are safe places available for people to go if they feel they are having mental health issues that require more intensive care.
Mind you, these are really only available to people with health insurance - Regan largely killed off federal and community mental health care in the 80’s. Care that cannot be replaced with a labor camp.
The only proper replacement for that care is rebuilding that/those system(s), and that is not what RFK is proposing. He’s proposing a labor camp to take advantage of and imprison away vulnerable populations.
I agree with you.
And I’m willing to entertain that maybe the word ‘addiction’ has a connotation that I’m not seeing, but as far as I can tell, there is certainly a physical dependence upon SSRIs. No one is abusing SSRIs or getting high, but if they cause the same withdrawal symptoms as drugs of abuse, and as severely, what would you call it if not addiction? Honestly asking, because I’m willing to be educated here.
I would certainly hope that such a facility would be staffed by medical professionals who would be able to recognize “Nope, you need medication” in those cases.
Now, whether that’s what RFK is envisioning here is debatable. And it wouldn’t surprise me if he thought you could just put people to work and they wouldn’t need meds anymore. I have no desire to defend RFK or anyone else tapped to be in the next administration. I just don’t think it’s necessarily a bad idea to have a safe place available for people who need to deal with withdrawals for anything.
Addiction has a medical definition, not a connotation.
As previously shown, SSRI’s do not cause addiction, even if they can cause withdrawal or physical dependence for some people.
I guess I’m wondering if support of this policy has to be riddled with asterisks and accompanied by statements that express hopes of how the programs will be run, then why express any support at all for them?
And finally: There are safe places available for people to go if they feel they are having mental health issues that require more intensive care. Mind you, these are really only available to people with health insurance - Regan largely killed off federal and community mental health care in the 80’s. Care that cannot be replaced with a labor camp.
The only proper replacement for that care is rebuilding that/those system(s), and that is not what RFK is proposing. He’s proposing a labor camp to take advantage of and imprison away vulnerable populations.