So, TIM, exactly what is the threshold for "danger to himself or others"? How do you properly identify that?
Expressed intent by the patient to harm themselves or others. This standard requires so little because a clean record and initial appearance does not cause or predictably determine the presence of mental illness.
I have said it before and I will say it again and again until I am blue in the face. Broad, indiscriminate screening needs to occur during adolescence in order to detect and, if possible, prevent metal illness.
so kvlt
More seriously, what happens if the patient doesn't express his desires for harm? Not every psychopathic spree killer admits their feelings to their therapist, or to their friends.
It has to be fretted out over a series of sessions by building rapport. To do so is long, costly and dangerous for the counselor. In fact it might be out of the range of a counselor’s abilities thus a referral is necessary.
Insurance companies do not like this because it costs them more money than usual, they want people treated in a week or less. They do not like it when someone they covered goes on killing sprees either, investigations are bad for business. They used to make up bullshit criterion for preexisting conditions and just not cover people in an attempt to minimize risk. This is really stupid because there is no profile for psychosis. They can’t pull that BS anymore due to the ACA.
I have to ask, what has been your exposure to the field of counseling do you have? I thought it was common knowledge that counseling is not a quick, easy process.
You seem to be under the impression that I'm denying that counseling is not quick or easy. If you read my posts, it's pretty apparent that I'm not.
I started questioning you in the first place because you made a rather plain statement that if a patient is a "danger to himself or others", that you need immediate police intervention.
