|
Post by oliveoilmom on Oct 10, 2012 8:41:11 GMT -5
I admit I was fascinated watching this one. But it's like they are going for just shock value now, and they seem to be getting into the realm of more severe problems than just OCD or people who have had past trauma. Opinions? Here's the link. www.aetv.com/hoarders/video/#1684035729
|
|
|
Post by babz25 on Oct 10, 2012 8:44:47 GMT -5
This woman had severe emotional problems, her problems were worse than hoarding. She had no real concept of reality. She admitted herself that she didnt know what was wrong, why this was unacceptable behavior. Im glad they didnt just clean up the house and leave her there, they forced her to go into some sort of care. She was completely incapable of caring for herself.
Of course they are going for shock value, they have to get people to watch the show. At the same time, someone called them and asked them to come do the cleanup, so they are just choosing the worst houses they can find.
|
|
|
Post by oliveoilmom on Oct 10, 2012 8:56:18 GMT -5
I haven't finished watching it yet, but I do think this could be beyond what Dr Zasio can do. It scared me when the lady didn't know anything was wrong. (The poop lady not the rapture lady) I am waiting to see if Dr Zasio calls in a psychiatrist, because I do think this is beyond just OCD.
I also wonder if this kind of direction of the show would help regular people with hoarding problems. I don't think it would, because it probably has nothing to do with 99% of the hoarders out there.
I'm also waiting to see what the rapture lady decides. Maybe they will bring a priest in or something to talk to her about this, or get her to donate it to a church. The stuff that can be donated that is. That would probably be the best thing, if she's saving it for people in case some rapture happens.
BTW the rapture lady has the exact same glasses I do, except mine are reading glasses. That's the first time I've seen anyone else with my exact frames.
|
|
|
Post by 60isolderthanithot on Oct 10, 2012 9:06:10 GMT -5
I'm nervous any time we use law to force a person into treatment. I am not the least convinced that psychology has ANY clue what's up with many conditions. If you read the history of the last hundred years, it's filled with biases, prejudices, amazingly self-referential behavior on the part of learned "associations" of -- what, exactly? How scientific is any of this? What they've come up with is drugs to make it easier to control people. That can definitely become a bit too easy to do. Zelda Fitzgerald is one of the most famous cases but certainly not the only one.
I've recently become aware that clutter and poor hygiene has become a common tool for vengeful kids to get control over parents. A neighbor is now spending much of her life savings remodeling her house -- mostly because her kids want this job done before her MS gets bad enough to land her in a Home. They figure they can rent it out or sell it easier if it's completely and recently remodeled. They speak to her as if she's retarded. She's so scared of being abandoned, she is easy to bully.
I really really really have discomfort around issues of force. A lot of abuse is excused by claiming the person is mentally ill. For women especially, this usually means they're not good housekeepers. The range of what's considered ill enough to take away civil rights and self-determination can be way too broad.
|
|
|
Post by oliveoilmom on Oct 10, 2012 9:11:17 GMT -5
I think if I was living with all that poo around me, it would be the right thing to do to get me into some kind of treatment before I die from a disease. This is more than not being a good housekeeper. This lady had no idea that she shouldn't be doing it or what the smell was. She needed help.
I see that as no different than forcing someone who has attempted suicide into treatment, because the poo lady was commiting slow suicide and didn't even know it. That's not clutter, dust, junk, etc. That's a biohazard.
|
|
|
Post by 60isolderthanithot on Oct 10, 2012 9:11:38 GMT -5
Having said all that, I KNOW how hard it must be to watch a loved one go through what's in this particular Hoarding episode. It's easy to see those ladies are really far FAR far away from mainstream living standards. It's not healthy to have raw human waste in such proximity to people. I'm just nervous that this type of rabid publicity will be the core of a generalized scapegoating of people who are off the mainstream. Not everyone with clutter issues is using their living space as a septic tank!
|
|
|
Post by oliveoilmom on Oct 10, 2012 9:14:30 GMT -5
Well, I suppose it's like the difference between legally forcing a heroin junkie into treatment after they have OD'd several times and forcing a guy into treatment who smokes a joint once every three months. I'd assume the professionals could tell the difference.
Being basically a social drinker, who has on occasion tied one on, when I watch "Intervention" about an alcoholic, I do not worry that they may come out and make me to to treatment if I decide to stay drunk for the entire weekend of the Iron Bowl. It's the same prinicple. It really depends on the degree and the danger.
|
|
|
Post by 60isolderthanithot on Oct 10, 2012 9:26:46 GMT -5
The segway to forced suicide treatment shows there is a line of thought which goes down similar paths. It's not that far from treating poor housekeepers to treating other eccentrics and, in recent history, political dissidents against their wills. I believe we should be very careful, VERY, about how we write laws which force people into treatment. I don't think psychological services are so reliable that we can put everybody's liberty in the hands of shrinks and social workers. Just one relevant note: psychiatrists commit suicide at higher rates than the average population. Check out divorce rates too. And the levels of drug and other substance abuse. The "shrink" population should not have police powers without deep accountability.
"Extreme cases make bad law," is an old truism in legal studies.
|
|
|
Post by Di on Oct 10, 2012 9:30:17 GMT -5
I started watching and couldn't... It made me physically ill. That is not just hoarding... I'm not sure what it is.
|
|
|
Post by Ally on Oct 10, 2012 9:34:46 GMT -5
I just watched part of it. Shanna is sitting there is exteme filth, with a poster on the was that says, "I am okay." I don't know what to say, except it make my extemely messy, cluttered house, look clean in comparison.
|
|
|
Post by 60isolderthanithot on Oct 10, 2012 9:51:20 GMT -5
Yes, it's complicated. I find it hard to think that what's being shown in this episode is the natural end of hoarding. I suppose it could be for some.
Another reminder for me: isolation KILLS.
|
|
|
Post by oliveoilmom on Oct 10, 2012 10:03:22 GMT -5
Well, I'm very glad that when I attempted suicide that I was forced into treatment, because otherwise I'd be dead.
I'm also very glad that when my mother had a nervous breakdown when I was a teenager that she was forced into treatment because otherwise my life would have been worse.
I'm very glad that when my grandfather because paranoid and violent that he was forced into treatment because otherwise we could all be dead.
So, extreme or not, I'm very glad that those "bad laws" helped save me during extreme cases.
|
|
|
Post by 60isolderthanithot on Oct 10, 2012 10:21:58 GMT -5
And yes, I will confess that if it were my Mom, I'd want to bring in a bulldozer -- after using a tranquilizer dart on her! It outrages all notions of what's right for human life, what we see in these scenes. But we must question how much we allow the shrink community to decide what's normal and proper. It's very scary, giving anyone the power to say that a person should be forcefully removed from their home. Historically, "for their own good," has been an abuse excuse for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by 60isolderthanithot on Oct 10, 2012 10:38:43 GMT -5
Making arguments from personal reactions isn't the only way to create workable legal policy, is it? In many countries, heroin treatment is a choice -- and they don't have nearly as much drug crime as we do, nor do their addicts die as often. Even the Swiss finally accepted the body of scientific data and stopped trying to jail every drug addict. The USA has become known for its paranoia in this regard - such that our kids will find their work lives consumed paying for a failed war on drugs and just plain old fashioned wars - which have also failed. Force seems to be weaker than we think - unless we exert it maximally and forever. Which is rather expensive.
I wouldn't vote for ANYONE in this message board to be forced into treatment beyond the absolute minimums required to protect the public - and at that, if the person is mentally ill, I'd have trouble "treating" that with brute force. We aren't stepping up in time to prevent these things, near as I can tell, and it's a tad "too little, too late" to pop in with threats of prison after the person has gone so far down, they are dangerous to their neighbors.
If personal reactions are the fulcrum, I wouldn't mind a little more law enforcement with regard to noisy neighbors too, but again, I wouldn't vote to harass people with armed intervention over piano lessons or even parties.
These are torts and should be handled as civil matters, in my opinion. When you force someone into a hospital setting and pump them full of powerful psychotropic drugs, the results are not always what's expected or desired. Even something as common and benign as bipolar disorder has only about a 35% chance of long term management with drugs currently available. What are we supposed to do about this failure - jail the shrinks for fraud? Should hoarders be put into prison forever? It is obvious that it's a long term problem. IS that really how we want to run this society?
|
|
|
Post by oliveoilmom on Oct 10, 2012 10:47:02 GMT -5
It's not just psychiatrists. I do admit that there are some truly crappy ones out there, and just leaving things up to the people trained to spot mental illness will result in almost everybody being declared mentally ill. I mean, the sanest person in the world could go talk to one and they could find some diagnosis.
Social workers, psychologists, nurses, other doctors, family, friends, cops, lawyers, neighbors, public health officers, city inspectors, they all have a hand at times in deciding who should be forced into treatment and removed from their home. The poo lady needed to go to treatment and be removed from there for her own good. It's not that she had issues with getting it done, she really didn't seem to know that it needed to be done, and even after being told that it was dangerous, she was resistent. Maybe she has a cognitive problem, maybe a processing problem, maybe she is in denial as a defensive mechanism. Either way, she needed help to get her head back together.
The rapture lady didn't need to be removed or go to treatment, and she wasn't forced to. There are people on that show sometimes who live in unimaginable filth with human and animal poo and dead animals, etc but they are't forced into treatment. They are removed from the home when a professional says that it's not possible to fix it, and usually they are able to be helped somewhat by psychologists there.
As for the psychiatrists, I'm all for them when you need them. Antidepressants saved my life several times. I know a vet with severe PTSD and he admits that without his shrink he would be in prison, the looney bin, or dead. They are good to have when you need them. Some people don't realize they need them until after treatment. Sometimes you just can't see whats wrong.
I don't see shrinks going into peoples houses who are messy housekeepers and removing them and putting them in treatment. I don't see social workers removing kids from messy houses either. It's only when it gets past a certain point that they do. As a society we decide what is and isn't acceptable. It's not like the 1950's where if you didn't have a four course dinner, wash your sheets weekly, and sew your kids Halloween costume yourself, you were considered a bad mother. I do believe there is a line that shouldn't be crossed and I think that as a society we tend to recognize it now.
People in apartments and condos have less leeway than people in houses I believe, and I think that's probably because bugs or mice could spread to others, and renters have less leeway than owners because the owner of the property is the one who will eventually have to pay to fix what's messed up.
I do believe that adults in their right mind do have the right to live however they want to live. If the poo lady had said "Yes, I'm aware that this is dangerous. I know exactly what could happen to me and although I do not want to die, I accept this risk of my own free will" and if she lived out and away from others where her actions wouldn't effect anyone else, then I'd say let her do what she wants to do. As long as the person understands the risk and no one else is at risk, then I don't think we should bother them. Like bungee jumpers or the guys I saw in NG who climb mountains without ropes. That's crazy and can kill you but it's hurting no one else, they do understand it, so let them do it.
But when you don't really understand it, when you have neighbors who it effects (even without the smell or if it's behind a fence, their property values go down) then someone needs to step in.
As for the comment that isolation kills, do you believe that someone should step in to do something about someone's isolation, even if that person says they want to be isolated?
Whats the line that you believe shouldn't be crossed, and when do you believe that it's ok for mental health and government to step in and take over?
|
|