While virtually the entire nation unites around the reasonable proposition
that people with serious mental illnesses should not own assault weapons, one group
takes umbrage: mental-health experts. In the wake of incidents such as the one
at Newtown, the experts immediately issue press releases claiming that people
with mental illness are no more violent than others, leading to the conclusion
that people with serious mental illness should not be the target of gun-control
efforts.
How can the chasm be so wide? Who is right? The public that
believes mental illness is associated with violence, or the experts who claim
it is not? The science of violence becomes clear when you look at the totality
of mental illness violence studies versus any single study. The definitive answer is: It
depends on who is mentally ill.
- Studies of the 40 to 50 percent of Americans whom mental-health experts claim have some “diagnosable mental disorder” support the claim that “persons with mental illness are not more violent than others.” But the populations in those studies are disingenuously large.
- Studies of the 5 percent of Americans with the most serious mental illnesses -- primarily schizophrenia and treatment-resistant bipolar disorder -- who are receiving treatment also support the claim of mental-health experts that "persons with mental illness are not more violent than others". But these studies prove only that treatment works, not that persons with mental illness are not more prone to violence.
- Studies of the 5 percent of subgroup of the most seriously mentally ill who are not in treatment and are psychotic, delusional, or hallucinating, or are off treatment that has previously prevented them from being violent, are in fact more prone to violence than others.
When people ask
whether the mentally ill are more violent, they usually mean this group of
severely ill individuals and not their friends on Zoloft, Prozac, etc.
Another disconnect: Mental health advocates claim that people with mental
illness are no more prone to violence than others, but at the same time claim that to prevent violence, more money is needed for mental-health treatment. Both
claims cannot be true. And the public knows it.
There is another gap in between the public and mental-health experts.
The experts think they are doing a good job with limited resources. But the public
disagrees. Over $100 billion is spent on mental health. When more money goes
into the system, more people get diagnosed as needing services. The incremental
funding is rarely used for the most seriously ill. Witness California: In 2005,
California voters passed the Mental Health Services Act, a 1 percent tax on millionaires
to provide services for people with “serious mental illness.” As someone with a
mentally ill relative, I thank Californians for that. But when the money rolled
in, the mental-health system turned their backs on the seriously mentally ill.
The California mental-health system diverted money to fund hip-hop car washes,
gardens for Hmong, massage chairs for government employees, and public-relations
firms to convince the public that all is well. The mental-health experts investigated
these reports and found nothing wrong. The state auditor is investigating, and
I believe her conclusion will differ.
The mental-health system claims more money is needed to identify
who is mentally ill. Again: it's not true. Jared Loughner, who shot Gabrielle Giffords;
James Holmes, who shot up a movie theater in Aurora; John Hinckley Jr., who
shot President Reagan; James Bassler, who shot the former mayor of Ft. Bragg;
Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, who mailed explosive packages; Ian Stawicki, who
shot five others and himself in a Seattle café; Eduardo Sencion, who shot
National Guardsmen at a Nevada IHOP restaurant; Russell Weston, who shot two
guards at the U.S. Capitol building; and Adam Lanza, who shot his mother, 26
others, and himself in Newtown, Conn.-- all were all known to be ill before
they became a headline. The problem wasn’t lack of identification. It was lack
of treatment.
Those of us who address these issues honestly and openly enjoy broad public support. The police
are on our side. The parents of persons with serious mental illness are on our
side. People with serious mental illness themselves are on our side. But the mental-health
advocates are not. Unfortunately that is who politicians listen to.
Who’s crazy?
— D. J. Jaffe
is executive director of Mental Illness Policy Org., a think tank specializing
in serious mental illness, not mental health. A version of this article originally appeared in National Review.
