Any info at all on why Jared Loughner did not get treatment for his mental health issues?

It could be his family was in denial and/or wasn't able to force him into treatment. But, what if it was because Mr. Loughner had no health insurance?

I hope answers are forthcoming, especially in light of upcoming hearings on the repug effort to repeal HCR.

He's an adult and it's very difficult to get an adult committed against their will. And, as you can see from his INternet postings, he though he was fine and that it is the rest of the world that's wrong.

And, had he wanted help, how would he get it? No insurance, no money, no help.

To be reinstated, he would have to be evaluated.
Instead, he bought a gun.

COLD BLOODED killer plain and simple

Nobody is saying that his psychosis was an excuse. The point is, if he had sought treatment, this killing might have been prevented.

I will ask: Do we know he went without treatment? I have yet to read and article that establishes that he did not.

thus we process children through a juvenile court system. Given the rarity of violence byte mentally ill, clearly being mentally ill doesn't mean you have no judgment, but I think the argument can be made for impaired judgment. Or, consider the case of someone who shoots an intruder in their home, only to turn on the light and discover it was their son up getting a glass of water. Here a perfectly rational person has made a bad decision based on faulty info. The mentally ill often navigate through their own individual reality.

To lock him up without his consent - civil liberties which we support

...also perversely make the person unwilling to seek those interventions.

Many states do not have good mental health programs.

In fact, when people try to tell you you're mentally ill it confirms your opinion that you're right and they're out to get you.

Still, to avoid the hassle you can often hide it. Parents and relatives are often more than willing to overlook obvious signs. My father missed my mother's Alzheimer's until she had been hallucinating for 9 months and had forgotten the previous 10 years of her life. He found excuses for her. You see precisely the same kind of pattern of behavior in families where a relative is sexually abusing children.

Now, I've just gone through the entire process in Arizona to win guardianship for my mother. It took filing a petition--not a cheap affair. She had her lawyer, which I had to arrange for and would pay for if I had lost. We had a hearing, and because it was contested we had an evidenciary hearing. It helped that my mother was there and acted truly bizarre; her lawyer nearly had to take her out of the courtroom. It wasn't a fun day. It took 5 months for the process, from filing to court order. She had the full benefit of due process so that her civil rights were protected. Rather more than necessary, IMO, although there is an emergency temporary guardianship possible, with a rather higher bar to get over for it to be instituted pending having the usual process followed to make it permanent.

Loughner's behavior by most accounts was bizarre. I don't think that his parents or a public fiduciary would have been able to clear the legal requirements for stripping him of his rights because not all mental illness, by any means, needs to be treated.

Most health insurance doesn't cover psychiatric care. Counseling-based therapy is expensive, open ended, "cures" are hard to spot and often the care ends when the patient thinks he's improved enough and not when the doctor says, "All better." Drug-based therapies are similarly expensive and open-ended. Plans that cover psychiatric care tend to be spendy.

On the other hand, from a relative's experience, Arizona does have the infrastructure for handling people that are mentally ill and a danger to themselves or others. They get arrested. They get involutarily committed. They get observed and monitored and treated. And the state picks up the tab if the patient is indigent--and if the patient isn't indigent, he probably will be in short order. There are group homes once the patient isn't an obvious threat to himself or others if he can't really live on his own; slots are limited, but the patient's circumstances can move him to the top of the list.

On edit: The standard isn't "danger to themselves or others" but unable to manage their affairs using sound judgment. Yes, you could drive a semi through the hole in that left by variously defining "sound judgment" but it's defined elsewhere clearly enough. Aberrant political views don't count; we're not the USSR.

Especially if he believed he was perfectly fine and world was out to get him.

of in-house mental treatment-such as a hospital- because of political decisions to shut down most mental hospitals to save money. It is also very difficult to get an adult committed for treatment against their will.
From the little I read about his family, I would guess they were not very big on mental health anyway.


mark

depression. It is expensive to treat mental illness. There is not much out there anymore except private practices. Meds are expensive too, without insurance. I have had depression for years, since college. I think I tried to treat myself but I needed help. Been on celexa/lexapro/prozac, etc. on and off for 15 years. People with mental issues feel a certain stigma. And then some are simply too mentally ill to know they need help. Parents can be in denial. I have worked with abused and mentally ill children as well. It is a crisis in this country. And not many people get the help they need.