Thursday, May 29, 2014

ad endum

yes, i know i spelled it incorrectly.

so the other day i wrote about how i didn't get how the parents of mentally ill children (adult or otherwise) could just abdicate from their responsibility to monitor and take care of their children. i was speaking of the tragedy in california, of course. and today, i heard on npr a discussion saying about people with mental illnesses, their families, and the difficulties in such. and they were saying that in the california case, the parents really did all that they reasonably could given that their child was an adult. they also made the point that you can't really expect law enforcement to be of much assistance unless we did a better job of staffing police departments with people trained in handling people with mental illnesses and even then, we can't expect a perfect world- that even trained professionals make errors in judgement. they also discussed at what point others have the right to take away the rights of mentally ill. it's all pretty jumbled and murky really.

and so i've been thinking about that for the better part of the afternoon. and i still go back to parents. in that they need to be more proactive rather than reactive as the california parents were. by that i mean, while we all want our children to be independent as adults, i think we need to face the fact that there are some children/people who aren't going to be independent as adults. the other day, i gave the example of cognitively challenged children/adults. i think we also though, have to seriously consider this in terms of the issue of mental illness. i'm not talking about depression or anxiety disorders and such, but i do mean mental illnesses where you have any degree of psychosis or breaks with reality. i think in those cases, there always needs to be guardianship. and close monitoring and even in-residence care-taking or supervised adult living.

many years ago, in my small town, there was a man who was perhaps late 30ish or 40ish at the time. and he was schizophrenic. (and no, i didn't lay-diagnose him, i knew his family and they were open about the diagnosis.) anyway, he lived independently and even while it was a small enough town, his family really never knew exactly where he was or even how he was at any given time. and sad to say it, he just kind of had that "vacant" look, like he was somewhere else other than where he physically was, whenever you'd see him. and he's often be talking or mumbling to himself or to people who weren't there. and quite honestly, he scared people. he scared me, i'm ashamed to admit. but here's the thing. as the parent of two small children, it made me uneasy as all hell to be in the same store with him when my children were there. fair, not fair, i can't say. but it's how i felt about him. to the degree that one time when i was taking my kids out to get ice cream, we entered an ice cream store and i saw him and on seeing him, i turned my children around and said, "we're going to Dairy Queen instead."

explaining the incident to my then-husband later, i admitted my shame for feeling that way and my actions, but my assertion that my first duty was to keep my children safe. and i said, "i'm just afraid that something in his imagination will set him off someday and he'll take out a whole store or something."

turns out he didn't. what he actually did one day some 8 or so years later was hang himself. taking out only himself. thankfully. and sadly.

but you know? what an exceedingly lonely sad life for him. to have people be so afraid of you, they won't even share the same air with you. and i think, how much better would it have been for him to have lived with his family or in a supervised setting, where it could be assured that he would take his meds and it could be assured that he'd have people to interact with him. i guess what i'm saying is that he'd have had a better life without all that independence. and with others assuming some of his responsibilities. and i can't think that had his family or a companion been with him when he was sitting at that ice cream shoppe, that i would have been afraid of him.

did you ever see the movie, benny and june? i loved that movie. and it was rather about this subject. the brother did not want to let his sister (who i think was schizophrenic) have independence. he kept hiring housekeepers who she would drive away. then one day someone showed up who wanted to actually be a family member who would take care of her. (good old johnny depp) at first the brother doesn't trust that. but in the end, it's real. and i realize that this is just a fairy tale story. that you can't realistically hope that an offbeat, quirky hippie is going to show up and love your sister through her life. but seriously? i give the brother high praise for never abdicating his responsibilities until he found someone who could be trusted.

No comments: