debluvscanucks, on 04 December 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:
HBR, my thinking is that, at the current time, the mental health system doesn't work. It's failed, miserably, as a matter of fact.
lot's of difficult situations with poor outcomes for sure. I've seen the system firsthand for decades an can attest to it. You still need to trust the system rather than incarcerate anyone that "scares" you. This woman is scary indeed but she is in better hands now than what she ever has been before. Knee- jerk reactions to have her deemed a potential serial killer and thrown into jail again is not the answer and smarter people than us here on CDC feel that way. She needs some sort of normality in order to improve and she won't get that in a "psycho" ward at Riverview. There are never any guarantees in life but somehow we think we are smarter than those in charge. We are not.
And yes you did quote an article that says she should be permanently institutionalized.
I just don't understand how, in this day and age, we are so seriously deprived of good mental health care. There is no excuse for people not to be institutionalized if they pose a serious risk to others as well as themselves.
Here's some more insight into it:
is a 22-year-old BC resident who enjoys inflicting suffering on others. She tortured to death her family dog and pet cat, for which she is doing an absurdly short stretch in jail. She has fantasized about killing homeless people, and was found on her arrest to have a “murder kit” in her possession—syringes, a knife, a mask, and restraining straps.
Judge Malcolm MacLean called Kayla Bourque a “psychopathic and narcissistic” “sexual sadist” who’s obsessed with gore and violence and has shown no guilt or remorse.
…”She was intelligent and articulate and preoccupied with inflicting harm and pain on others,” said MacLean.
He said Bourque showed no empathy and psychiatric reports showed she was a sexual sadist with “multiple sexual deviations.”
She suffers from a number of personality disorders, including psychopathology and narcissism, and “felt no guilt, shame or remorse.”
He said she will likely require supervision for the rest of her life and she “presents a moderate level of treatability,” but her rehabilitation has less likelihood of success if voluntary.
“She’s at a moderate to high risk to harm others,” particularly children, the elderly and the disabled, said MacLean.
Under the BC Mental Health Act
, a “person with a mental disorder” can be involuntarily confined in a psychiatric institution. Here’s the definition:
“person with a mental disorder” means a person who has a disorder of the mind that requires treatment and seriously impairs the person’s ability
(a) to react appropriately to the person’s environment, or
( to associate with others;
But, incredibly, the psychiatrists on the case will apparently not certify her as such. She will be walking the streets in a mere few weeks, looking for prey.
Bourque was a Romanian orphan for the first crucial eight months of her life in 1990. Conditions in those state orphanages were appalling
, and the healthy and rapid infant development that arises from bonding was likely stunted. It is perhaps not all that surprising that Bourque cannot form normal relationships. She is a deformed and dangerous person, but she was likely made that way.
Nevertheless, to know all is not to forgive all, and certainly not to permit all. Bourque is a threat to everyone around her. Permanent institutionalization
at Her Majesty’s pleasure would seem the obvious, socially responsible course to take.
, the psychiatrist’s working manual, is a vast compendium of alleged “disorders” that in theory, at least, permits the psychiatrization of almost anyone who doesn’t fit a narrow definition of “normal.” It offers cover for the institutionalization of people who talk back to authority
and for the incarceration of drama queens
. But somehow, in this instance, it has failed to function.
So here is the bottom line. After all the hand-wringing is over, a psychopath will soon be terrorizing society. Yet there is nothing to be done, we are told, except to impose onerous parole conditions on an apparently bright and inventive young woman, and follow her around at great expense for the rest of her life.
This is, to use a technical term, madness.
"She is already considered to be of risk to others, that's been determined (that the likelihood that she'll continue on this path is strong). She has no remorse and sounds to be very disconnected - there are obviously deep psychological issues here that need addressing before you move to square two, letting her wander around in public. She has tortured and killed living creatures and was found with weapons and plans for further action. If it was just a fantasy, fine....but she's put her plan into action, at least in the beginning stages. That's a red flag, not to be taken lightly.
We're not saying "forever",
we're saying in these initial stages. For crying out loud, she's just been recently identified with these serious issues/disorders and initial assessments are in the works...during the period of "figuring out" - yes, keep her safely out of the public and formulate a plan. Start chipping away to see if there's any hope of rehabilitation and then determine what's best. But to simply impose strict regulations on her and risk that she doesn't abide by them - that's not really doing anyone any good, including her. "
I love rock and roll, just put another dime in the juice box baby.