Nepal pictures, history, people, facts

New legislation pending in PA will give school officials the power to make involuntary commitments to mental health facilities.  This is House Bill 1276. The bill provides that school officials will be able to do this without parental consent and that school officials will have complete immunity from liability that arises. A legislator was quoted as saying that if a school employee did this, using their personal judgement about what is in the best interest of the child, they should not be hald accountable for any liability. Who will the targets of this legislation be if it should pass?  All the unruly and problem children in school.  Anyone who pushes someone in the halls (danger to others).  Anyone who acts disrespectfully to an adult (disrespect will be interpreted as threatening behavior).  Anyone who has poor attendance (they must be depressed).  Anyone caught in a lie (they clearly have a poor concept of reality). As it stands now, if a child is involved in behavior alleged to be criminal, schools may call the police.  If a child is experiencing a mental health crisis, schools contact the parent.  If a child poses a clear danger to self or others, the police have the authority to petition for involuntary commitment of the child. Do schools really need this new, unchecked power?  Without consent, without liability and without a right for the parent to be heard?

liability and without a right for the parent to be heard? And without consent and liability or the rights of the parents to be heard this is a new high in draconian arrogance and attack against the cornerstones and foundations of society. Hear those iron gates yet? Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

. . . involuntary commitments [of students] to mental health facilities [by school officials] . . . without consent and liability or the rights of the parents to be heard this is a new high in draconian arrogance and attack against the cornerstones and foundations of society. Well said.  No society will last very long without functional families.  The proof is all around us.  Even a prosperous economy can't conceal our homegrown problems. Another problem with involuntary commitments mandated with impunity is that they can be used to stifle legitimate dissent.  The Soviet Union followed this path before that empire crumbled.

I would assume such would be with the knowledge of the parents, and the parents would have their ability to oppose such action, true? Not my area of expertise, but this is how I know it to be.  Anyone, feel free to educate me here.  I believe that children under 14 cannot be subject to involuntary commitment, and could not otherwise be hospitalized without parental consent or a court order.  There may be exceptions to this.  Mental health law is complicated.  Children 14 or older are subject to involuntary commitment and can then be hospitalized for pyschiatric treatment without parental consent.  There is a review process, but I know nothing about it.  It seems, although I really don't know the details, that this new liegislation pending in PA might end up making kids under 14 subject to involuntary mental health hospitalization. IMO, it's a knee jerk.  And a really strong one.  And a really intrusive one. The law already provides for means to address the situation of a child's mental health needs.

Another problem with involuntary commitments mandated with impunity is that they can be used to stifle legitimate dissent.  The Soviet Union followed this path before that empire crumbled. If Bob and Bing were still making movies, we be On the Road to Moscow.

liability and without a right for the parent to be heard? OF COURSE NOT! Bad bill. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.