fwiw

Rando7 · Post by **Rando7** » Tue Jul 22, 2003 6:52 am

Paul Reid wrote: Fortunately for us Canucks, we don't have to pay for this care - it's covered under our Provincial health plan called OHIP.

Sorry to pick a nit, but assuming you pay taxes then you do indeed pay for the care. Even if you don't pay taxes, the program still impacts on the costs of other goods and services. I'm not saying that's good or bad, just that "ain't nuthin in life that's free".

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:59 am

Just to put the thing in perspective, as I and others
have testified personally in earlier threads, inexpensive mental
health care is widely available to poor Americans
through various venues, public and private.
There may be rural areas
where there are difficulties, and if you can't get
to it (you're far from transportation, can't drive, etc)
you may have special problems--though there
is usually free transportation for the handicapped.
Best

Paul Reid · Post by **Paul Reid** » Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:34 am

Can't argue with that Rando. The only thing is that taxes are the one thing you can count on, and one lump payment for services is sometimes difficult for those without the means. Unemployed people who get taxes refunded are also covered by OHIP. Those of us who are lucky to be healthy take care of those who are not, and one day those of us who used to be healthy will dip into the system eventually. It all works out in the end.

Cheers,

PR

madguy · Post by **madguy** » Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:48 am

Welcome back, Cran.
However, didn't someone sage caution us about getting too involved in all of this earlier?

~Larry

TelegramSam · Post by **TelegramSam** » Tue Jul 22, 2003 1:33 pm

madguy--actually Dale just advised that we not yack about him while he's not here to speak for himself. Well, he's back, and I don't think he minds a bit of chatter if it's positive and at least trying to be helpful. If anybody steps out of line, I'm sure Cran will tell them to clam it.

spittin_in_the_wind · Post by **spittin_in_the_wind** » Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:28 pm

jbarter wrote:
Cranberry wrote: I've been getting a LOT better at whistle (not hard to do considering I suck).
I think I've spotted a basic flaw in your technique. Try blowing.

Now, THAT was funny....

Anyways, I go away for a few days and there's Cranberry! Pop in once and a while, will ya?

Robin

Wombat · Post by **Wombat** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:10 am

TelegramSam wrote:madguy--actually Dale just advised that we not yack about him while he's not here to speak for himself. Well, he's back, and I don't think he minds a bit of chatter if it's positive and at least trying to be helpful. If anybody steps out of line, I'm sure Cran will tell them to clam it.

Sages other than Dale recommended caution and perhaps still do.

Loren · Post by **Loren** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 1:58 pm

jim stone wrote:Just to put the thing in perspective, as I and others
have testified personally in earlier threads, inexpensive mental
health care is widely available to poor Americans
through various venues, public and private.

Yes, and No, Jim. What is available varies from state to state. In addition, the type of care available to those with little or no income, is often not apropriate for their condition (due to lack of funds for "second opinions" and diagnostic testing), not provided frequently enough (therapy sessions once a month for people who are seriously ill?!!?), nor is this "Care" provided in a timely fashion - often it doesn't matter how sick a person is, unless they say they will kill themselves in the next 24 hours, they will often have to wait 4-8 weeks for an appointment to see a doctor/therapist and have the opportunity to get medication. There are many people out there who, while not suicidal this minute, urgently need help - certainly quicker than a month or two - and for these people the reality often is that there is no help available when it's needed.

I can certainly understand that your experiences Jim, and those of others you know, may have been different, but I believe your blanket statement oversimplifies and gives an inaccurate idea of what the reality is in many parts of the country.

I have no interest in debating this subject, simply adding another viewpoint, for the record.

Loren

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Wed Jul 23, 2003 4:15 pm

Maybe so, Loren. As you say, it conflicts drastically
with my experience. I do believe that people
who put some energy into problem solving
can generally get what they need.

Wombat · Post by **Wombat** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 3:19 am

jim stone wrote:Maybe so, Loren. As you say, it conflicts drastically
with my experience. I do believe that people
who put some energy into problem solving
can generally get what they need.

Psychosis and neurosis are two dramatically different things, Jim. Somebody in the midst of a psychotic breakdown does not have a 'problem' in the sense that most of us have problems and might well lack the energy to do anything much that is constructive. For such a person, self help might simply be impossible and most forms of therapy hopelessly inadequate.

I am puzzled by the tendency of well-meaning people in our community to not want to acknowledge this; it is however just what I would expect from the bean counters. The view that we are all in control of our own destiny seems to be fixed ideology in some quarters. In other quarters, the view seems rather to be that no condition could be so bad that fixing it requires more than love and positive energy. How simple it would all be if either of these views were true.

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 6:37 am

You write: 'Psychosis and neurosis are two dramatically
different things, etc.'

Been there; done that.

You might, if you haven't done so,
want to read some earlier threads that
dealt with some of these issues, which expressed
concerns about
the ramifications of threads like these, and which Dale
asked us to stop. Maybe some reading between the lines
would help. I'm out of this one. Best

Wombat · Post by **Wombat** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 1:08 pm

jim stone wrote:You write: 'Psychosis and neurosis are two dramatically
different things, etc.'

Been there; done that.

You might, if you haven't done so,
want to read some earlier threads that
dealt with some of these issues, which expressed
concerns about
the ramifications of threads like these, and which Dale
asked us to stop. Maybe some reading between the lines
would help. I'm out of this one. Best

Well Jim if you can misinterpret me this badly I'd better set the record straight. My post was a reaction to general points you made in response to Loren about mental health care. Dale rightly cautioned against our discussing the mental health of a particular member of our community. On that thread I myself had earlier expressed the view that this kind of discussion is distasteful. It is therefore wildly improbable that I intended my carefully chosen general remarks here to be about one or another member of our community. So let me make myself clear: that was not how I intended my remarks to be taken.

I take it that mental health can still be discussed here in general terms; I took myself to be entering a conversation in which precisely this was being done. I haven't the faintest idea how my remarks could have been taken differently.

jim stone · Post by **jim stone** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 6:34 pm

They weren't. Sorry if i'm being confusing. If you want
to talk further, let's do it PM. Thanks, Jim

Wombat · Post by **Wombat** » Thu Jul 24, 2003 11:18 pm

jim stone wrote:They weren't. Sorry if i'm being confusing. If you want
to talk further, let's do it PM. Thanks, Jim

Sure Jim. Thanks for that. I think I now know what you were hinting at. I'll send you a PM just to make sure. I don't think there's now any need to clear the air anyway, publicly or privately.

Chiff and Fipple Forums

fwiw

Re: fwiw