Search This Blog

Sunday, February 25, 2018

Analysis of a Catastrophe

On Wednesday, February 14, 2018, nineteen years old Nikolas Cruz used a semiautomatic rifle to kill seventeen people, mostly teenagers at Marjory Stoneham Douglas High School. Cruz’s violent actions were so beyond the realm of normal behavior that many, including myself, assume that he was mentally ill at the time. Untreated seriously mentally people are more likely to be violent than the general population.

What was the extent of his mental illness? What can legislators do to try to prevent a recurrence? Should they tighten gun control or reduce mental illness? Although Breakdown: A Clinician's Experience in a Broken System of Emergency Psychiatry will not address the gun control debate, the most thorough examination of mental illness should include it.

In One Source. One Organ posted on October 1, 2017, I wrote: “Even features of antisocial personality disorder, such as lack of empathy, are physically evident in the brain.” After a homicidal man told me about his enjoyment of killing small animals and his lack of remorse for harming others, I authorized his involuntary transfer to the hospital. He had a specific plan, means, and target in mind. He also killed people in the past. Later, the hospital emergency physician released him to a homeless shelter and told me that antisocial personality disorder didn’t rise to the level of inpatient criteria.

As a mobile psychiatric emergency clinician, I decide on a daily basis whether or not to authorize involuntary transfers of mentally ill patients to the hospital. I examine all the information available to me and ask myself if anyone will die if containment is not arranged. If Cruz landed on my caseload, what would I have done?

Let’s suppose that a family member brought to my attention that Cruz cut his arm on Snapchat. What did he intend to do when he cut? How deep into the skin did he go? Where on the body did he cut? Close to a vein or artery? Or between the elbow and wrist? Was he alone when he did this?

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reported that someone reported to them that his behavior was erratic. (https://bit.ly/2sKib4C) This alone is not specific enough to warrant commitment.

Snapchat showed that he wanted to buy a gun. (https://bit.ly/2sKib4C) He bought the gun legally.

Well over forty articles all show that Cruz said that demon voices instructed him to kill his peers. To be clear, if this were known before the shooting, he would have qualified for inpatient. It arose after the tragedy. I cannot conclude that he was psychotic because it is too vague. Religious patients told me that God talked to them, or that they should not have listened to the devil just before making poor choices. Cruz did not make this statement to a forensic clinician. He might have been asked this in a leading way. His developmental disability might have interfered with his ability to report information accurately. Young children who do not have the same intellectual capacity as most adults have are certainly not always reliable reporters. He might have intended to say that he chose to act violently. Delusions are associated more with violence than hallucinations are.

Another diagnosis might have been discovered if he was in treatment. He was out of mental health treatment for more than a year, despite professionals recommending that he receive treatment. He was diagnosed with mental illnesses that are not associated with violence - autism, attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and depression. However, the lack of being in treatment becomes alarming when considering the following threats of violence.

His caretaker called 911 stating that he put a gun to his brother’s head and previously put a gun to his mother’s head. (https://bit.ly/2opRHAw)

On January 5, 2018, the FBI was informed that he owned a gun. (https://bit.ly/2sKib4C) This alone was not enough to qualify for inpatient, but when placed in the following context, inpatient criteria was met. Someone called the FBI last month stating that Cruz intended to kill people, perhaps at school. (https://nyti.ms/2ocUTiR) According to the Department of Child and Family Services, he expressed a desire to kill people. (https://bit.ly/2sKib4C)

Cruz threated to harm his peers at school. He was referred for a threat assessment by the school in January 2017. (https://nyti.ms/2ocUTiR) A teacher requested of the administration, social worker(s), and psychologist(s) that they meet with him and his caregivers to assess what mental health services can be recommended or if he needs to be hospitalized. Before getting expelled, he was not permitted to carry a backpack to school because of the threats he made toward other students.

Last year, someone notified the FBI that Cruz posted on YouTube “Im going to be a professional school shooter.” (https://bit.ly/2EGSc3m) An FBI representative said that they could not identify the author. This doesn’t seem accurate to me. Rather than order a psychiatric evaluation, they chose to do nothing.

Public defender Melisa McNeill said that Cruz is remorseful. This alludes to the possibility of serious mental illness. An array of articles point to his killing of small animals. This refers to the possibility of antisocial personality disorder. Stating that mental illness is rarely the cause of mass shootings minimizes the extent of its role.

The system is not sophisticated enough to consistently identify and predict who is most at risk of murdering others. The National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch voiced that mentally disturbed people shouldn't be allowed to purchase guns. As long as the mental health system is as dysfunctional as it is, the implementation of this feat would be impossible because persons' potential for imposing violence is not always apparent. Under federal law, people who have been involuntarily committed are not allowed to buy guns. This is not nearly enough to prevent another school massacre. Firstly, commitment standards are overly restrictive in most states, which makes it hard to hospitalize people. Secondly, even if a dangerous person gets involuntarily committed and released, there are so many guns available in the United States that he can easily obtain one illegally.

My personal opinion is that all common civilians should not be allowed to access guns with the capacity (e.g., fast-capacity magazines, bump stocks) to inflict the carnage seen at Virginia Polytechnic college, Sandy Hook elementary school, and Douglas high school. The states and countries with the strictest gun laws have the least deaths from guns. (https://bit.ly/2HKOjs8) Approximately 99 percent of the world does not have anything akin to our second amendment. Antiquated and unnecessary, it is repeatedly used as an excuse for gun violence. Cruz's right to own a gun obliterated the rights of these children. The United States is the only country in the world that encompasses this conversation. It is not needed elsewhere.

When safety concerns are brought to my attention, and the patient denies these, reliability must be questioned. When hints and clues exist, what is not seen must be considered. Dig deeply to unmask the whole story. Trust your instincts. Talk to people who know the patient best.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

It is so tragic and what makes it even more tragic is that it will keep happening!

aitchkaye said...

I cannot imagine the heartbreak and anger of the survivors knowing that this could and should have been avoided.