Heard it all now !!!!

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Why the quote marks?

Hard to say but the Prison Service's provision of welfare has in the past been found lacking. I find it hard to believe that this case would have come to court had appropriate treatment been available. One has to wonder if prison is indeed the right place for him.

Just maybe?

Methinks you are a) splitting hairs here (with or without a razor blade) and/or b) looking to blame the authorities (for a change?).

Here's another few maybes: maybe, just maybe, the guy is in the right place, maybe with good care (maybe even better than that afforded to non-criminals), and maybe he just saw a way to grab attention by employing a lawyer who maybe should have refused to handle the case?

Me283, why the quote marks.

I suggest you do some research into self harm.

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Me283, why the quote marks.

I suggest you do some research into self harm.

Quote marks because I personally don't know if it is an illness, do you? Is it an illness, or a condition? Is it a reaction to existing medication? Jeez, it could be many things... it could even have religious grounding. So Andy, which is it?

Originally Posted by me283

Quote marks because I personally don't know if it is an illness, do you? Is it an illness, or a condition? Is it a reaction to existing medication? Jeez, it could be many things... it could even have religious grounding. So Andy, which is it?

So are you just lazy or do you not want to challenge your own perceptions and prejudices, or learn about a condition upon which you are happy to comment. I suggest you download the Google toolbar and use it.

In the meantime:

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/178/1/48
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/press/preleases/pr/pr_312.htm
http://www.nshn.co.uk/facts.html

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

So are you just lazy or do you not want to challenge your own perceptions and prejudices, or learn about a condition upon which you are happy to comment. I suggest you download the Google toolbar and use it.

In the meantime:

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/178/1/48
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/press/preleases/pr/pr_312.htm
http://www.nshn.co.uk/facts.html

So are you lazy, or are you avoiding the question? Is it an illness, a condition, a result of medication...

I really can't be ar*ed to look up about everything that happens in the world. The guy has a problem: we have doctors for that, not courts and razor blades.

Now, will you answer my question, or avoid it? (Memories flooding back of your previous avoidance...)

Me283, I've put you on ignore cos there's is absolutely no point in debating with someone who can't even be @rsed to research when provided the links to do so. I hope you are very happy in your nasty and uninformed world.

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Me283, I've put you on ignore cos there's is absolutely no point in debating with someone who can't even be @rsed to research when provided the links to do so. I hope you are very happy in your nasty and uninformed world.

I'll take that as a "no" then.

Good grief, can we leave "quote marks" out of this and stick to the topic please?!

I think we have heard more than enough questioning and more than enough answering on that point. This is not Newsnight, we are not Jeremy Paxman, so let's stop with the forensic questioning.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by Chris T

Good grief, can we leave "quote marks" out of this and stick to the topic please?!

I think we have heard more than enough questioning and more than enough answering on that point. This is not Newsnight, we are not Jeremy Paxman, so let's stop with the forensic questioning.

Thank you.

Chris, I appreciate your considered input on many threads (youy can sense that 'however' coming now can't you) however (there it is!) the reason I challenged on the quote marks was precisely because the attitudes being promoted on this thread were highly dismissive of a serious problem. So from my perspective at least, this was on topic. Happy to let it drop now as I hope I have made my point.

I would also argue that being chastised for picking up on this issue when others have been wishing a bloke dead is, er, a bit peculiar

[me283]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Good grief, can we leave "quote marks" out of this and stick to the topic please?!

I think we have heard more than enough questioning and more than enough answering on that point. This is not Newsnight, we are not Jeremy Paxman, so let's stop with the forensic questioning.

Thank you.

Well said Chris!

[greencreeper]

Self-harm has nothing to do with suicide, and by preventing him from self-harming with sterile blades, the courts have made it more likely that his wounds will become infected, and more likely that he will commit suicide. The guy is in the wrong place to help him understand his self-harming. That said, there are very few right places - treatment and understanding of self-harming is very poor.

I don't find his request funny or a waste of money. If you do have a right to life, then you have a right to the thing that sustains that life - your body - and by extension, you have a right to die. For me, it's simple and clear. We complicate the issue because of fear and misguided compassion.

[me283]

Originally Posted by greencreeper

Self-harm has nothing to do with suicide, and by preventing him from self-harming with sterile blades, the courts have made it more likely that his wounds will become infected, and more likely that he will commit suicide. The guy is in the wrong place to help him understand his self-harming. That said, there are very few right places - treatment and understanding of self-harming is very poor.

I don't find his request funny or a waste of money. If you do have a right to life, then you have a right to the thing that sustains that life - your body - and by extension, you have a right to die. For me, it's simple and clear. We complicate the issue because of fear and misguided compassion.

I think the "right to die" issue is extremely complex, much more so than the matter under discussion.

As for whether or not to let him have razor blades, it would be a very brave person to do so and believe that a mentally unstable person would be able to self-harm and not endanger his life. That's in my opinion of course, which some people believe is not worthy of hearing.

[greencreeper]

Originally Posted by me283

I think the "right to die" issue is extremely complex, much more so than the matter under discussion.

As for whether or not to let him have razor blades, it would be a very brave person to do so and believe that a mentally unstable person would be able to self-harm and not endanger his life. That's in my opinion of course, which some people believe is not worthy of hearing.

Self-harmers are not mentally unstable. I'm not entirely certain who would be classed as mentally unstabled. Self-harmers are "mis-wired" for want of a better explanation - they cope with the things you and me cope with by harming themselves.

[me283]

Originally Posted by greencreeper

Self-harmers are not mentally unstable. I'm not entirely certain who would be classed as mentally unstabled. Self-harmers are "mis-wired" for want of a better explanation - they cope with the things you and me cope with by harming themselves.

Which doesn't exactly make them "mentally stable"? Sure, the level of instability is debatable, but you surely aren't saying that they are mentally sound?

Originally Posted by greencreeper

Self-harmers are not mentally unstable. I'm not entirely certain who would be classed as mentally unstabled. Self-harmers are "mis-wired" for want of a better explanation - they cope with the things you and me cope with by harming themselves.

Erm ... I think you're juggling semantics just a little there GC. Survival is the most basic instinct of all life, so any mis-wiring of the brain that compromises that basic instinct is reasonably described as an instability in my view.