Last week I mentioned a number of factors that went into why I as a teenager never had to fear dying in a school shooting–despite access to guns being easier in the 1980’s. Discipline, actual parental oversight, less glorification of violence and actual human interaction were among the points I touched on. One that I did not mention–but will now–is that people that threatened to harm us were usually locked up.
I was reminded of that this week as reports surfaced that the Parkland, Florida shooter had been recommended for involuntary commitment due to mental health issues. Such a commitment would have taken the shooter off the streets and receiving the in-patient mental care he obviously needed. It also would have put him on a list of people who would not be allowed to purchase firearms–meaning gun laws already on the books would then have likely prevented the school shooting.
Some of you older listeners may remember “sanitariums”. Originally used for those with highly-infectious diseases, they eventually became repositories for the insane. People that talked to themselves in public, whose behaviors could not be controlled by their parents or police, and those that made threats to harm others were secreted away to these facilities. The CNN series on the Kennedy family this month reminded me that Joe Kennedy had his daughter lobotomized and then committed to a facility in Jefferson County here in Wisconsin to live out the rest of her life.
Institutionalization was seen as the best way to protect the rest of society from those who could not–or would not–control their behavior. But somewhere in the 1960’s and 70’s–involuntary committal came to be seen as “inhumane”–and courts became less likely to do it. Doctors convinced judges and advocates that modern medicines could control those deemed to be a threat to themselves and others. Laws were passed that forced the mainstreaming of those with profound mental illnesses into society, schools and the workplace. Committal was no longer a proactive step–but a “last resort”–usually taken only after a serious criminal act.
Now those that had for decades been locked away for both their own and society’s protection are out on the streets. Often left to fend for themselves, or to disrupt classrooms and workplaces, and in extreme cases to act out in ways that take dozens of lives with them. So among the “discussions” we should be having in the wake of another school shooting is if we should continue to put faith in voluntary administration of drugs to control the criminally insane–or if we are going to use involuntary commitment to protect not just ourselves but those who seek to do us harm.
