By Lauren Spiro, Director of Public Policy, National Coalition of Mental Health Consumer/Survivor Organizations

& Judi Chamberlin , Director of Education and Training, National Empowerment Center 

H.L. Mencken said, “For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” The Virginia Tech tragedy – in which a student was responsible for the shooting deaths of 33 people, including himself – has been generating this kind of solution.  

Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia recently suggested one such misbegotten plan: the creation of a list of individuals ordered into involuntary mental health treatment, to be reported on a state’s Central Criminal Records Exchange. On the Hill, there is a proposal to develop a national list of everyone who has ever been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital, which would be shared with law enforcement personnel. 

These are examples of knee-jerk, ill-informed, short-sighted “solutions.” Eroding civil liberties will not make our community safer. Instead, it will waste precious resources that could be better spent on solving the problem. Lists such as the one the governor has ordered and the one proposed on the Hill would have the following unintended negative consequences:  

• Such a national list would include the names of millions of people whose mental health history does not involve violence.
• The possibility of ending up on the list would drive people away from mental health services.
• There is a great likelihood that the list would become public and expose private health care information.
• The list would inevitably lead to further stigma and discrimination (for example, in renting an apartment or applying for a job). 

Instead, a thoughtful approach to the real problems exposed by the tragedy can lead us toward a future in which complex problems have complex but workable solutions. Some facts: 

• Research shows that people diagnosed with mental illnesses are no more violent than other citizens, and, in fact, are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. (Steadman, H. et al., Arch. of General Psych., 55:393-401, 1998; Teplin, L. et al., Archives of General Psych. 62:911-921, 2005.)
• Stigma and discrimination are major obstacles for people diagnosed with mental illnesses.
• Treatment approaches that are voluntary and non-coercive are most likely to engage people, while force and coercion drives them away from treatment.

Countless individuals have recovered from mental illness and become productive citizens, aided by the right mix of services and supports, including peer-run self-help programs. Those of us who have recovered have much to share about our experiences and our knowledge about what is helpful and what is not. In the aftermath of this tragedy, we have an opportunity to work together to insure that people get effective mental health care that responds to their individual needs. 

The President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (2003) called for major changes in our nation’s mental health system so that it could better meet the needs of individuals and communities. The Commission recommended that the mental health system be consumer- and family-driven and ensure that everyone diagnosed with a mental illness has a chance to recover and become a full participant in society. It is a disgrace that the recommendations in the Commission’s Report, which are supported by many national mental health organizations, have not been implemented. There continues to be a lack of voluntary, accessible, affordable, culturally appropriate mental health services and supports across the United States. We need to invest in such programs and services, which have a proven track record in helping people recover.  

A transformed mental health system would not let people fall through the cracks. It would focus on programs that promote wellness, recovery and resiliency. People who have psychiatric histories would be included in discussions concerning them just as other groups are included when decisions are made about them. Trauma – such as bullying, physical and sexual abuse, exposure to violence or natural disaster, physical and emotional neglect, and general disrespect of people who appear different or odd – would be recognized as playing a major role in the development of emotional distress and the diagnosis of mental illness. Peer support and open dialogues with diverse stakeholders – two of the most promising methods of engagement for people with histories of trauma, emotional distress, or mental illness – would be widely practiced.  

Lastly, there would be “nothing about us without us”: We who have recovered from mental illness would be consulted by the media and others when mental health topics are in the public policy arena. We can provide a broader understanding of the issues involved and offer positive solutions. We also can offer information about self-help/advocacy organizations we have developed around the country and about the active role we are playing in transforming the mental health system. Allowing others to speak “for” us perpetuates the myth that we are unable to represent our own interests.