Should we have psychiatric waivers where people decide whether they should be "involuntarily" committed if they're a danger to themselves?

Anonymous
One critique of psychiatric medicine is that mental illnesses are the only ones you can be held against your will for having (or at least that was the argument before 2020).

The argument goes that while we have the right to refuse treatment, a mentally ill person can't decide what's best for them so the decision has to be made by someone else. However, if people could specify what should happen if they become mentally compromised beforehand, and say that they don't want to be treated, you know if it's them or their disease talking. So what I would suggest is that when people start seeing a mental health professional, they would sign a wavier specifying what should happen in an emergency (and to make changes to it they would first have to undergo an evaluation).

Should such a policy be implemented and if so what would you put on said wavier.
No, I think suicidal people need help no matter what
Vote A
Yes we should have that wavier and I would say that I should be committed if I became suicidal
Vote B
Yes we should have that wavier and I would say that I shouldn't be committed if I became suicidal
Vote C
If that wavier existed I would have said I shouldn't be committed and I would be dead now because of it
Vote D
People shouldn't be held against their will if they're a danger to themselves
Vote E
Select age and gender to cast your vote:
GirlGuy
Should we have psychiatric waivers where people decide whether they should be "involuntarily" committed if they're a danger to themselves?
0
2
Add Opinion