Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

FBI: ‘Declarations that all active shooters must simply be mentally ill are misleading and unhelpful’

Posted in:

Illinois

* Alexa James, CEO of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, writing in Crain’s…

In the wake of mass shootings, we are understandably desperate to make sense of what happened and identify solutions when the otherwise unthinkable has occurred, which often leads to calls for increased mental health funding. Though it’s a positive sign to see broader recognition of the importance of mental health, these rinse-and-repeat conversations connecting mental health and mass shootings are not leading to fewer tragedies. […]

Much of my life’s work revolves around voicing the needs of those living with mental illness, so I will always stand by increased funding for the work we at the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) in Chicago and other advocates lead, but we must be able to move beyond the basic rhetoric that more mental health funding on its own will serve as a solution. […]

For many reasons, the mental health system alone is not equipped to change the tide on this public health crisis. While there are certainly instances in which mass shooters are living with a psychiatric disorder, it’s a dangerous misconception to assume that all are — as it is to see this connection in most cases applied to perpetrators who fit a certain profile.

In reality, mass shooters don’t necessarily suffer from major psychiatric disorders. In 2000-2013, only 25% of assailants had been diagnosed with one, according to a 2018 study by the FBI.

The fact that only 25 percent of mass shooters were diagnosed with major psychiatric disorders doesn’t necessarily mean that all of the rest didn’t have a major disorder. The FBI study reported that they could not verify if 37 percent had even been checked for mental illness. But it’s still a valid point.

* Here’s more from that FBI study…

In light of the very high lifetime prevalence of the symptoms of mental illness among the U.S. population, formally diagnosed mental illness is not a very specific predictor of violence of any type, let alone targeted violence. Some studies indicate that nearly half of the U.S. population experiences symptoms of mental illness over their lifetime, with population estimates of the lifetime prevalence of diagnosable mental illness among U.S. adults at 46%, with 9% meeting the criteria for a personality disorder. Therefore, absent specific evidence, careful consideration should be given to social and contextual factors that might interact with any mental health issue before concluding that an active shooting was “caused” by mental illness.

In short, declarations that all active shooters must simply be mentally ill are misleading and unhelpful.

Food for thought.

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:01 am

Comments

“In short, declarations that all active shooters must simply be mentally ill are misleading and unhelpful.”

So true.

Evil is not a mental illness.

Comment by Me. Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:07 am
I have been pointing this out for a long time.

Blaming “mental illness” is like the joke about “milk is a gateway drug,” just because most heroin users in the US drank milk in their childhood.

Blaming “mental illness” does not lead to a viable action plan, unless you want to suggest that all Americans take and regularly retake a mental health test in order to own a firearm or certain classes of fire arms. I am not dismissing that idea altogether, but I think the folks who oppose even a FOID card would have a fit.

Some more food for thought, undiagnosed and untreated mental illnesses are particularly high among men in the US. That means that not only are gun ownership schemes that rely on a mental health diagnosis unreliable for preventing men with mental illnesses from obtaining guns, they probably will have the perverse effect of preventing men with mental illnesses from voluntarily seeking diagnosis and treatment.

Comment by Thomas Paine Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:13 am
Mental illness is a global problem. But the US stands alone in its gun enabled mass executions. The proliferation of guns sets us apart. I’m sure the FBI’s conclusions will fall on deaf ears with the 2A crowd but the data doesn’t lie.

Comment by Pundent Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:15 am
Anyone who solves their problem with a gun, ain’t thinking right

Comment by Rabid Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:15 am
It would not shock me at all if untreated mental illness existed in many if not most mass shooters. But mental illness happens everywhere in the world, but only the US has this many mass shootings.

Further, most people who want to say “it’s not guns, it is mental health(banned punctuation)” also show zero interest in spending any resources on mental health diagnosis or treatment either.

Comment by Homebody Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:24 am
Now is not the time to talk about guns.

Now is the time to talk about mental health.

Now is not the time to adequately fund or build access to mental healthcare.

But we’re talking about it.

Problem solved for a month.

Comment by Roadrager Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:27 am
The argument is simple to a truthS.

* The United States has not cornered any market on massive mental health.

* Access to weapons is easier in the US, and more prevalent here (in the US) than anywhere in the world.

* Those using weapons, that never means it’s a mental illness in the weapon’s use.

* Easier access for *all* means *all* can use weapons for bad actions, no matter a mental state.

Defaulting to mental illness is a tool used to keep weapons readily available and accessible, that’s why thoughts and prayers are preferred over limiting access. Curbing access is a non starter.

The FBI calling out the game as they are, it’s coming down to access *for all* being an issue that can be gleaned, parsing any other way is ignoring statistical truths too.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:29 am
People’s actions may make no sense to us, but that’s not the same thing as being mentally ill. You can believe things, have certain opinions, values, priorities, that again make no sense to most people but still be “rational” or “sane”.

Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:30 am
Policymakers are long overdue in having this specific conversation. How much longer can we keep doing the same thing and get the same result (actually worse) before everyone acknowledges we need to take a different approach?

Comment by Shytown Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:31 am
Defaulting to mental illness is a tool used to keep weapons readily available and accessible, that’s why thoughts and prayers are preferred over limiting access. Curbing access is a non starter.

yet that is exactly what JBP and the President want to do. How say you to that?

Comment by Green Mountain Boys Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:33 am
Like TP was saying, I look forward to ‘mental illness’ going the way of violent video games.

Jared Lee Loughner was mentally ill. Crimo, Cruz, Crumbley, Holmes, and Lanza had mental health issues that were under-treated (or ignored) by parents.

Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:34 am
No it’s not mental illness, it’s the guns. We don’t have any greater mental illness in the USA but we don’t have good services and we do have lots and lots of guns. but we have to do a better job of getting guns out of the hands of those who are dangerously mentally ill. Maine shooter, recall that fiasco and learn.

Comment by Amalia Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:34 am
>>>>before everyone acknowledges we need to take a different approach?

What kind of different approach would you like? Go ahead, say it out loud.

Comment by We've never had one before Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:35 am
===yet===

Pritzker signed a bill on curbing weapons.

Biden can’t sign anything that’s not been passed by both chambers.

Please, keep up.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:36 am
Is there not a middle ground where it can be both? Mental health and guns.
Why can we only concentrate on one reason at a time?

Comment by Bruce( no not him) Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:43 am
===yet===

Pritzker signed a bill on curbing weapons.

Biden can’t sign anything that’s not been passed by both chambers.

Please, keep up

read again.

I said…… yet JBP and the President want to do. I never said that the President signed anything I said he wants to ban weapons. JBP already has. its been in the news.

Hope this helps.

Comment by Green Mountain Boys Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:50 am
==Is there not a middle ground where it can be both?==

What middle ground? Guns are more prevalent now than they have ever been. Opponents howl at the thought of limiting magazine sizes.

Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:51 am
===Hope this helps.===

Maybe if you could point out others’ writing outside your own, that could make what you’re writing clearer.

You wrote this;

===yet that is exactly what JBP and the President want to do. How say you to that?===

I’m not a mind reader, use all the words in your vocabulary.

Hope that helps.

Like… what actually are you saying… banning is good, bad, what?

Drivebys are for Facebook

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 10:54 am
Mental illness is a cop out and excuse to not enact tougher gun legislation, like insurance and registration. If people’s guns are used illegally to cause harm, victims or their families should be able to get financial compensation, just like with vehicles. No one is screaming that their driving rights are infringed because they have to get a license, registration and insurance.

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 11:01 am
We could treat mental health as simply health care and require insurance companies to include it as standard health care coverage. Socialize the cost via the insurance market. Health care is health care after all.

But that makes too much sense.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 11:01 am
-We could treat mental health as simply health care and require insurance companies to include it as standard health care coverage-

This coverage happens already. The problem is much deeper than insurance coverage, but that’s the easiest finger to point, right? You have to provide people the time, resources, and childcare to even find mental health professionals as well as stay with a program.

Stop blaming a boogeyman and be more holistic when suggesting policy changes. Now THAT makes sense.

Comment by Justaquestion Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 11:20 am
=== Is there not a middle ground where it can be both? ===

This isn’t a philosophical debate in search of ultimate causes and ultimate truths.

It’s a public policy debate in search of workable solutions.

I mean, don’t get me wrong, I would love to expand Obamacare to a single payer model and add full mental health coverage, and, as I said, mandatory mental health screenings for gun owners.

But the reality is that while nearly 50% of Americans have a mental illness at some point in their lives, only a fraction ever end up committing a mass shooting. Only a fraction ever end up murdering their spouse, or committing suicide.

You can say the same thing about the “Let’s focus on poverty instead” argument. Lots of great reasons to combat poverty, and yet most poor people do not shoot up block parties.

The common factor is ease of access to firearms, particularly military-style firearms.

Determining the proximate and actual cause of a social problem leads you to the most effective and most workable solutions.

Comment by Thomas Paine Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 12:23 pm
== What kind of different approach would you like? Go ahead, say it out loud =

Did you read the op ed? National approach to addressing the gun violence epidemic. National ban on assault weapons. Processes and protocols to help mental health providers and law enforcement to better coordinate and align. etc.

Comment by Shytown Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 12:45 pm
==National approach to addressing the gun violence epidemic. National ban on assault weapons.==

This is the only way we could possibly get on a road toward fixing it, and I am pretty sure the last remote chance of it ever actually happening died at some point during the second Clinton term. So instead we have to hope our numbers do not come up, and force our brains to push away questions like “Why does it so often take days to identify mass shooting victims?” because it is a lot to be left pondering that answer on our own, as our elected leaders at the federal level have left us on this.

Comment by Roadrager Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 12:58 pm
- Anyone who solves their problem with a gun, ain’t thinking right -

Heard of War?

Mankind has solved perceived “problems” with weapons since the dawn of History.

Comment by Dotnonymous x Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:19 pm
I get very tired of hearing 2A people lean heavily into the “shall not be abridged” clause. It’s way past time to lean MORE heavily into the
well-regulated” clause.

Comment by Teacher Lady Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 1:29 pm
Man is the most dangerous creature on planet Earth…provably.

Comment by Dotnonymous x Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:03 pm
OW
as you are well aware at any time, for any reasonable reason, any LEO in the state of illinois can have a persons FOID cancelled and their guns seized. What I want to hear a clear and concise discussion as to how to prevent MVA which kill over 30000 people a year, and out of those over 50% are caused by dui drivers. Even Laura Bush killed someone in a MVA I want the US which leads the world in MVA to do more about that. You worry about guns. I worry about the guy at the stop light. Different perspectives on life.

Comment by Green Mountain Boys Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:11 pm
===What I want to hear a clear and concise discussion as to how to prevent MVA which kill over 30000 people a year, and out of those over 50% are caused by dui drivers.===

Facebook.

Down the dial, turn Right.

Look for the in-law uncles.

They will go on any tangent you want. They might even add a meme or three.

(Sigh)

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:13 pm
Man is the most fearful creature on planet Earth…provably.

Comment by Dotnonymous x Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:14 pm
===Even … killed someone in a MVA===

I mean, geez. In-law uncle logic to… (checks notes) mental health and guns?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 2:17 pm
I think as long as weapons with high power magazines are available the US will always have a higher mass shooting rate.

But I would like to capitalize on the GOP always talking about mental health by the US forming the best, most modern and expensive national mental health care plan on Earth.

Just imagine, no cost to the user. Promise of a videocall with a licensed counsellor the minute someone decides they have a problem and a follow-up, in person visit with in 2 days. Up to 6 monhts of follow ups at no cost to the user, or for as long as the counsellor thinks necessary.

I mean, as long as the GOP is willing, why not go for a Cadillac nationalized mental health care plan? (and if they are not willing to support it then use that politically against them, hard!).

Would it reduce shootings? Maybe. I think it would reduce the level of human misery in the nation, though; much of which the taxpayers pay for various effects anyway.

Comment by cermak_rd Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:35 pm
>>>>It’s way past time to lean MORE heavily into the
well-regulated” clause.

OK, Teacher lady, tell us what that means, please.
And what did it mean in context?

Comment by We've never had one before Tuesday, Nov 7, 23 @ 3:38 pm