de Grood to be transferred to hospital for assessment

[SutterBrother]

Everyone relax.

He’ll only be out till he kills one more person.

Its super unlikely to be anyone you know.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Now you're getting it, son! Welcome!

Really that’s your response.

Not my statement was wrong. Do I need to go back and quote what you said and how you continued to double down including posting that LI had mandatory monitoring requirements that you provided a link to that directly contradicted you.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by GGG

Really that’s your response.

Not my statement was wrong. Do I need to go back and quote what you said and how you continued to double down including posting that LI had mandatory monitoring requirements that you provided a link to that directly contradicted you.

I bet if you pound your head against this brick wall a few more times it'll break.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I bet if you pound your head against this brick wall a few more times it'll break.

His head, or the wall?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by zamler

What if he didn't relapse and was released? See the problem?

Which is why he has to monitored on a regular basis should he ever be released. His health professionals will be able to spot the early signs of a relapse and treat it accordingly.

[Dion]

Relapse rates

Results

Relapse rates are very high when treatment is discontinued, even after a single psychotic episode; a longer treatment period prior to discontinuation does not reduce the risk of relapse; many patients relapse soon after treatment reduction and discontinuation; transition from remission to relapse may be abrupt and with few or no early warning signs; once illness recurrence occurs symptoms rapidly return to levels similar to the initial psychotic episode; while most patients respond promptly to re-introduction of antipsychotic treatment after relapse, the response time is variable and notably, treatment failure appears to emerge in about 1 in 6 patients. These observations are consistent with contemporary thinking on the dopamine hypothesis, including the aberrant salience hypothesis.

Conclusions

Given the difficulties in identifying those at risk of relapse, the ineffectiveness of rescue medications in preventing full-blown psychotic recurrence and the potentially serious consequences, adherence and other factors predisposing to relapse should be a major focus of attention in managing schizophrenia. The place of antipsychotic treatment discontinuation in clinical practice and in placebo-controlled clinical trials needs to be carefully reconsidered.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3599855/

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by GGG

Really that’s your response.

Not my statement was wrong. Do I need to go back and quote what you said and how you continued to double down including posting that LI had mandatory monitoring requirements that you provided a link to that directly contradicted you.

I don’t think you have the stamina to win this one buds.

[WhiteTiger]

https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/calgary-m...ssed-1.6442466

The Alberta Court of Appeal has dismissed an application for an "absolute discharge" from a Calgary man who stabbed five people to death at a house party in 2014.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Barclay Hunter, the father of Joshua, says he is "very relieved" to hear of the decision made by Alberta's top court, but added de Grood's lawyer was "highly irresponsible" in pursuing the appeal.

"(We are) encouraged that their position was so strongly rebutted by the appeal court," he wrote in a statement to CTV News following the decision.

"I understand his lawyer is in place to advocate on his behalf but it is highly irresponsible of them all, his lawyer and his family, to pursue such a reckless position on his behalf, against the better judgement of his treatment team and the review board."

Nailed it.

[Dion]

"He is undoubtedly much less dangerous now than he was then. However, his transition to unrestricted life in the community will not happen overnight, or at any discrete moment in time."

However, the appeal court said there may come a time when de Grood would be "entitled to conditional or absolute release," but that time hasn't come.

"It is a journey for him," the court said.

Glad to hear this. Decisions about his release should be left in the hands of doctors and not lawyers.

[Snuffleupagus]

Matthew de Grood seeks Supreme Court appeal to return to Calgary with additional freedoms

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Matthew de Grood seeks Supreme Court appeal to return to Calgary with additional freedoms

I hate playing armchair psychologist, but I'm going to do it anyways. It's concerning to me that he's not accepting the board's decision. Doesn't really demonstrate someone who understands the gravity of what he did.

[Hi-Psi]

Exactly, the fact that he thinks that he deserves a conditional discharge after killing 5 people is absolutely insane. But I guess that's just par for the course when you're found not criminally responsible for KILLING 5 ####ING PEOPLE.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I hate playing armchair psychologist, but I'm going to do it anyways. It's concerning to me that he's not accepting the board's decision. Doesn't really demonstrate someone who understands the gravity of what he did.

If his doctors that are managing his treatment are making these assessments that he is ready why would he not believe them?

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by GGG

If his doctors that are managing his treatment are making these assessments that he is ready why would he not believe them?

They have repeatedly made the assessment that he is not ready.

[26] At the hearing, the treatment team concluded that the appellant was still a “significant threat to the safety of the public”, and that his detention on a full warrant was necessary to protect the public.

[28] The appellant has undoubtedly made progress, but the treatment team thought his health is still fragile. He is highly responsive to his oral medication, but any disruption in that medication may cause him to decompensate. He has not yet had any experience with self-medication. Further, it appears that even when he is medicated he can decompensate. The deterioration of his mental health can be subtle and masked by other factors, and may not be obvious to the treatment team or appreciated by the appellant himself.

[29] Dr. Manuwa, the treating psychiatrist, performed a number of tests, and also applied his clinical judgment and experience in assessing the appellant’s condition. He concluded that the appellant’s risk of imminent future violence, if given an absolute discharge, would be low, but any future violence is significantly likely to be of high severity. Further, if he transitioned to a lower level of psychiatric care, the appellant would be more likely to deteriorate mentally and behaviorally, and pose an increased risk to the safety of the public. Given his lack of early insight into decompensation, there was a risk that the appellant would not voluntarily return to the hospital for care if he was discharged. In order to protect the public, the treatment team required the ability to quickly return the appellant to hospital for treatment, which required his detention on a full warrant.

[36] It is clear the appellant was a serious danger to the public at the time of the index offences, before he was diagnosed and began receiving treatment. He is undoubtedly much less dangerous now than he was then. However, his transition to unrestricted life in the community will not happen overnight, or at any discrete moment in time. It is a journey for him. On every annual review the treatment team and the Review Board must assess whether he has proceeded far enough that he can no longer be seen as a significant danger to the public. As the appellant points out, the “significant risk” test is not a “zero risk” test, and there will presumably come a point when he is entitled to conditional or absolute release. However, on the evidence on this record, it was reasonable for the Review Board to conclude that the appellant still poses a risk of serious violent behaviour.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Hi-Psi

But I guess that's just par for the course when you're found not criminally responsible for KILLING 5 ####ING PEOPLE.

I mean this is a dumb take. You either believe that people can suffer mental breaks and be found NCR for their actions or you don't. The severity of the actions has nothing to do with the validity of the diagnosis.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

This ^

I see why some people can't separate their emotions enough to wrap their minds around a NCR determination but the people making that call are professionals and using assessments that are well established and tested and I'm pretty sure the seriousness of the crime is not lost on them.

[Monahammer]

... but the same cadre of professionals who helped determine deGrood was NCR are maintaining today that it is NOT safe for him to be in the general public still... yet deGrood and family persist in seeking release.

The severity does matter here. Being NCR doesn't absolve someone of the moral responsibility... just the CRIMINAL responsibility of an action. He and family are not showing that they accept moral responsibility in spite of the NCR absolving them of criminal matters, and that is the problematic element.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

... but the same cadre of professionals who helped determine deGrood was NCR are maintaining today that it is NOT safe for him to be in the general public still... yet deGrood and family persist in seeking release.

The severity does matter here. Being NCR doesn't absolve someone of the moral responsibility... just the CRIMINAL responsibility of an action. He and family are not showing that they accept moral responsibility in spite of the NCR absolving them of criminal matters, and that is the problematic element.

This is sort of the thing and I'm far, far from an expert, but my understanding is that 'Severity' is considered.

Some people can fall off their meds or have a psychotic break and become a public nuisance for a bit. Some people can murder a room full of kids.

Its quite the range, so you'd better be sure.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

... but the same cadre of professionals who helped determine deGrood was NCR are maintaining today that it is NOT safe for him to be in the general public still... yet deGrood and family persist in seeking release.

The severity does matter here. Being NCR doesn't absolve someone of the moral responsibility... just the CRIMINAL responsibility of an action. He and family are not showing that they accept moral responsibility in spite of the NCR absolving them of criminal matters, and that is the problematic element.

Honestly the only way I was able to heal (as best I could) from an NCR event in my personal life, was that the guy was fully accepting and open to all punishments/follow-up actions, etc. nothing was pushed back by his council. Full acceptance of the moral responsibility. No one involved will ever fully heal, but it’s sure helpful that he wasn’t fighting/arguing anything that came up. Except the NCR of course, but it was quickly accepted by both sides as the proper course of action.