Bring Back the Asylum

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
4,819 posts. Do you have time to sleep?
 
Some good points. Is it really more humane, safer, more effective, or cheaper to shuttle chronically and severely mentally ill patients between EDs, inpatient psych units, and prisons, or would we be better off moving back toward increasing dedicated long-term psychiatric beds? Definitely worth addressing on a national level.
 
I used to go to a community services clinic, so I know the answer is that much more extensive help is needed. I was on the fringe of really not being the type of person who was bad off enough to get help according to their standards (not so much because I didn't meet the standards but because of their limited resources going to the most severe cases), even though I really did need the help. In fact, I would welcome more help to this day. But when I was receiving home-based services (help with going out in the community), I would hear the stories about other patients and how it was pretty much a band-aid approach to their care. How community assistants being paid about $9-10 an hour were the safety net between a patient and disaster, and often that meant taking them to the ED to get a shot of an antipsychotic with no follow-up care until there was an opening to see the psychiatrist at the clinic. I am someone who, if not for my family, would need more help from a public resource.

We're in that place between radical inclusion of those with chronic mental illness into society (which would require far more spending and/or effort) and having space in long-term care facilities (which would require far more spending and/or effort). I say "and/or" because I don't know that it really is more expensive in total to provide adequate care. It's not like prison is cheap; though it is profitable.

I've mentioned before my difficulties in finding any psychiatrist let alone a decent one. I just found out that the psychiatrist I had been seeing at that clinic is a fugitive. He was convicted of drunk-driving and prescribing himself Ambien. He lost his medical license and was supposed to serve a month in jail but fled to Pakistan. And if you don't remember, my main issue has been trying to wean off benzos, something he did not want me to do, which makes a bit more sense now that I know what had been going on (I read the court reports--he had been a binge drinker and taking Ambien for quite a while). It's not that I don't feel sorry for him. I am frustrated, though. We're talking about needing asylums. But I have Cadillac insurance, and the psychiatrists where I live are booked out for months and months. I waited 8 months to see a new psychiatrist. Finally saw him. He's working at the same clinic I mentioned and moonlights at a private practice once a week (where I saw him). I thought that once I became a patient of record, I wouldn't have to wait months. I was wrong. He told me if I needed to see someone more than every 3-4 months, he was not the psychiatrist for me. There was a packed waiting room at 8 PM at night to see him in in a private practice in a very wealthy county. There are just no psychiatrists around--in fact, going back to the asylum discussion, when I search my state's Board of Medicine site to find providers, most psychiatrists in my county work at the state mental hospital in town (which is only for geriatric patients who have waited years to get a bed there from all over the state). There are only a few outpatient psychiatrists, and they're terrible. Like really, really terrible. Not just as psychiatrists. As human beings.

Edit: I wish I were still novopsych. In the same vein of the Dadaists not being able to handle the horrors of war and turning reality into paper and tearing it up like confetti and throwing it into the air, I'd rather turn to the absurd than reality.

Edit 2: As a way of relating to asylums, she'd probably write something about a lock-in dance night she's hosting at the local middle school gymnasium for mentally disturbed children.
 
Last edited:
Wondering if anyone read this recent article in JAMA and what your thoughts are on this subject:
Improving Long-term Psychiatric Care
Bring Back the Asylum


Link: http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2091312

the thing about increasing the # of longterm psych beds: how could we afford it?? These beds are state funded of course, and I don't know if you guys keep up with the news but states are in financial binds. people are already taxed to death, and there is no way I'd be willing to pay even more dollars to fund something like this. At the state level we need to look to ways to further cut mental health expenditures, and this goes towards the opposite of that.
 
I'm generally fairly fiscally conservative, but its not clear the current methods of limiting state psych beds are saving states/cities any money. Lots of psych patients in prison, which is incredibly expensive. Lots of them taking up space in ERs which is incredibly expensive. Tons of law enforcement time going into picking up and transporting chronically psychotic patients doing stuff people don't like, etc.
 
I've worked in long-term, short-term, forensic units, private practice, community practice, ER, etc.

There definitely is a need for long-term facilities. Some people are treatment-resistant. That said, a long-term facility should be a last choice option or an earlier choice option if the case is readily apparent as severe (e.g. extremely violent while psychotic or manic).

Usually there's a long-term facility that services quite a sizable chunk of the state. Some states only have one. It's understandable given that few people per thousand need this level of care.

Such patients that need a long-term could be clozapine-resistant, or need clozapine, taking months to reach a therapeutic dosage. Some people are late-responders-taking weeks before the antipsychotic works. Others could be very severe in their level of violence. Others could be tricky cause it could be a TBI, in which case a med-trial of several meds may be needed that could take over a year before one is found that is optimal for the patient.

Now all of this said, doctors in long-term facilities tend to suck. This is not true of all of them. But since you don't have to write a daily note, they are virtually all state-funded and thus fall into the usual -you don't get paid more for better work- mentality, a lot of the docs working there aren't good docs and can get away with it. I had several cases where a patient was psychotic on one guy's unit for over a year, he was only on Risperdal 1 mg daily and transferred to my unit and I got the guy better in about 10 days upping the Risperdal to 4 mg Q BID and the guy and his family are asking "why didn't the other doctor do that?"

(Of course some of the docs working there were very good. The ratio of good to bad was about 1 to 3.5, at U. of Cincinnati the ratio was about 8 out of 10 were excellent with some of them being literally the nation's best, in private practice it was about 50%).

To reward my superior performance, the clinical director saw to it that I got all the tougher patients and I didn't get paid anymore than the guys doing piss-poor work, thus making my unit more dangerous for my treatment team. This is the type of BS you got to deal with if you work in a state facility. I don't claim to be a genius. I only claim to do competent work but I was surrounded by very incompetent people so I stood out.

I did eventually barter with the administration, telling them I always want tough patients but to cap it because I'd get burned out, but also for safety reasons. I always wanted at least 3 really tough cases. Compare that to most of the other docs that didn't want one tough case. Once I got one of them figured out and fixed, transfer them to a BS doc and give me one of the BS doc's bad patients that he did not get better.

The enjoyable aspect of working in the long-term facility for me was that you could get really tough cases, and like a House episode, get your skills truly tested. Another aspect is a long-term facility is purely psychiatry as the main focus, so that BS attitude from other disciplines we psychiatrists sometimes get? Well in a long-term we are the masters. The other disciplines work with us and we're in charge.

For students and residents, long-term facilities are where you'll likely master Clozapine treatment since on most units there'll usually be quite a few patients on Clozapine and you can see for yourself a patient tried on say 6 antipsychotics, none of them working and then Clozapine's tried and voila the guy gets better.

After I left the state to become a professor, the state hospital offered me back as a clinical doctor with a $30K raise that they would not offer to other docs that had to be approved by the state government, so at least they were going to recognize I was doing better work and give me some payback for it. I was also offered the #2 position in the hospital for even more if I wanted, and the new head of the hospital was a very good highly respected doc that I wanted to partner with. So I was in a conflicted position of staying at U of Cincinnati with some of the top people that I highly respected, or going back to the state but running a hospital with a clear path to be the head guy in maybe 10 years. (Most of you know I ended up moving to St. Louis cause my wife got a professor's position-so that solved that dilemma of having to choose).

Another nice thing about the state is that job marries very well with private practice. You get all the benefits of a full-time job usually only at 20 hours a week, and could spend the rest of your time doing private practice.
 
Last edited:
Whopper, your stories often worry me a bit. I am truly excited to be going into psychiatry. What worries me is that your stories have become almost cliche in that it is often about a psychiatrist you've encountered doing incredibly poor work and you come in and save the day by making obvious medication changes. I am not criticizing you for this. I am only saying that it is slightly dismaying to hear that this happens so often to you. I hope I practice in an area where this is not the case.
 
Whopper, your stories often worry me a bit. I am truly excited to be going into psychiatry. What worries me is that your stories have become almost cliche in that it is often about a psychiatrist you've encountered doing incredibly poor work and you come in and save the day by making obvious medication changes. I am not criticizing you for this. I am only saying that it is slightly dismaying to hear that this happens so often to you. I hope I practice in an area where this is not the case.

I would not let his posts discourage you.

Whoppers posts are that of someone who is extremely driven, confident and competent. It borders on the non-pathological "narcissism" (I'm hesitant to use that word b/c of negative connotations) that you would expect from someone like a CEO, chairman, big name lawyer, etc. who is highly skilled and knows it. I suspect he would make similar posts about his less competent professional colleagues no matter what type of profession he was in.
 
I'm generally fairly fiscally conservative, but its not clear the current methods of limiting state psych beds are saving states/cities any money. Lots of psych patients in prison, which is incredibly expensive. Lots of them taking up space in ERs which is incredibly expensive. Tons of law enforcement time going into picking up and transporting chronically psychotic patients doing stuff people don't like, etc.
Everyone assumes the reason our society did away with asylums was to save money. They're forgetting the "civil rights" argument. We started thinking we had no right to keep people hospitalized for life if they preferred to wander the streets pandhandling and acting psychotic, as long as they weren't a direct, immediate threat to their own or others' lives. Bringing back asylums would mean changing this view, which, given the liberalism of our society, I don't see happening anytime soon.
 
Everyone assumes the reason our society did away with asylums was to save money. They're forgetting the "civil rights" argument. We started thinking we had no right to keep people hospitalized for life if they preferred to wander the streets pandhandling and acting psychotic, as long as they weren't a direct, immediate threat to their own or others' lives. Bringing back asylums would mean changing this view, which, given the liberalism of our society, I don't see happening anytime soon.
poppycock. although Kennedy's community mental health act of 1963 led to deinstitutionalization, the centerpiece was supposed to be construction of new community mental health centers and services for the severely mentally ill. the funding for this never happened and the biggest pushes for continued dismantling of asylums came under sucessive republican governments who displaced the mentally ill from our hospitals to rot in our streets and prisons. The answer is not to bring back the asylum but to establish community mental health which doesn't really exist in this country. The US is the only country in the world that created a large population of homeless mentally ill through deinstitutionalization, this was not the case in Europe. We could house our most vulnerable and provide them higher quality mental health care in the community than we could in an asylum but because of the complexity of where money comes from and who pays for what (i.e. county vs state vs. federal) this is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Also one myth that needs to be debunked is the notion that people were consigned to asylums/state hospitals and left there for ever. In reality a minority of patients were permanent residents, rotting on the backwards (there really were backwards). Psychiatrist and Historian Joel Braslow notes that discharges within 12 months for those diagnosed with "schizophrenic reaction" ranged from 62.8% in Illinois to 94.7% in Arkansas. In California, statistics were collated from 1949, in the pre-thorazine era, and even at this point 68% of patients were discharged as recovered within a year.

The problems and patient population is much different to it was in the asylums of a byegone era. Paranoid/persecutory forms of illness are by far the most common manifestation of psychosis today, but this was not so 50-60 years ago, and remains untrue outside the West. The number of individuals with TBI and who have substance abuse in the mix (particularly things like meth which are highly psychotogenic and more recalcitrant to neuroleptics) which increase violence and impulsivity is much greater. The length of stay in hospitals has declined dramatically, which has been shown to increase the suicide rate, violence, and readmissions and the kind of care, social support, housing, and continuity of care offered patients is very poor. There are effective psychotherapeutic interventions such as supportive psychotherapy, social skills training, and family therapy for psychotic patients (note I do not include CBT) which are scarely available, and the number of patients without a home, without friends, rootless, purposeless and isolated is much greater today. What we really need is more general psychiatric beds, to allow longer length of stays for patients, to have true community mental health services with a better integration of mental health, substance use, social care, and primary care for patients. Unfortunately this is not going to happen.
 
Whopper, your stories often worry me a bit. I am truly excited to be going into psychiatry. What worries me is that your stories have become almost cliche in that it is often about a psychiatrist you've encountered doing incredibly poor work and you come in and save the day by making obvious medication changes. I am not criticizing you for this. I am only saying that it is slightly dismaying to hear that this happens so often to you. I hope I practice in an area where this is not the case.
Don't worry about Whopper, when you get out there you will see that a lot of providers are less than competent. We all see it every day. Look at some of Vistaril's posts that seem to indicate that incompetence is the standard of care. It's also not limited to psychiatry either. In psychology we have evidence-based practice and then we have "WTF was this psychologist thinking by focusing on the trauma in an already unstable patient?"
 
the centerpiece was supposed to be construction of new community mental health centers and services for the severely mentally ill. the funding for this never happened and the biggest pushes for continued dismantling of asylums came under sucessive republican governments who displaced the mentally ill from our hospitals to rot in our streets and prisons. The answer is not to bring back the asylum but to establish community mental health which doesn't really exist in this country.

If community mental health centers never happened, then why do I see so many of them when I drive down the road? I would disagree that community mental health doesn't exist in this country- it appears from your post that you don't think we put enough into it and that it is subpar, but other people believe we spend far too much on it. Regardless of where one is on that spectrum, the reality is that money doesn't grow on trees. Government spending is obscene, and unfortunately every little niche group wants 'their share'. We are all psychiatrists so it's easy to bang our fists on the table wanting more state and federal $, but there are 40 other groups advocating more $ for their (also worthy) cause. It pains me to say this as a psychiatrist, but since tax dollars are so precious(and rightfully so), I wouldn't be surprised to see community mental health funding slashed state by state in the coming years.
 
If community mental health centers never happened, then why do I see so many of them when I drive down the road? I would disagree that community mental health doesn't exist in this country- it appears from your post that you don't think we put enough into it and that it is subpar, but other people believe we spend far too much on it. Regardless of where one is on that spectrum, the reality is that money doesn't grow on trees. Government spending is obscene, and unfortunately every little niche group wants 'their share'. We are all psychiatrists so it's easy to bang our fists on the table wanting more state and federal $, but there are 40 other groups advocating more $ for their (also worthy) cause. It pains me to say this as a psychiatrist, but since tax dollars are so precious(and rightfully so), I wouldn't be surprised to see community mental health funding slashed state by state in the coming years.
Excellent points and I would state that we squander a lot of our resources and spend too much time and money on programs that are ineffective. I have seen good community mental health and bad community mental health and usually the bad costs more than the good. I actually think one problem is that they do not use psychologists enough in designing these programs. Program development is part of our skill set.
 
Excellent points and I would state that we squander a lot of our resources and spend too much time and money on programs that are ineffective. I have seen good community mental health and bad community mental health and usually the bad costs more than the good. I actually think one problem is that they do not use psychologists enough in designing these programs. Program development is part of our skill set.
The one near me turns away people in crisis. I've heard stories of people bringing loved ones in to the crisis center and if they have private insurance they're turned away, and then go to the ER. They don't advertise themselves as being an available resource, either. There is definitely a lot of waste and bureaucracy. A lot of people doing paperwork. It's a problem with bureaucracies in general, but there is a way in which they can be better. I don't understand how the system works, but this country is just so huge and has so many federal and state and county agencies that I'm not sure anyone understands it. It doesn't seem person-focused to me. I feel like there should be a mission question for every employee to ask themselves daily: Am I helping someone today? Because a lot of what they do seems to be to find ways to either not let people into the system or to charge Medicaid for things they say they're doing but actually aren't—I personally witnessed a backdating of services that I didn't ever receive. There is no way a severely mentally ill person could find help at my community services board without a very supportive family staying on them like a hawk. You practically need a lawyer to get services from them. There were really good employees there, but it seemed like they were there by happenstance rather than the management attracting them. The woman who helped me the most was a community assistant who was just really, really kind. The medical side of the building was a disaster. Rude staff, constant turnover of psychiatrists, just a culture of misery and nihilism. The psychologist I saw there was good, though. I ended up seeing him in private practice instead because I so disliked just going to the community services building. He ended up leaving it, as well, citing (vaguely) many of the same things I witnessed.
 
Some good points. Is it really more humane, safer, more effective, or cheaper to shuttle chronically and severely mentally ill patients between EDs, inpatient psych units, and prisons, or would we be better off moving back toward increasing dedicated long-term psychiatric beds? Definitely worth addressing on a national level.


IDK if it is always more humane. Many of them become homeless people in need of both psychiatric and then serious medical care. Shoving these people out, well, it has not been a good thing for many. It may not have been the best situation in the facility, but at least they got their meds and food and medical care, etc. It kills me to see these people living under overpasses and so forth as I drive through the city.
 
Non-pathological narcissism? Maybe it's just plain narcissism...HEHEHEH.

Anyways, I'll put a little perspective into this. While I was at U of Cincinnati there were plenty of docs that were as good, even better than I. That's why I wanted to be there. I wanted to be a sponge and learn from them despite the lower pay. That's why I'm at St. Louis U where I get to work one-on-one and on a very personal and intimate level with 3 of the nation's best: Henry Nasrallah, George Grossberg and Alan Felthouse. I could literally be making twice as much as I am now if I didn't give a damn about the field, went into private practice and didn't teach.

I know some residents at U of Cincinnati read these forums. Which docs did I think were excellent? Aside from the nationally renown ones like Keck, so many of them. John Wyrick is a better teacher than I though I do think I'm a very good teacher. He also gives a big damn about his patients. Bresler and Mossman are a geniuses and it'd take me years to achieve what they have if I'm even capable of it. Jackie Collins is a lady, an excellent clinic doc, and always keeps a cool head. So many. I could write a list of several of them.

A problem with every field of medicine is so many people think it's their ticket to a comfortable lifestyle and once in the job don't take it seriously or have a love for it. A problem in psychiatry is because it's more subjective the bad docs have more room for hiding their bad work.

I love psychiatry. I don't find it to be work. I could work 60 hours a week in it no problem other than that my wife would be upset with me not being home much. I can't work 80 hours cause I'd physically not be able to handle it but in terms of pure passion for it-yes.

The bad docs I'm talking about and so many people know this to be true are the guys that medicate everything, even things non-pathological or things that meds don't improve, give benzos out like they're candy, dx even when they don't believe in the dx.

I've had so many times where I had to tell a judge a patient didn't have bipolar disorder despite several other doctors writing that down as the dx, even calling those docs and they even told me they didn't think they thought the person had it.

The reality is that several o docs in general are bad and in every field including the state hospitals. Everyone there knew it. They just didn't blatantly talk about it despite that it was true cause they were trying to be polite. I guess my tolerance for it is much less, hence why I'm willing to accept less pay to be in an more intellectually honest environment. Hey, I guess it's just me but when a guy could've gotten better in about 1 week but was left psychotic for about a year, I find it a bigger evil to not address the real issue going on.

The head of the state psych hospital in Cincinnati is excellent and he's a doc I'd definitely put several notches above me. The problem is he's playing with a chess field of too many pawns and not enough valuable pieces like rooks or knights. With the state, his ability to recruit top doctors is limited by the salary the state allows him to pay docs. So if he fires even a bad doc he might not be able to replace them, hence the reality of the economics and politics with why bad doctors don't get fired from state hospitals.

No matter what field you go into, you'll encounter bad providers. While this could disillusion you, instead let it build your resilience to make sure you do a better job and not fall into the same traps of mediocrity and laziness that others have fallen into.

I don't think I'm a singularity in finding so many doctors out there bad. I think that I am, however, someone talking about it more openly than others.

Addendum: I knew several senior residents at U of C and I recommended they work at the state hospital. Why with all my complains above? Cause it marries well with private practice and they wanted to do private practice.

It would've been a win-win for everyone. The head doctor at the state hospital in Cincinnati would've gotten a crew of great new young docs, while they would've been able to get full-time benefits for only about 20 hours a week of work plus make moolah cash while doing private practice.
 
Last edited:
Top