2 Comments

Hi, very odd to hear this from the other side, so to speak.

So I was institutionalized. And frankly, it was torture. There are countless stories of 'I was in a bad place and inpatient made it worse', so I don't think it's worth discussing.

But I wish I had absconded. I think my life would have been a lot better if I had.

I am actually a bit obsessive about absconding. I think I have read all of the literature on this topic that is available on Google scholar. I have spent too many hours of my life replaying those days in my head and contemplating ways I could have escaped. I am mad at myself for not trying. I hate myself for not having the guts.

So I am conflicted. Clearly there are some people who are not safe. But secretly I fantasize about how I should have/would escape if I needed to, and don't actually want security.

I read one paper (too lazy to look it up now) that says most absconders went home and did ordinary daily activities. And only a few percent had negative impacts.

I like absconders because they provide a view into an unethical experiment we wish we could run.

We have doctors assessing patients for involuntary holds, usually under the 'imminent danger' standard. It would be nice to run an experiment to test how accurate doctors are at this assessment, right? For instance, we could split our patients into two cohorts:

- one cohort is actually sent to a locked ward

- one is just released

Completely unethical and will never be done... But absconders give us a small (perhaps biased) view into the second cohort.

So, how many absconders actually end up in suffering grave harm?

From what I have read, it's a minority of absconders. Depending on the situation (forensic/non-forensic and voluntary/involuntary, etc), most end up going home and doing ordinary activities.

Which really questions our ability to identify people who we had just signed a statement saying we had 'clear and convincing' evidence that they were an 'imminent danger'.

Expand full comment