Editor,
No government should support harm in the guise of help.
Henry David Thoreau said, "For every thousand hacking at the leaves of evil, one is striking at the root."
Nowhere is this more evident than in the Legislature's consideration of the bill called Kendra's Law. For those not familiar with this bill, it basically states that it is unlawful for an individual in an outpatient mental health program to choose not to take his or her medication.
The secretary of the Department of Health stated that among other rights we had the right to freedom from psychosis. My question is for whom this right applies - the individual or society?
I want to know where that fits in this bill, because in the past it could be argued that our society enforced peace and quiet with chemical straitjackets at the expense of the individual.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
There is no proof that these drugs have any long-term benefit. In fact, quite the contrary - the Food and Drug Administration has put a black box warning on the label stating that these drugs can kill. This one fact alone should be enough to convince our elected representatives to vote no on a bill that would legally force someone to take a drug that could kill them.
The Albuquerque Police Department was present at the Legislature to unofficially support the bill, showing some lack of foresight. Their argument was that mental patients needed to be forced to take medication, citing the recent killings with which John Hyde was charged as an example of the dangers of allowing such patients not to take their medication.
There are two flaws in this logic, however. First, the Hyde case was an issue of negligence on the part of Hyde's health maintenance organization - not of noncompliance on his part. Hyde and his family had been trying for weeks prior to the shootings to correct a medication improperly prescribed by a new doctor that was making his symptoms worse. This negligence cost six people - including two police officers and Hyde himself - their lives.
Secondly, what happens when noncompliance is suspected or confirmed? Who has to enforce the law? The police, of course - they will put more officers in the very situation that cost two of them their lives. It would be only worse under this law, because now they won't just be checking on the person, but acting to enforce the law.
Putting aside obvious violations of the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution - documents that lose value and meaning annually - one must confront the asinine nature of the $2 million statewide budget that came attached to the proposal.
Sen. William Payne from Bernalillo County didn't seem to follow this logic, however, mentioning Medicare as if it was a solution to all the arguments. To my open-mouthed amazement, the bill was approved to be voted on the floor of the Senate this session, showing that at least the majority of the responsible committee bought into his logic and casually brushed aside the documents that all entrants to every branch of the military swear to protect.
I would encourage anyone who is a voter to read George Orwell's 1984 to see a rendition of a society that operates without regard to the individual rights outlined in the documents above.
Rob Ellis
UNM student
