Where Is the Line Drawn on Mental Illness?

Defining mental health is a tricky task. Where is the line? It is nebulous, yet it carries very real-world consequences. Mental illness is hard to diagnose due to the complex nature of the human mind. At its core, mental health is an almost imaginary concept, built from the opinion of other human beings. Furthermore, even if an individual is considered mentally ill, their future actions cannot be predicted. At what point does a person's mental health condition begin to usurp his or her rights, which are protected by the laws of this nation? The idea of restricting a group of people of any of their rights is a serious proposition and is something that requires the utmost caution when approaching.

It is obvious to most people that someone who is clinically insane should not be able to purchase a firearm. Yet should someone who suffers from ADHD be barred as well? People who suffer from ADHD are notoriously impulsive. Impulsiveness can be a dangerous trait, often leading to unplanned and emotion-driven murders. However, most Americans would likely oppose stripping those with ADHD of some of their rights.

According to Ranna Parekh, M.D., M.P.H. with the American Psychiatric Association (APA), "nearly one in five (19 percent) U.S. adults experience some form of mental illness [and] one in 24 (4.1 percent) has a serious mental illness." This lends some perspective on just how many people fall into the nebulous category of mentally ill. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration in a report outlining the definition of Serious Mental Illness (SMI), they included schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorders. Also commonly included are eating disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and panic disorder.

4.1 percent of the population or approximately 13 million individuals suffer from SMI, and to propose stripping such a large number of people of their rights to purchase firearms is an intimidating prospect. 

This idea is dangerous for several reasons no matter where one falls on the political spectrum. Some will argue that mental illness is not even the cause of gun violence, rather it is the gun itself that is the issue. Others will say that this would set a dangerously powerful precedent by granting the government the ability to take away rights based off of a psychiatric evaluation and opens up the possibility for an abuse of that power.

Is banning the sale of firearms to people with SMIs the right move? Is it even something to consider? It is all so hard to say. Someone can easily have a mental breakdown and not be diagnosed with a mental illness at all. It should be hard to make a decisions and come to conclusions such as these because it forces cautiousness. Fixing societal problems is never a simple task, however, acknowledging pitfalls, flaws, and dangers are the first steps to being able to avoid them.