LGC 10.27 — Mental Health Reform Act — FAILED

[ZMUN M441]

Mental Health Reform Act

Section I - Title
The bill may be cited as Mental Health Reform Act

Section II - Equal rights for all people
1. Lincoln will no longer make any kind of distinction between normal and people with mental difficulties
2. A mental disorder will no longer be called a disorder, instead we refer to this as mental difficulties
3. Referring to mental difficulties with mental disorders will be seen as a slur or smear, and can be punished.
4. Advantages that currently exist for people with mental difficulties, will be made available to the entire general population, this because we believe:
a. a lot of people might simply have mental difficulties as well, while not being recognized by a GP or psychiatrist, which does not mean their problems are not valid.
b. it is impossible to make distinctions between valid and unvalid, and to what extent someone is affected by something or not. There is no clear border or distinction.
c. we don't believe in dividing people in certain groups of people if that should not be the case or if there is no base for that. We believe that all people are unique.
5. Every person living in Lincoln will have the right for one freely week session with a psychologists funded by the Lincoln government, if that psychologist is a recognized one by official authorities.

Section III - No more funky names
1. Lincoln will no longer recognise the diagnostic manual of mental disorders, since Lincoln does not believe in mental disorders
2. All current diagnosies and pre-existing diagnoses from the DSM-V manual will be considered invalid and will be immediately unrecognised, this includes the following diagnosises:
a. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
b. Autism Spectrum Disorder
c. Conduct Disorder
d. Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder
e. Eating Disorders
f. Gender Dysphoria
g. Intellectual Disability
h. Internet Gaming Disorder
i. Major Depressive Disorder and the Bereavement Exclusion
j. Mild Neurocognitive Disorder
k. Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders
l. Paraphilic Disorders
m. Personality Disorder
n. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
o. Schizophrenia
p. Sleep-Wake Disorders
q. Specific Learning Disorder
r. Social Communication Disorder
s. Somatic Symptom Disorder
t. Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders
3. Lincoln opens the possibility to re-recognise one of the former disorders through a separate act if the need for that is clear. However it specifically rejects the DSM-V.
4. Pre-existing sentences given based on a psychiatric disorder won't be undone, but Lincoln opens the possibility of redoing these processes if that is the request of the defender or the victim.
5. As stating by the involuntary commitment is kidnapping act, there will no longer be a base for involuntary commitment. The only base for an involuntary commitment would be through a regular and normal judicial trial, based on a sentence given by a judge.
6. As a consequence of no longer the DSM-V manual, people can no longer be convicted based on a psychiatric disorder, since this is no longer recognised until further notice.
7. Using one of the no longer recognised diagnosises as a slur in any way possible can be convicted under hate crime or hate speech.

Section IV - Ending modern 21st century segregation
1. Schools will be outlawed to divide their students based on a mental disorder or special needs or intellectual capabilities.
2. Schools designed to specifically solely help students with special needs or a disability will be closed or reformed into a general school.
3. All schools will be required to have accomodation that suits all possible pupils.
4. Schools no longer have the choice to reject a pupil, or to ban a pupil, with the following exception
a. if the parents or guardian voluntarily chooses to leave the school, however the parent or guardian need to be in agreement with the compulsory school attending law.
b. if a school believes a student bullies another student, they have the right to remove them from the school, however this will automatically start a court case that needs to prove the bullying took place.
5. Schools are no longer required to offer accomodation based on any of the DSM disorders, instead we prefer a different approach that start
a. from general wellbeing of the student itself and how a school or accompanist can be of help of said student.
6. Every student in a school will be required to have a monthly session with a school psychologist. Schools will ensure that this service will be offered. This will strictly be confidential. The psychologist can offer help with difficulties students face in for example
a. family situations or issues
b. situations related to their friend circle
c. questions based on first love and sexuality.
d. situations related to performing, homework and school results.
e. questions based on acceptance and religion, events covered in the news and so on.
7. Students can no longer be rejected based on financial demands
a. This applies to higher and university schools, including private universities
b. universities will ensure there is enough place to accomodate every possible student, this could require fusion with other universities or other buildings.
8. Schools will actively focus more generally on mental wellbeing, and focus on group events that
a. focus on awareness of mental health issues
b. focus on inclusion of students
c. see inclusion as an important value for students
9. Schools recognize that every student is a unique individual with talents.

Section V - Effective Date
This legislation shall take effect on 1 January 2023.

Occupying: Slot 9 of 10
Sponsor: Lakigigar

[LAKISYLVANIA]

To be more specific and avoid confusion

1. Section III eliminates specifically categorizing these "disorders" as a disorder. Gender dysphoria is included in DSM-V as a psychiatric disorder.

I don't believe this is true for example, but I don't believe it isn't a thing or that it does not exist. What I believe in is that it is not a psychiatric disorder specifically. It's possible some existing bills will need to be changed or that a new act needs to be introduced to clarify this or change definitions.

2. Secondly, for other things like for example what is seen as "an eating disorder" here. I don't believe that one needs to be diagnosed with an eating disorder in order to be treated for it (and if it is, than that needs to be changed), but to me it makes no sense

This for example is the diagnostic criteria for anorexia nervosa in the DSM-V:

To   be   diagnosed   with   anorexia   nervosa   according   to   the   DSM-5,   the   following   criteria   
must   be   met:
1. Restriction   of   energy   intake   relative   to   requirements   leading   to   a   significantly   low   body   
weight   in   the   context   of   age,   sex,   developmental   trajectory,   and   physical   health.
2. Intense   fear   of   gaining   weight   or   becoming   fat,   even   though   underweight.
3. Disturbance   in   the   way   in   which   one's   body   weight   or   shape   is   experienced,   undue   
influence   of   body   weight   or   shape   on   self-evaluation,   or   denial   of   the   seriousness   of   the   
current   low   body   weight.
Even   if   all   the   DSM-5   criteria   for   anorexia   are   not   met,   a   serious   eating   disorder   can   still   
be   present.   Atypical   anorexia   includes   those   individuals   who   meet   the   criteria   for   
anorexia   but   who   are   not   underweight   despite   significant   weight   loss.   Research   studies   
have   not   found   a   difference   in   the   medical   and   psychological   impacts   of   anorexia   and   
atypical   anorexia.

It specifically indicates criteria, but it also specifically says

Even   if   all   the   DSM-5   criteria   for   anorexia   are   not   met,   a   serious   eating   disorder   can   still  
be   present.   Atypical   anorexia   includes   those   individuals   who   meet   the   criteria   for  
anorexia   but   who   are   not   underweight   despite   significant   weight   loss.   Research   studies  
have   not   found   a   difference   in   the   medical   and   psychological   impacts   of   anorexia   and  
atypical   anorexia.

Yet a person missing one of the criteria risks being denied treatment for anorexia nervosa esp. when sometimes a BMI of > 17.5 needs to be present in order to get the diagnosis. This would lead to atypical anorexia patients sometimes in practice not being able to receive treatment. And in some occassions can lead to an intensification of the disorder since their concerns are considered invalid, which would intensify disturbances in the way they perceive their body's weight which is literally one of the criteria.

I don't believe in these strict criteria, and I believe that everyone with eating problems deserves to get treatment.

In general, the spirit of the bill is centered in that I don't believe it is advantageous to work with labels, names or groups and to avoid namecalling and since I don't believe there is an objective way of categorizing these phenomens of issues in a proper way, and because I believe in treatment focused on an individual's experience on the base that everyone is unique and that what works for one does not always works for another, and that the way eating issues develop can differ from person to person so that the solution sometimes is an entirely different on (or the way one approaches a problem).

Names, labels and the existence of these poorly defined "disorders" can lead to namecalling and unwanted discrimination, even sometimes segregation due to our societal systems. To me, giving it a name isn't helpful (which I also say from personal experience). And that it can lead to discrimination, we all know, since a lot of these disorders can be used as a slur or to discriminate one.

An example of why it doesn't work is Belgium, the European country with the highest amount of schools designed for pupils with special needs. And to me that doesn't fit with the desire to offer inclusion and diversity everywhere, and it leads to stigma, which can be seen in the following example.

https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2022/11/25/investigation-launched-into-allegations-of-bullying-by-teachers/

That is what I specifically try to tackle in the bill.

I believe in an entirely different approach of dealing with mental health.

[ZMUN M441]

Amendment:

Mental Health Reform Act

Section I - Title
The bill may be cited as Mental Health Reform Act

Section II - Equal rights for all people
1. Lincoln will no longer make any kind of distinction between normal and people with mental difficulties
2. A mental disorder will no longer be called a disorder, instead we refer to this as mental difficulties
3. Referring to mental difficulties with mental disorders will be seen as a slur or smear, and can be punished.
4. Advantages that currently exist for people with mental difficulties, will be made available to the entire general population, this because we believe:
a. a lot of people might simply have mental difficulties as well, while not being recognized by a GP or psychiatrist, which does not mean their problems are not valid.
b. it is impossible to make distinctions between valid and unvalid, and to what extent someone is affected by something or not. There is no clear border or distinction.
c. we don't believe in dividing people in certain groups of people if that should not be the case or if there is no base for that. We believe that all people are unique.
5. Every person living in Lincoln will have the right for one freely week session with a psychologists funded by the Lincoln government, if that psychologist is a recognized one by official authorities. However, they will not be required to use it.

Section III - No more funky names
1. Lincoln will no longer recognise the diagnostic manual of mental disorders, since Lincoln does not believe in mental disorders
2. All current diagnosies and pre-existing diagnoses from the DSM-V manual will be considered invalid and will be immediately unrecognised, this includes the following diagnosises:
a. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
b. Autism Spectrum Disorder
c. Conduct Disorder
d. Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder
e. Eating Disorders
f. Gender Dysphoria
g. Intellectual Disability
h. Internet Gaming Disorder
i. Major Depressive Disorder and the Bereavement Exclusion
j. Mild Neurocognitive Disorder
k. Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders
l. Paraphilic Disorders
m. Personality Disorder
n. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
o. Schizophrenia
p. Sleep-Wake Disorders
q. Specific Learning Disorder
r. Social Communication Disorder
s. Somatic Symptom Disorder
t. Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders
3. Lincoln opens the possibility to re-recognise one of the former disorders through a separate act if the need for that is clear. However it specifically rejects the DSM-V.
4. Pre-existing sentences given based on a psychiatric disorder won't be undone, but Lincoln opens the possibility of redoing these processes if that is the request of the defender or the victim.
5. As stating by the involuntary commitment is kidnapping act, there will no longer be a base for involuntary commitment. The only base for an involuntary commitment would be through a regular and normal judicial trial, based on a sentence given by a judge.
6. As a consequence of no longer the DSM-V manual, people can no longer be convicted based on a psychiatric disorder, since this is no longer recognised until further notice.
7. Using one of the no longer recognised diagnosises as a slur in any way possible can be convicted under hate crime or hate speech.

Section IV - Ending modern 21st century segregation
1. Schools will be outlawed to divide their students based on a mental disorder or special needs or intellectual capabilities.
2. Schools designed to specifically solely help students with special needs or a disability will be closed or reformed into a general school.
3. All schools will be required to have accomodation that suits all possible pupils.
4. Schools no longer have the choice to reject a pupil, or to ban a pupil, with the following exception
a. if the parents or guardian voluntarily chooses to leave the school, however the parent or guardian need to be in agreement with the compulsory school attending law.
b. if a school believes a student bulliepeer abuses another student, they have the right to remove them from the school, however this will automatically start a court case that needs to prove the bullyingpeer abuse took place.
5. Schools are no longer required to offer accomodation based on any of the DSM disorders, instead we prefer a different approach that start
a. from general wellbeing of the student itself and how a school or accompanist can be of help of said student.
6. Every student in a school will be required to have a monthly session with a school psychologist. Schools will ensure that this service will be offered. This will strictly be confidential. The psychologist can offer help with difficulties students face in for example
a. family situations or issues
b. situations related to their friend circle
c. questions based on first love and sexuality.
d. situations related to performing, homework and school results.
e. questions based on acceptance and religion, events covered in the news and so on.
7. Students can no longer be rejected based on financial demands
a. This applies to higher and university schools, including private universities
b. universities will ensure there is enough place to accomodate every possible student, this could require fusion with other universities or other buildings.
8. Schools will actively focus more generally on mental wellbeing, and focus on group events that
a. focus on awareness of mental health issues
b. focus on inclusion of students
c. see inclusion as an important value for students
9. Schools recognize that every student is a unique individual with talents.

Section V - Effective Date
This legislation shall take effect on 1 January 2023.

Section III Provision 7 strikes me as a liability, considering Atlasia has no hate speech laws and that making the use of 'slurs' illegal would be considered by most (including, presumably, our Supreme Court Justices) to be a First Amendment violation. Also, while I support most of this bill, I do not support forcing children to meet with p$ychiatrists — in fact, as an individual who was subjected to that in the past, I'd argue that's worse than what we currently have.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I agree with the amendment.

A required school psychologist maybe as you say isn't a great idea, but there should be a voluntary option to have one (which I think is already there).

[ZMUN M441]

The first ZMUN M441 amendment is adopted.

New amendment:

Mental Health Reform Act

Section I - Title
The bill may be cited as Mental Health Reform Act

Section II - Equal rights for all people
1. Lincoln will no longer make any kind of distinction between normal sane and insane people with mental difficulties
2. A mental disorder will no longer be called a disorder, instead we refer to this as mental difficulties insanity
3. Referring to mental difficulties insanity with mental disorders will be seen as a slur or smear, and can be punished.
4. Advantages that currently exist for insane people with mental difficulties, will be made available to the entire general population, this because we believe:
a. a lot of people might simply have mental difficultiesbe insane as well, while not being recognized by a GP or psychiatrist, which does not mean their problems are not valid.
b. it is impossible to make distinctions between valid and unvalid, and to what extent someone is affected by something or not. There is no clear border or distinction.
c. we don't believe in dividing people in certain groups of people if that should not be the case or if there is no base for that. We believe that all people are unique.
5. Every person living in Lincoln will have the right for one freely week session with a psychologists funded by the Lincoln government, if that psychologist is a recognized one by official authorities. However, they will not be required to use it.

Section III - No more funky names
1. Lincoln will no longer recognise the diagnostic manual of mental disorders, since Lincoln does not believe in mental disorders
2. All current diagnoses and pre-existing diagnoses from the DSM-V manual will be considered invalid and will be immediately unrecognised, this includes the following diagnosises:
a. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
b. Autism Spectrum Disorder
c. Conduct Disorder
d. Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder
e. Eating Disorders
f. Gender Dysphoria
g. Intellectual Disability
h. Internet Gaming Disorder
i. Major Depressive Disorder and the Bereavement Exclusion
j. Mild Neurocognitive Disorder
k. Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders
l. Paraphilic Disorders
m. Personality Disorder
n. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
o. Schizophrenia
p. Sleep-Wake Disorders
q. Specific Learning Disorder
r. Social Communication Disorder
s. Somatic Symptom Disorder
t. Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders
3. Lincoln opens the possibility to re-recognise one of the former disorders through a separate act if the need for that is clear. However it specifically rejects the DSM-V.
4. Pre-existing sentences given based on a psychiatric disorder won't be undone, but Lincoln opens the possibility of redoing these processes if that is the request of the defender or the victim.
5. As stating by the involuntary commitment is kidnapping act, there will no longer be a base for involuntary commitment. The only base for an involuntary commitment would be through a regular and normal judicial trial, based on a sentence given by a judge.
6. As a consequence of no longer the DSM-V manual, people can no longer be convicted based on a psychiatric disorder, since this is no longer recognised until further notice.

Section IV - Ending modern 21st century segregation
1. Schools will be outlawed to divide their students based on a mental disorder or special needs or intellectual capabilities.
2. Schools designed to specifically solely help students with special needs or a disability will be closed or reformed into a general school.
3. All schools will be required to have accomodation that suits all possible pupils.
4. Schools no longer have the choice to reject a pupil, or to ban a pupil, with the following exception
a. if the parents or guardian voluntarily chooses to leave the school, however the parent or guardian need to be in agreement with the compulsory school attending law.
b. if a school believes a student peer abuses another student, they have the right to remove them from the school, however this will automatically start a court case that needs to prove the peer abuse took place.
5. Schools are no longer required to offer accomodation based on any of the DSM disorders, instead we prefer a different approach that start
a. from general wellbeing of the student itself and how a school or accompanist can be of help of said student.
6. Students can no longer be rejected based on financial demands
a. This applies to higher and university schools, including private universities
b. universities will ensure there is enough place to accomodate every possible student, this could require fusion with other universities or other buildings.
7. Schools will actively focus more generally on mental wellbeing, and focus on group events that
a. focus on awareness of mental health issues
b. focus on inclusion of students
c. see inclusion as an important value for students
8. Schools recognize that every student is a unique individual with talents.

Section V - Effective Date
This legislation shall take effect on 1 January 2023.

This amendment is somewhat less important than the first. All it does is replace the term 'mental difficulties,' which already has a strong association with intellectual disability, with 'insanity.' It also removes the mention of involuntary commitment as a judicial punishment, as that was prohibited by LGC 10.6.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

I agree with what you're trying to say but I didn't want to refer to "insane people" with "insane people" as that would already be derogatory. In my opinion those people are not "insane", so I don't refer to those as "insane", but what term should be used in the bill is unclear to me.

Insanity is arguably less respectful than "mental disorder", even if i don't believe it is a "disorder" which is exactly one of the things the act tries to do.

I agree with the amendment made in section III. But I want to use different terms than "insane", "sane", in section II even if "mental difficulties" might not be the right word either. Insane also is a subjective term, what is insane for one is not insane for another and is thus a subjective term, and not an acceptable term IMO.

[ZMUN M441]

Understood. I used the term 'insane' because it has been reclaimed by activists on the topic, and lacks the overt claim that insanity is a 'disorder,' 'difficulty,' or something else to be 'fixed.' But if you can come up with another, more 'respectful' term, I'd be willing to change to it.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Just remember, yall already got rid of involuntary commitments. If you abolish all legal distictions based on sanity then anyone can buy a gun without a mental health flag showing up in a background check. Even the South has not gone so far with regards to firearm ownership. But hey, Regional rights and all that.

[ZMUN M441]

Just remember, yall already got rid of involuntary commitments. If you abolish all legal distictions based on sanity then anyone can buy a gun without a mental health flag showing up in a background check. Even the South has not gone so far with regards to firearm ownership. But hey, Regional rights and all that.

You say that like it's something I'd have an issue with.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Just remember, yall already got rid of involuntary commitments. If you abolish all legal distictions based on sanity then anyone can buy a gun without a mental health flag showing up in a background check. Even the South has not gone so far with regards to firearm ownership. But hey, Regional rights and all that.

You say that like it's something I'd have an issue with.

Just wanted to mention it.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Yeah this does kinda erode some of the FF Act, but that may be the will of the elected body currently.

[ZMUN M441]

The second ZMUN M441 amendment is adopted.

Motioning for a final vote.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Just remember, yall already got rid of involuntary commitments. If you abolish all legal distictions based on sanity then anyone can buy a gun without a mental health flag showing up in a background check. Even the South has not gone so far with regards to firearm ownership. But hey, Regional rights and all that.

With current laws, some people who would be able to carefully handle a gun, fall out the system while vice versa, some people who are unfit to handle a gun, might not have a mental health flag. To be honest, gun rights has little to with this act. If people disagree with the accessibility of firearm ownership, they should deal with that in a different act, updating background checks to fit better with this act or proposing different restrictions. The current form of gun legislation is already lacklustering, but that isn't because of this law, but because the way gun legislation works specifically.

[ZMUN M441]

A final vote on this bill has been initiated.


Aye

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Nay

[Vice President Christian Man]

Nay

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Aye

[nerd73]

Nay

[ZMUN M441]

LGC 10.27 fails to pass, 3-2.