A Confluence of Factors - Why There Is No Functional System of Care for Severe Mental Illnesses

 

 This post was stimulated by a confluence of factors.  I had no real concerns about what I would do in retirement and it seems that I have as much to think about as I did when I was working.  The factors included:

1.  A post by one of my esteemed colleagues on Twitter – Emily Deans, MD.  I have never met Dr. Deans and know her work primarily through her blog, Substack, and Twitter posts.  I cannot recall ever disagreeing with her.  Today she began a thread with: “The US allows people with terrible brain illnesses to languish on the streets and get murdered on the subway.”  She built upon that theme.

2.  I was working on a presentation for Friday May 5 on “Everything You Wanted To Know About Psychiatry in 30 Minutes or Less.”  That got me into a historical frame of mind.

3.  I had the occasion to pick up my copy of Sylvia Nassar’s biography of John Nash “A Beautiful Mind” and reread the description of his civil commitment to a state hospital where he received insulin shock treatments at age 33.

4.  During my work on the presentation I suddenly got the bright idea to create a couple of new timeline graphics – one of which was about European influences on American psychiatry (protopsychiatrists, transitional self-taught psychiatrists, and psychiatrists) and that led to thinking about the current state of psychiatric affairs in the United States.

That all came together to produce the following paragraphs that I have discussed here before but seems reinforced by the current confluence of information.

Psychiatric care in the US is abysmal and it is not due to the lack of bright and highly motivated psychiatrists.  It is due to a lack of access.  It is possible to find those psychiatrists and get treatment but good luck with that.  Dr. Deans is correct that people are currently dying due to the lack of humane laws to treat people with severe mental illnesses. In many jurisdictions those laws are interpreted in the context of the lack of resources.  In other words if there are no facilities available, legal action is dropped. That problem lies squarely on several entities that are far outside of psychiatry. The problem is so chronic it is hard to prioritize which of these entities came first and is the worst (although I have provided a few timelines). Let me take them point by point as they come to mind.

The antipsychiatry movement needs to finally get credit for its destructive nature. Psychiatrists tend to respond either by ignoring them and hoping they will go away or by wasting their time trying to argue against their repetitive rhetoric.  The pandemic and the last election highlighted the use of misinformation in social media. The antipsychiatry movement are experts in misinformation and they have been using the same tactics for the past 50 years.  Part of those tactics include getting their rhetoric and opinions in the mainstream psychiatric literature. In 1986, Martin Roth and Jerome Kroll had the following observation:

“We have argued in this section that the concept of mental illness has definable boundaries and that medical forms of care are appropriate and efficacious only in circumscribable portions of those who present a danger to society. But recent trends if allowed to continue, can only culminate in a society in which prisons again contain a large portion of those who suffer from mental illness because there is no appropriate or alternate form of care or accommodation for them. If such a situation should materialize, the distinction between prison and hospital will become once again blurred and obliterated like it was 133 years ago when Bucknill held out optimistic hopes of a new era in which science and humanity would jointly seek to surmount the problems presented by morbid mental suffering. The hard-won and remarkable progress achieved by psychiatry during the past half century in particular, will then have been set into reverse.” (p. 114).

There has not been a more prophetic statement in the field.  The largest psychiatric hospitals in the United States are currently county jails. The state hospital systems that were in some cases flagships for treatment of people with severe mental illnesses are no longer functional and exist at the margins to alleviate pressure on community hospitals to accept involuntary patients.  It is more of a blockade than a bottleneck since the latter would suggest movement once the obstacles have been passed.  There is no movement and the association of state mental health directors has made it very clear they are not interested in movement.

The basic paradox of the system is that the necessary infrastructure necessary to treat even average numbers of persons with severe mental illnesses and those who are under civil commitment is not there.  It is atrophied or rotten and there has been no wide sustained effort to improve it since The Community Mental Health Act of 1963. Even though the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) was passed in 2008 – it is clear to anyone working in the field that there is no enforcement to ensure mental health parity or adequate substance use treatment. The healthcare industry has sent a clear message that it takes more than a law on the books – it takes concerted and very expensive legal action.  In the past some activist attorney generals had some success – but there are not many of them around anymore.

It is not hard to imagine how a fragmented system of care has withered during a time of continuous antipsychiatry rhetoric.  Money is always cited as a limiting factor, but the amount of money especially compared with the ballooning number of administrators at the state and health plan levels does not seem great. State hospitals and departments of human services seem to run on a managed care rationing model rather than a model focused on helping the most vulnerable citizens. It is not a coincidence that both antipsychiatry and business rationing for profit both depend on Libertarian values – the most basic being “you are only worthwhile if you are living what I determine to be a worthwhile life.”  That same value system criminalizes aggression and violence secondary to mental illness and sees incarceration as the only beneficial outcome. That is consistent with the current model of county jails as psychiatric hospitals that do not deliver any psychiatric care.

That brings me to the Nash biography. He was hospitalized in about 1961 at Trenton State Hospital.  According to Harcourt’s graphs of deinstitutionalization – this was the beginning of a time of rapid decline in mental hospitalization rates that has continued unabated to the present time. Trenton was overwhelmed by the large number of patients seeking help there – 4,000 after World War II dropping and then rising again in the 1960s to about 2,500 when Nash was there. Psychiatrist staffing ratios varied from 1:100 patients in the acute ward to 1:500 patients in the chronic ward.  Length of stay for most patients was about 3 months. Rationing clearly existed even before deinstitutionalization. One of the psychiatrists who worked there described the environment as “crummy.”  In terms of personal relationships with patients – it could be expected to be rare with those staffing ratios.  Nasar describes the hospital as “overcrowded, underfunded, and understaffed.”

Figure 1. Rates of Institutionalization in Mental Institutions and State and Federal Prisons (per 100,00 adults) from the paper by Bernard E. Harcourt, " REDUCING MASS INCARCERATION: LESSONS FROM THE DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MENTAL HOSPITALS IN THE 1960s," 9 Ohio St. J. Crim. L. 53 (2011), available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/639

The exception noted was the insulin unit.  Apparently, Nash was recommended to go to this hospital because it had this modality.  It was a 44-bed unit – half men and half women in separate wards. Patients on that unit received special diets and special recreation.  That is where Nash got insulin treatments 5 days a week for the next 6 weeks. Nash later described the agony of these treatments in detail including what may have been long tern effects on his dietary pattern.  In retrospect, the question is whether it was necessary or not.

Manfred Sakel had discovered insulin shock treatments (IST) in 1935 by accidentally administering too much insulin to a patient with morphine addiction resulting in seizures and a coma.  The patient awoke with more mental clarity.  That led to further trials and wider application. Nassar suggests that by 1960, IST had been phased out in most hospitals and replaced with electroconvulsive therapy (ECT).  Max Fink did a direct study of chlorpromazine versus IST in 1958 (2) and noted that the results clearly favored chlorpromazine.  That resulted in the IST unit at his hospital closing within 6 months (3). Even though Nash had not been able to work for the previous 3 years he was widely regarded and his intelligence was described as a national security asset. As he was recovering, he started a paper on fluid dynamics while he was at Trenton that he subsequently finished and published in 1962 French mathematical journal. He was awarded the Noble Prize in economics for game theory in 1994. His original two page paper at age 22, was part of the basis for the Nobel determination (5,6).    

Nash’s tenure at Trenton is a good example of rationing prior to managed care. The rationing resulted in both the abysmal conditions and a lack of state-of-the-art care. Some might say that you can’t argue with results.  Nash recovered and was able to go back to research and publishing in mathematics, despite his dissatisfaction with treatment.  Later in his biography he was treated with a number of second generation antipsychotic medications that were described as helping him stay out of the hospital but  “have not given him a life.”

That brings me back to Dr. Dean’s comment at the top of this post. We have people with severe mental illness dying on the streets. A small number become aggressive and violent, but a much greater number are victims of violence and exploitation. They do not have stable living situations and there are associated problems with substance use disorders. This is a gross level of neglect compared with way other healthcare problems are addressed requiring more resources than psychiatric care. About 1 in 300 people get retinal detachments during their lifetime. In any mid-sized city in the United States access to state-of-the-art retinal care is not a problem. The same thing is true for orthopedics, gastroenterology, and cardiology. Psychiatric care is fragmented across private pay systems, public pay systems, and managed care systems.  The last two are managed by large bodies of administrators that are focused on rationing rather than an adequate system of care. In many ways, the landscape of psychiatric care is approached with the same level of recklessness as firearms. We all have to pretend that something useful can never be done and therefore maintain the status quo.

 

George Dawson, MD, DFAPA

 

References:

1:  Roth M, Kroll J.  The Reality of Mental Illness.  Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England 1986: 82-144.

2:  Fink M, Shaw R, Gross GE, Coleman FS. Comparative study of chlorpromazine and insulin coma in therapy of psychosis. J Am Med Assoc. 1958 Apr 12;166(15):1846-50. doi: 10.1001/jama.1958.02990150042009. PMID: 13525160.

3:  Fink M. Meduna and the origins of convulsive therapy. Am J Psychiatry. 1984 Sep;141(9):1034-41. doi: 10.1176/ajp.141.9.1034. PMID: 6147103.

4:  John F. Nash Jr. – Facts. NobelPrize.org. Nobel Prize Outreach AB 2023. Sun. 7 May 2023. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/1994/nash/facts/

5:  Holt CA, Roth AE.  The Nash equilibrium: A perspective.  PNAS. 2004; 101 (12) 3999-4002.  https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0308738101

6:  Nash Jr JF. Equilibrium points in n-person games. PNAS. 1950 Jan;36(1):48-9. https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.36.1.48

Graphic Credit:

I took this photo of the Rum River Dam in Anoka, MN about 30 minutes after I gave my presentation on May 5, 2023.  Anoka happens to be where the Anoka Metro Regional Treatment Center is located.  It is the last state mental hospital in Minnesota.  Since 1978 Minnesota has closed 10 of its 11 state hospitals and only AMRTC remains.  There have opened 6 - 16 bed units called  Community Behavioral Health Hospitals that have reduced capacity and apparently do not accept referrals from major metropolitan hospitals. https://mn.gov/dhs/people-we-serve/adults/services/direct-care-treatment/programs-services/community-behavioral-health-hospitals/

Racism and gun violence both exist in an overtly gun extremist society: They cannot be explained away by mental illness.

I suppose I should have not been very shocked that a Wall Street Journal editorial this morning (1) chose to double down on both gun rights and the myth that racism is not a problem and had nothing to do with the recent mass shooting – while scapegoating both mental illness and the rationed system of mental health care that we have in this country.  For good measure he added another conservative agenda item - that there was also blame for the public health officials like Dr. Fauci for mismanaging the pandemic.  This post is to straighten all of that out.

Let me preface these remarks by saying that I have no information about the most recent mass shooting other than what is reported in the media.  The author of the editorial does not seem to either. What I do have is 22 years of experience in acute care psychiatry and involuntary care. That’s right – for 22 years I was one of the guys you would have to see if you were admitted to my hospital on a legal hold for behavior that involved threatening or harming other people or yourself.  That included all kinds of violence - homicide, suicide attempts and severe self injury, and violent confrontations/shoot outs with the police.  I had to evaluate the situation with the considerable assistance from my colleagues and decide if that person could be released or needed to be held for further assessment and treatment. People (including psychiatrists) like to summarize that situation by saying: “Nobody can predict future dangerousness” and that is certainly true. But we do pretty well in the short term (hours to days).  We also do well coming up with a plan to prevent future violence.

The details about the most recent mass shooting are still being reported at this time, but so far include interviews with the families of the victims, police reports, videos, and excerpts from a manifesto written by the perpetrator.  According to reports that manifesto discussed Replacement Theory as a potential motive for the mass shooting.  Replacement Theory is a white nationalist, far right ideology that claims non-whites are a threat to the white majority in several countries including the US. A corollary is that the Democrats are trying to get aligned with more non-white voters to develop more political power. This is the rationale currently given in the media for the actions of the mass shooter who scouted neighborhoods and said very explicitly in documents that his intent was to murder as many black people as possible. He had no difficulty obtaining firearms legally – even though he was detained and sent for an emergency evaluation a little less than a year earlier for stating “murder-suicide” in response to an online question about what he planned to do upon retirement.  Those details and his response talking about how he got out of it and continued to plan to kill people are at this link.  

As a psychiatrist and member of the American Psychiatric Association, I can’t speculate on the diagnosis of anyone who I have not personally assessed and if I did do an assessment – I would need a release from the person to discuss any details.  The editorialist is under no constraints speculating that “signals were missed” and that “psychotic young males whose outlet is killing” is not the object of his column.  Instead, he makes the claim that he is really concerned about the post pandemic mental illness and addiction trends in this country. He is apparently not consulting the correct sources about what has happened in this country in terms of mental health care before the pandemic.

I will start with his anchor point in the 1970s.  At about that time Len Stein, MD and coworkers invented Assertive Community Treatment and a number of additional innovative approaches that were focused on keeping people with severe mental illnesses in their own homes.  Dr. Stein was one of my mentors and in seminars he would show what Wisconsin state hospital wards used to look like. About a hundred patients in one large room with their cots edge-to-edge and all wearing hospital pajamas. By the time I was working with him in the 1980s, those folks were living independently supported by case management teams and psychiatrists. Dr. Stein and his colleagues also ran a community mental health center that included crisis intervention services and outreach. That model of community mental health and crisis intervention is still practiced and has been covered in the New England Journal of Medicine.  Psychiatric residents are still trained in community mental health settings and many prefer to practice there.  Counties are not as enthusiastic and have shut down many if not most community mental health centers.

Community psychiatry is an obvious 50-year-old solution but it has to be funded. The same is true of affordable housing.  In some cases that housing needs to be supervised and also a sober environment. Both community psychiatry and affordable housing are casualties of business rationing that can only occur with the full cooperation of both state and federal governments. The current system costs about a trillion dollars in overhead that is directed to Wall Street profits and unnecessary meddling by middle managers. The only people who “sweep mental health under the rug” are large healthcare organizations and state bureaucrats who disproportionately ration it.  The "science of mental health" is not difficult at all.  Being forced to do it for free is difficult.

The 1980s were a critical time in establishing the managed care industry and taking all healthcare out of the purview of physicians.  While rationing psychiatric resources was being ramped up, services to treat alcoholism and addiction were essentially demolished. Suddenly you could not longer get detoxification services at most hospitals.  People were sent to social detox units run by counties where there was no medical coverage.  The thinking was that if a person developed medical complications like seizures or delirium tremens they could always be sent back to the hospital. The biggest risk was continued substance use and immediate relapse. Residential and outpatient treatment facilities never materialized.  Inadequate funding was a significant problem.  The managed care industry played a role in that case as well with absurd expectations and limits on treatment.  It is no accident that treatment for substance use disorders basically became non-existent.  None of the disproportionate rationing of mental health or substance abuse treatment is new.  It has been like this for 30 years because it is the government endorsed model of care.  

Overall, this editorial is a smokescreen over the proximate issues of guns and racism.  The author trivializes this as political rhetoric when in fact the rhetoric has all been pro-guns and pro-white supremacy.  It is the only rational explanation for turning the United States into an armed camp that has progressively increased the likelihood of gun violence. We are not talking about a pandemic precipitated phenomenon.  The gun violence has been multi-year and the pro-gun party has “doubled down” on it to make it more likely.  As far as politics go – now that we know how a partisan Supreme Court works – the Heller decision and the resulting liberalization of gun ownership should not come as a surprise.  On the issue of hate crimes, I can’t really think of anything more relevant in a case based on the public disclosures.  This was a specific crime directed at black Americans intentionally perpetrated in a neighborhood that was scouted ahead of time for that ethnicity. Brushing that aside to claim that this is a response to an embarrassing record on mental illness, when there is no evidence that is a factor is disingenuous.

American history including other recent mass shootings tells us that racism can be a causative factor.  What is never addressed is the omnipresent gun culture in the USA.  People with an apparent need for military weapons and handguns and politicians willing to give them unlimited access to carrying them in public, carrying them without permits, and stand your ground laws - encouraging violent confrontations with firearms.  All fueled by one party and their affiliated special interests.

Disingenuous discourse and misinformation is what we typically see these days. If you want the facts about what needs to be there in terms of a functional mental health system (and I know there are absolutely no business people and very few politicians that do) – ask a psychiatrist. If you want to know about what gun control needs to be in effect rather than claiming that psychiatrists are not preventing gun violence from people with no mental illness – you can also ask me.

I could put all of those details on a 4” x 6” card and it would work. 

But there is certainly nobody on the right or at the WSJ who wants to know that either.

 

George Dawson, MD, DFAPA

 

References:

1:  Daniel Henninger. The Next Pandemic: Mental Illness.  Wall Street Journal. May 18, 2022.

Graphics Credit:  Eduardo Colon, MD

A Return To Asylums Will Not Stop The Rationing

An article was published in the JAMA recently where three ethicists argue for the return of asylum care.  It has become an expected flash point for the antipsychiatry movement as well as some psychiatrists who still think that the word asylum has some meaning.  I thought I would add a more realistic opinion and solution.  I refer readers to the original article or many that I have written here about the reduction in bed capacity in long term psychiatric care.  The reductions are indisputable and well documented.  I am more interested in elucidating the mechanisms behind this reduction and the lack of effective care in the remaining community hospital beds.  The authors allude to the underlying dynamics as captured in the sentence "For the past 60 years or more, social, political, and economic forces coalesced to move severely mentally ill patients out of mental hospitals."  They discuss the well known euphemism for incarcerating psychiatric patients or "transinstitutionalization" and rotating the chronically mentally ill in and out of emergency departments.

The authors even go so far as pointing out the bloated estimated inpatient costs for care in Michigan at $260,000/year/patient and Washington, DC at $328,000/year/patient.   For comparison they include a state of the art facility the Worcester Recovery Center and Hospital that has 320 beds at a cost of $60 million per year or or $187,500/bed/year.  It is difficult to figure out why what may arguably be the best public hospital in the United States has the lowest cost of care for what may be more comprehensive services.  But that is part of the problem.  Most of these institutions are managed by human services agencies through the states and the real fiscal status is always difficult to ascertain.  State and business accounting frequently provides calculations for bed or per patient rates that seem to include unrealistic estimates of overhead costs (often for subpar facilities).  The administration of many of these facilities also seems to depend on restricting psychiatric care at several levels.  In many cases the managed care concept of "medication management" or a "med check" mentality is applied, often with the overall plan of replacing psychiatrists with "prescribers".  Any notion of quality is trumped by a managed care notion of "cost-effectiveness" that typically includes removing psychiatrists from management positions and delegating policy and management at the institutional level to people with no training in psychiatry.

The authors accurately describe the problems of severe mental illnesses.  People have very complex neuropsychiatric disorders and will either not be getting well soon or will never recover enough functioning to do well in any community setting.  They were some of the first victims of "medical necessity" criteria.  I was a Peer Review Organization (PRO) reviewer for Medicare hospitalizations in the states of Minnesota and Wisconsin in the 1980s and 1990s.  For at least part of that time I was sent boxes of medical records from state hospitals for review.  If I looked the the records and decided the patient should continue to be hospitalized, I would get a call from the Medical Director of the PRO suggesting that I should consider the medical necessity criteria.  In the case of long term care, that meant that the patient was "stable" meaning that I would not expect them to change significantly with additional treatment.  If I could say that, the hospital was notified that the patient did not meet criteria for continued long term hospitalization and they needed to be discharged.  In fact, it was very likely that although they were not changing at a rapid enough pace, they would still present formidable problems for community placement.  It may be impossible to discharge them.  In many cases discharge resulted in almost immediate readmission to an acute care hospital and the cycle emergency department to brief hospital admission to homelessness to jail or readmission occurred.  At least until the person was sent back to the state hospital.

In her opinion piece, Dr. Montross suggests that these patients have been abandoned in the name of autonomy or  treating people in the so-called "least restrictive alternative."  That seems at odds with frequent sustained incarcerations for minor and in some cases trivial offenses.  What is really going on here and why do people continue to ignore it?  I have analyzed the problem many times and it is apparently so institutionalized at this point that nobody sees it as a problem anymore. The problem that I continue to point it out is managed care and all of the rationing mechanisms that they employ.  The very first one in the paragraph above is the so-called medical necessity criteria.  Any managed care company physician reviewer can deny care based on their own proprietary guidelines or a purely arbitrary and subjective interpretations of those guidelines.  Managed care companies can harass physicians with mountains of unnecessary paperwork and deny payment or demand payment back based on more subjective interpretations.  Even more problematic, states have incorporated some of these same management techniques and almost uniformly have completely abandoned quality in favor of "cost-effective" care which is quite frankly - care on the cheap.

The end result of all of this cost cutting, rationing, and insurance company profiteering at the expense of patients with mental illness or substance use problems is extremely poor quality care.  One of the authors suggests longer inpatient treatment may be the solution.  Right now practically every psychiatric hospital does their best to get patients discharged in 5 days or less.  Outpatient psychiatrists see patients who have not been stabilized after a 5 day admission.  That is business as usual in acute care psychiatric hospitals.  If that discharged patient makes it to an out patient clinic, they are seen for 10 - 15 minutes in a medication management visit (another fabrication of the managed care industry and the US government) and if they are lucky they discuss the medication and whether it is effective for symptoms or causing side effects.  The problem is that there are important areas in the patients life - like their cognition and social behavior, that are never discussed or evaluated in any productive way.  Very few patients with severe mental disorders receive any kind of psychotherapy despite the evidence it is useful to them.

Putting all of these problems back into the asylum will have predictable results.  The medication management mentality is basically now inside the walls of an institution. There is no enlightened, research driven treatment that addresses all of the problems that the person has.  The asylum is typically administered by a bureaucrat, bound by the same arbitrary budgeting that comes down from the Governor's office.  Across the board spending cuts by a certain percentage and no adjustments when the cash flow is positive.  Money "saved" on asylum care transferred to the state's general fund and used to build roads or whatever was stated in campaign promises.  Suddenly the asylum is an overcrowded bottleneck due to cost shifting by every county in the state who does not want provide services for serious mental illnesses.

The alternative?  How about doing things the right way for once.  We seem to have people who recognize that mental illnesses are not going away, that the current care is atrocious and inhumane, and that it is time to do something about it.  Estimates for the number of people in each state with severe mental illnesses are out there.  Consistent reasonable funding is necessary.  That includes the state, but also it is time to not allow managed care companies to dodge these costs and transfer them to the tax payers.  Finally, it it time to eliminate stakeholder meetings and develop systems of care for the people who it matters the most to - patients, families, psychiatrists, and the other mental health and medical professionals involved in providing this level of care.

Without those conversations, an asylum is just a poorly managed building.    




George Dawson, MD, DFAPA



References:

1: Sisti DA, Segal AG, Emanuel EJ. Improving long-term psychiatric care: bringback the asylum. JAMA. 2015 Jan 20;313(3):243-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.16088.  PubMed PMID: 25602990.

2:  Christine Montross.  The Modern Asylum.  New York Times February 18, 2015.

It Is Cold Outside

I was driving into work this AM. I drive a six year old Toyota Van. The thermometer on my rearview mirror hovered between - 20 and -21 Fahrenheit, but every bank I passed said -24. Before I left home this morning I added a layer of polyester, packed additional headgear, and wore my Sorel boots. This is serious weather even if you are born and raised here and you need to be prepared for the worst. Standing outside for even a few minutes without adequate cover can result in frostbite or worse. The Governor of Minnesota closed down all of the schools today to prevent frostbite injuries and so far there have been no arguments with that decision.  The drive home at night was slightly warmer at -16 degrees.  The sky was so clear it was like being in outer space.  I had to stop for gas and the driver's side door froze open.  I had to hold it shut for about 6 miles until it thawed to the point I could slam it.

Apart from the pragmatics of winter survival, the cold weather also triggers a lot of associative memories - starting with my Sorels. I got these boots originally in 1971 in order to do a Limnology experiment on Lake Superior.

A friend of mine helped me and we went out onto the ice for a about 5 hours and pumped about 200 gallons of lake water through a plankton net to look at the winter plankton population. It was about -5 degrees that day. A few years earlier he had a case of frostbite after walking about 10 blocks to school wearing nothing but a pea coat.  Like a lot of people in the northern US and Canada, I have found that these boots absolutely protect your feet in subzero weather.

I lived in Duluth, Minnesota for a while and can recall trying to speedskate when it was -10 to -15 degrees. At that temperature, a skate blade cannot compress and liquefy the ice enough to support much glide so the skating motion and its mechanics are seriously disrupted. I was wearing two layers of polyester, a layer of Lycra, and a layer of fiber.  Unlike Sorels - speedskates even with neoprene boot covers don't protect much against the cold.  When I got home I had to lay on top of a radiator under a blanket for 30 minutes in order to warm up. The coldest I have ever been in the winter usually happens after falling through the ice. I can recall walking across a creek and just getting ready to step up onto the far bank when I fell through the ice up to my chest in icy water. The sensation that occurs when that happens is incredible. Your breathing stops for a while followed by rapid gasping as you struggle to get out of the water. That is followed by the desperate run home. In my case it was only about 7 blocks and by the time I got there my clothes were frozen solid.  A friend of mine was skating on Lake Superior and fell through the ice catching himself only by his fingertips. He ran home about the same distance but he had been totally submerged.

My more recent memories are about how the cold has been a factor in my role as a psychiatrist. Most psychiatrists in the Midwest have first-hand experience with the complications of cold weather. We have seen people with frostbite injuries both on burn units and after they have been transferred. We know many of the people who are caught in the endless inpatient unit -> emergency department -> homeless cycle that seems like a permanent artifact of our managed care inpatient and county mental health systems. We have seen the human interest stories that tend to run in the papers when the potentially lethal cold weather hits and the temporary concern about whether or not there are enough shelter beds.

Weather this cold does not allow you to make a lot of mistakes. Sometimes all it takes is the idea that you can run out to the trash can without putting on a jacket and finding that you have locked yourself out of the house. People with memory problems and disorientation can wander off and get lost. People with drinking problems can pass out or just take too long to get home. All it takes is a decision that keeps you out in the subzero weather for minutes too long and you can be in serious trouble.

Potentially lethal cold weather is also an integral part of treatment decisions. You can't really watch people coming in to appointments wearing summer clothing in this weather without doing an assessment for cold weather safety. It becomes part of the discharge decision making. Exactly how stable is the person's housing and how likely are they to keep themselves safe? Can they walk 10 blocks from the hospital to their apartment wearing a sweat suit, basketball shoes, and no hat?  Should they be discharged to the street, even if they want to be?  Should they be discharged if a managed care reviewer says that they should be discharged?  We are generally talking about people who have chronic problems with insight and judgment.  What about people with suicidal ideation? What about the person with chronic drug problems who has a history of drug induced blackouts and waking up on park benches?  What about the person with Alzheimer’s disease who does not have 24 hour supervision?   

How do you make an unbiased decision in that context?  I can say that you don’t.  You don’t because as a psychiatrist you are aware of all of the adverse outcomes.  The continuum of severe frostbite injuries to the hypothermic who could not be resuscitated to those who were found frozen to death.  You don’t want to see that happen to anyone.  You don’t care if somebody wants to call that paternalistic.  You don’t really care if it costs a managed care company or (more likely) a hospital a few bucks.  You have been there yourself and you know you cannot take any chances in subzero weather.  It’s not about a fear of being sued, it’s about concern for a fellow human being.

There are implications for the imminent dangerousness standard that is commonly applied to involuntary holds.  I have argued with enough county attorneys over the years to understand that the standard itself is purely subjective and arbitrary.  No matter how it appears on paper you will hear ten different interpretations from 10 different county attorneys.  There are a few states where a gravely disabled standard applies.  That standard states that a person may have problematic judgment to the point that it potentially impacts their ability to secure adequate food, medical care, or housing.  That standard probably generally applies in these situations, but if you happen to be in a state where there is no statute or the county courts ignore it for convenience or financial reasons it may not be available for use.  

Those are the kinds of things I think about when it gets this cold.  I do get the occasional lighthearted thoughts – making sure I recall the thermodynamic equations that show my car battery dependent on temperature and telling myself that I am going to call Columbia and ask them if they make some type of expedition wear that is warmer than my current Titanium coat.  But mostly – I hope the most vulnerable among us get the help they need and nobody gets injured or killed.  Hopefully someday people will think about the fact that some people have a hard time protecting themselves - irrespective of the air temperature.

George Dawson, MD, DFAPA

Andy Rathbun.  Regions Hospital Sees "Record-Breaking" Number of Frostbite Cases.  St. Paul Pioneer Press.  January 6, 2013.

From the article:

"Most of the people that come in with severe frostbite are "in some way compromised," he said. A small number are physically or mentally disabled, but a majority are people who have consumed too much alcohol or were abusing drugs and didn't realize how cold it was outside, Edmonson said."