I agree with offering such a program for free but not making it mandatory. There's far too much possibility of it being abused and used against people, especially with people who have trauma from being mislabeled. Labels could be given and used against people.
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
-42 points (26.7% liked)
Unpopular Opinion
8098 readers
15 users here now
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The irony being that from your post history you're at best a troll at worst insane yourself.
Then again if luna tics run things...
I'm not a "troll" and I'm very sane
I'm sure that's what the insane say too in a lot of cases.
To be clear, this is nazi shit and is in and of itself revelatory of some alarming preconceptions and attitudes you hold towards the mentally unwell. I know others in this thread have said the same, but if I'm gonna reply it'd be remiss of me not to bring it up.
But it's also just a really fucking stupid idea…? Like, on a practical level, where are you finding all these professionals to assess the entire population? How do you ensure their assessments aren't affected by their own personal or institutional biases? How do you intend to partition "most people" (your words) from society without causing said society to collapse due to the sudden removal of a majority of its constituents??? Where are you keeping your undesirables, how are you looking after them, and how are you maintaining the necessary supply chains to sustain not only what's left of broader society but also at the same time the institutionalisation of "most people"??? And c'mon, be real, most people don't want to get locked up, so what's stopping them from just lying to their counsellor during their assessments? I know I would, and I consider myself to be far more mentally healthy than the typical user on here.
Not only are you an evil human with a contempt for the wants and needs of your fellows, you're also a fucking imbecile if you genuinely believe this is in any way workable.
OPs ideas are pretty fucked up, but I do think that there is a small kernel of a good idea hidden in there
People probably should be getting mental health screenings with some regularity. You (hopefully are able to) go to your regular doctor, dentist, etc. for a checkup regularly, even if nothing in particular is bothering you just to make sure you're healthy and catch any issues before they become a problem, I think we should probably be treating mental health similarly.
It would probably also help to dispell some of the stigma around it, it's less weird and embarrassing to go get treatment if everyone else is also going to see a therapist at least once a year or so.
And it is an issue that a lot of people with mental health issues won't seek treatment unless they're forced to. I work in 911 dispatch, I get a lot of calls from and about people with mental health issues. Unless they're presenting an immediate danger to themselves or others, there's not really much that can be done to make them get help.
I feel like there needs to be some kind of a middle ground between a full involuntary commitment and just handing them some pamphlets about what resources are available to them and hope they follow through on it themselves, because that's basically the two options available now.
As for what that middle ground looks like, your guess is as good as mine. If you figure out a workable, humane solution, I'm sure a lot of emergency service agencies would really love to hear about it.
Some examples off the top of my head.
We have one guy we get calls about pretty frequently who just kind of walks around town all day screaming at the top of his lungs. Not a danger, can't get him committed, but also a huge nuisance for people who live and work around there as well.
We had an old lady who called dozens of times a night having delusions that her neighbors were trying to break through the walls into her home. She never really bothered anyone else, but she was tying up our lines, which could mean delays for other people having an emergency. Again, not a danger, not malicious, genuinely believed she was having an emergency, so we couldn't even go after her for misusing 911 (not that locking her in jail over this would have been an acceptable solution either) so we just kind of had to live with her until she either died or her family finally put her in a home or something.
These are people who probably shouldn't just be out on their own living in normal society. Maybe they need an aide to live with them or some kind of a group home situation, maybe they just need someone to check in a couple times a day to make sure they're taking medications, maybe they do need to be taken to some sort of facility where they can just live their lives separate from society and have their needs provided for them.
At the milder end, we have people who just really need to learn some coping mechanisms, they're overall capable of taking care of themselves, holding down a job, etc. but just cannot hold themselves together when anything goes wrong. They become an absolute blubbering mess because they saw a deer that was hit by a car, or the traffic light is stuck on red, or someone was a little mean to them, and they just sort of need to have a sit-down with some elementary school guidance counselors to learn how to take a deep breath, count to 10, and collect themselves when these things happen.
Or all kinds of dysfunctional families and domestic situations where we have police out at the same house every damn day because they just can't coexist without something devolving into a screaming match. They have jobs, a house, food on the table but the people involved really need to get some kind of family counseling. (I sometimes think we need a sort of "death penalty" for relationships, where after a certain point police can decide "no, you two are no longer married/dating. You need to get separate homes and never have any contact with each other again." There's no good way that can ever be done of course, but it's something I kind of fantasize about after I've taken about the hundredth call for a domestic at the same address)
There's no easy solution to all of this, and certainly not OP's. But it is a real issue with no particularly good solution. And of course the logistics of making whatever those solutions actually happen are mind-boggling.
I'm not sure if you are genuinely this trusting of institutions, but weaponized psychology has been a tool of oppression for the field's entire existence; lobotomizing anyone deemed "degenerate". Feminists were deemed insane. Women who reported domestic abuse were deemed insane. Homosexuality was in the DSM-4, and there are STILL gay conversion programs running now in the USA and other countries. "Gender dysphoria" is a condition in the DSM-5.
Also consider: if the government is mandating the evaluation, they can easily weaponize it to stifle dissent. Any "safeguards" against that type of behavior would ultimately collapse the moment the government just decides it doesn't want to follow said restrictions. What would that look like now in the USA? Is opposing the PotUS a symptom of Trump Derangement Syndrome. In the UK, is opposition to the Digital ID system of excessive paranoia? of "histrionic personality disorder"?
Just hear from experiences of people who were exploited by hospitals and other psychological institutions, including in the USA of a few years ago. These peoples lives were destroyed under the guise of acting "for your safety". You're talking about mass-imprisonment and drugging of people who have not even committed a crime.
...And the worst part is, I'm not even sure this is an unpopular opinion. The widespread adoption of "Mental Health Holds" in recent decades is proof that many lawmakers support these policies. I've seen it in the USA, and heard testimonies from the UK and China of the same problem. The President of the United States directly built off this mentality with his executive order Ending Crime And Disorder On America’s Streets. California, which is as far opposite from the current President as you can go, recently created a parallel institution for this purpose with its "CARE Courts".
and we just let them crawl around society.
This is enough to tell that you don't give a shit about the people themselves and understand the authoritarian bent to this proposal.
load more comments
(2 replies)
So partitioned off from society in a concentrated manner, like in a camp?
And do it by force, like a prisoner (The German word for that is Häftling), for their,but also for societies protection(aka "Schutz"), so in German that would have been a Schutzhäftling.
And you want that to make sure these elements are not crawling around society to make society safer and cleaner?
Is that you, Joseph G?
Because congratulations,you literally have the exact same chain of arguments and wording the Nazis had.
Wow. I am speechless. Even if you are just a shitposting troll you are an so far removed from any decency that it's shocking.
A high-stakes "pass or lose freedom" test is the absolute dumbest idea anyone could attempt right now. If you do this in the UK, being trans or anti-israel will fail you. If you do this in the USA, not being "MAGA" will be enough.
Universal health care with some form of applicable sabbatical / vacation / recuperation leave will fix most of the problems you note. A real UBI would fix most of the rest.
load more comments
(3 replies)
What the fuck is wrong with you
Who defines what "mental stability" is, and how is this not just a tool to throw undesirables in camps?
its about mental illness or mental health.
same as physical sickness and health.
Every person should be given a free psychological evaluation once a year
Oh great.
Every person should be given a free mandatory psychological evaluation once a year
Oh no.
That's crazy talk, off to the camps for you.
Surely, that wouldn’t be abused.
Why not just free psychological assistance? I don't think like a forced test is a good way to fix issues. It's not like the psychologist comes, fixes your brain and then you're all good.
People need to want to improve their life, the psychologist assists in that process.
Man I can't even get a psychological evaluation when I ask for one. Where are you going to get an army of psychologists to implement mass judgments that are actually fair and healthy?
Regrettably, stuff like this would be ripe for abuse with the current regime.
Four years ago, I managed to finally find a medical practice in my area that was accepting new patients. Earliest available appointment was 6 weeks away, so I scheduled it and then waited.
A couple nights before my check-up, something came up (maybe dog was sick that night) and I got next to no sleep that night. Still had to work the next day so I didn't get a chance to catch up on sleep, and then the following night something else happened (partner was having night terrors). Then I go in for my check-up the following day with a couple sleepless nights under my belt, which was not typical at all, feeling like complete poop, and they have me fill out a psychological questionnaire.
There were questions like "In the last 5 days, how many nights have you had trouble sleeping?" "Do you currently feel tired or irritable" "In the past 5 days have you had trouble staying awake during your normal daily activities" and many other that don't really take any real history or perfectly reasonable explanations about why the last 5 days were outliers.
Anyway, the outcome is that I was immediately labeled as high anxiety and depression risk based on that one assessment. And now four years later, every time I go to the primary care place, they push me to go get psychiatric testing and ask about my anxiety and depression.
Honestly it really felt like a real-life equivalent of the "Not-sure" scene from Idiocracy and I definitely don't want that having actual real world consequences on me.
On the other hand, I've seen numerous people even just here on Lemmy over the past few years who seem very likely to be mentally unwell and there's a part of me that thinks it would be nice if there was a way I could help them.
People would lie and conceal anything abnormal. Its not magic and takes a lot of effort to actually evaluate them.
If I'm going to a psyc yearly I'm coming off as the most boring average person in the world. I'm not gonna sit down and lay out all my unhinged views (of which I have none because my views are all correct and hinged. Its others that are unhinged :p )
"Hide that problem I don't want to see!"
yeah totally like John Nash, James Taylor, Frances Farme, Vincent Van Gogh, Ernest Hemingway, Sylvia Plath, Robert Lowel, ........
Keep in mind that social media companies profit by enticing users to engage in their platform. They keep a nice steady flow of extremism to keep their users coming back.
load more comments
(2 replies)
this is a good conversation topic
I really want every one in the world to be tested for nuerodivergence because it would be fucking funny as hell if we found out shit's actually reversed and nuerotypical people are the minority, and thus the ones who are actually divergent. Like how in Xmen the mutants out number the normies.
Would this end the incarceration crisis?
No that's not the purpose of this.
Once it gets signed into law it won't matter what your intention was.
I used to be a Libertarian. But yet, here I am:
If we had a technocratic, non-partisan system that maximally respected individual variances while trying to focus on finding the people who most need emotional support, THEN
... I would totally be in favor of widespread periodic psychological profiling of schoolchildren , using the same sort of process that we do now for standardized academic testing.
No system is perfect and all systems will be abused. But with eg some local-level oversight boards I think it would be a huge net positive.
view more: next ›