I lied to the police, had my wife arrested, saved my family. *Was I morally correct? *You judge

[Harry Bosch]

What you did was absolutely in the best interests and intentions of all parties involved. Fuck the moral umpires who have not lived what you are have lived through and will never be able to comprehend or appreciate one second of your experience.

Thanks for that. But I understand people being skeptical. It's such a wild out of the ordinary story, that I don't know if I'd understand myself if it hadn't happened to me. I think that people can only understand mental illness when they are directly affected by it.

 

[abaddon]

If a lie serves a good cause and there’s no other choice, the lie is morally correct. We think of lies as immoral, but they’re not inherently immoral. It’s all context-dependent.

If there’s now possibly a trust issue, it might be a good idea to discuss it and let the person express. Keep it at the level of feelings, not “I did what I had to” announcements, just acknowledgment you understand how the other feels and then express how you feel too. There are no inappropriate feelings, there are just feelings. They need to be accepted without judgment and allowed to work themselves out, in whatever way is the person’s “process” to work through them. Out in the open is better than leaving them in the dark. That’s what I’d advise irt the wife’s possible fear of her husband.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

1st and foremost I will most certainly not be the judge of you or your actions. I'm far too narcississtic to go through what you had to endure and applaud your ability and werewithal to see it through - and am happy to know that this course of action was successful. I also want to preface what I'm about to type with 'it's my opinion'. I'm not judging or even saying that I would have the strength of character to act any differently than you did when facing the same circumstances. But getting alternative opinions is kind of the point, right?

You mentioned that you lied because of the condition of the law in Washington (and most states). At the end of the day, that makes the lie one of convenience only. Lying was more convenient than getting a divorce or a restraining order or moving or having custody lawsuits work their way through court. Some questions to consider:

Was it more convenient than delivering an ultimatum of having her commit herself or do one or all of the above?
Why do you suppose the law is crafted that way in the first place?
Her choices and decision making power were removed because you lied. While the outcome this time was justified, would you generally condone this type of behavior in others - in other situations?

Again, I'm not judging you. You could have perfectly decent answers to all of these and I seriously doubt I would have (could have) done anything differently than you in this situation. I would say that I am expertly aware of the fact that most of my actions and intentions are morally suspect. (like any good character trait, it's the ones you work on that you improve). I think we enter murky waters when we lie primarily because it's most convenient and then - because it worked out - invoke the 'ends justify the means.'

Again, and finally, for consideration only. Sincerest congratulations on getting your family back together.

aa

 

[Harry Bosch]

1st and foremost I will most certainly not be the judge of you or your actions. I'm far too narcississtic to go through what you had to endure and applaud your ability and werewithal to see it through - and am happy to know that this course of action was successful. I also want to preface what I'm about to type with 'it's my opinion'. I'm not judging or even saying that I would have the strength of character to act any differently than you did when facing the same circumstances. But getting alternative opinions is kind of the point, right?

You mentioned that you lied because of the condition of the law in Washington (and most states). At the end of the day, that makes the lie one of convenience only. Lying was more convenient than getting a divorce or a restraining order or moving or having custody lawsuits work their way through court. Some questions to consider:

Was it more convenient than delivering an ultimatum of having her commit herself or do one or all of the above?
Why do you suppose the law is crafted that way in the first place?
Her choices and decision making power were removed because you lied. While the outcome this time was justified, would you generally condone this type of behavior in others - in other situations?

Again, I'm not judging you. You could have perfectly decent answers to all of these and I seriously doubt I would have (could have) done anything differently than you in this situation. I would say that I am expertly aware of the fact that most of my actions and intentions are morally suspect. (like any good character trait, it's the ones you work on that you improve). I think we enter murky waters when we lie primarily because it's most convenient and then - because it worked out - invoke the 'ends justify the means.'

Again, and finally, for consideration only. Sincerest congratulations on getting your family back together.

aa

AA: I appreciate your POV! Again, it's difficult to explain to someone how a crazy person thinks, unless they have been through it! I was fully prepared for a divorce and restraining order. I had them legally ready to go. In her crazy state (I apologize if this word offends anyone, not sure of how to explain her state, manic does do it justice) she would not have cared about a divorce. She was completely lost in her crazy paranoia. Her mother, daughters, and sisters tried to talk sense to her. It did no good. No amount of reasoning would have done any good. Believe me, we tried.

AA question #1: "Why do you suppose the law is crafted that way in the first place" To answer your question, I agree with Keith in post #4 of this thread that the law was probably tightened to prevent people from forcibly committing someone simply to gain an advantage over them.

AA question #2: "would you generally condone this type of behavior in others - in other situations?" I don't know how to answer this! Again, I think that my wife would be homeless if I had left her and taken our family away.



than getting a divorce or a restraining order or moving or having custody lawsuits work their way through court. Some questions to consider:

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

1st and foremost I will most certainly not be the judge of you or your actions. I'm far too narcississtic to go through what you had to endure and applaud your ability and werewithal to see it through - and am happy to know that this course of action was successful. I also want to preface what I'm about to type with 'it's my opinion'. I'm not judging or even saying that I would have the strength of character to act any differently than you did when facing the same circumstances. But getting alternative opinions is kind of the point, right?

You mentioned that you lied because of the condition of the law in Washington (and most states). At the end of the day, that makes the lie one of convenience only. Lying was more convenient than getting a divorce or a restraining order or moving or having custody lawsuits work their way through court. Some questions to consider:

Was it more convenient than delivering an ultimatum of having her commit herself or do one or all of the above?
Why do you suppose the law is crafted that way in the first place?
Her choices and decision making power were removed because you lied. While the outcome this time was justified, would you generally condone this type of behavior in others - in other situations?

Again, I'm not judging you. You could have perfectly decent answers to all of these and I seriously doubt I would have (could have) done anything differently than you in this situation. I would say that I am expertly aware of the fact that most of my actions and intentions are morally suspect. (like any good character trait, it's the ones you work on that you improve). I think we enter murky waters when we lie primarily because it's most convenient and then - because it worked out - invoke the 'ends justify the means.'

Again, and finally, for consideration only. Sincerest congratulations on getting your family back together.

aa

AA: I appreciate your POV!

I appreciate you keeping an open mind about it. And the responses. Thank you. Again, consider the below 'devil's advocate' questions:

Again, it's difficult to explain to someone how a crazy person thinks, unless they have been through it! I was fully prepared for a divorce and restraining order. I had them legally ready to go. In her crazy state (I apologize if this word offends anyone, not sure of how to explain her state, manic does do it justice) she would not have cared about a divorce. She was completely lost in her crazy paranoia. Her mother, daughters, and sisters tried to talk sense to her. It did no good. No amount of reasoning would have done any good. Believe me, we tried.

I don't doubt the veracity of your reasoning, but was this a real 'ultimatum' or a bluff that she called? It sounds a bit like she got to exercise her free will, but you and your (and her) family got backed into a corner where your choices were limited. That situation sounds horrendous, btw, but if it was a bluff she still never had to make a choice. [/observation]

AA question #1: "Why do you suppose the law is crafted that way in the first place" To answer your question, I agree with Keith in post #4 of this thread that the law was probably tightened to prevent people from forcibly committing someone simply to gain an advantage over them.

Fair. Do you think the intent behind the law is morally justified? Given that some exceptions are warranted - probably yours - could it be better designed? If so - How? If not, how do you justify lying to circumvent a morally justified law, vs challenging it directly?

AA question #2: "would you generally condone this type of behavior in others - in other situations?" I don't know how to answer this! Again, I think that my wife would be homeless if I had left her and taken our family away.

And thankfully your decisions worked out. But the 'ends justify the means' isn't a true "moral" argument. Had she ended up homeless it would have been her choice to do so. You saved her by taking that choice away. Which is more important - having choice or salvation? (have no idea what the answer is, just positing it for consideration).

Furthermore,

What if this didn't work out at all?
What if she hated you and her family and remained comitted to an institution for the rest of her life?
What if the results were even more dire, fatally even?

I don't question that you had the best of motives in your heart, and again I cannot express my awe and inspiration for how successfully your decisions worked out, but had they a completely different outcome would you still be here seeking judgement? Should we rest our laurels on the results? If so, do we trod down a dangerous path of circumventing laws and/or inconvenience to achieve ends morally victorious to us?

Sorry to be so intrusive with my questioning, and I intuit that you've answered them already for yourself several times over before proceeding down the path you've chosen.

aa

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Again, if I hadn't done the above, she would be homeless today. She might not have been directly violent. But in her crazy state, she was totally destroying herself and our family.

Which in effect means she was a substantial danger to herself. Why isn't that enough to get committed?

 

[Toni]

Oh, Harry! What a terrible situation.

Sometimes a lie is the moral thing to do. Thank god for the poke that required stitches!

The choices you face are bleak: let your wife remain untreated and know that periodically, she loses touch with reality and while she hasn't actually physically harmed anyone, I don't think you can discount that possibility. I'm sure you have not. Unfortunately, recently there was a tragic situation in the family of one of my friends and it involved the loss of 3 lives.

Someone upthread (and I apologize for being too tired to go through and find it now) correctly pointed out that the stringent laws about involuntary commitment are in reaction to people having 'inconvenient' relatives committed indefinitely or as long as convenient.

At the same time, the safeguards against abuses of involuntary commitment create a pretty terrible burden on the friends and families of people with serious mental illness. And the patient!

You did what you needed to do in order to protect your wife and your family. The laws make it nearly impossible for you to do the right thing and also comply with the letter of the law. It is cruel and wrong and not only morally wrong but also inefficient and often ineffective to treat serious mental illnesses in such a sporadic way. Meds until stable, patient decides to stop meds, instabilty ensures, hospitalization is required. This is not an uncommon situation and it is not new. 30 years ago, someone I knew described a similar situation with his cousin who had schizophrenia. The drugs would make her stable and then she'd begin to feel that maybe she didn't need the drugs. Fortunately, she talked about it rather than just going off the drugs. But the drugs made her feel not like herself. The side effects are not necessarily pleasant or easy to live with and it's hard to keep taking a drug that makes you feel not so great when the disease you are trying to control is not causing you problems. At that moment.

Many/most/possibly all psychotropic drugs have unpleasant side effects, including making the patient feel like not themselves. Often they don't simply alleviate symptoms but also mask so much personality, so much self. It's cruel that we do not have better, more effective treatment for mental illnesses.


It is obvious that your wife requires the medication in order to keep her stable. At the same time, it seems obvious to this outside (not trained or licensed in any way) person that your wife requires more than just meds and monitoring to keep her from going off meds/going off the deep end. She needs to be seen by someone very skilled and compassionate, who can help her gain the insight necessary to realize that meds are not optional but for her, are likely lifesaving. And possibly not only her own life.

Is it possible for you to find such a professional and to convince her current doctors at the hospital to make her continued participation in ongoing therapy --not just counseling--therapy, with a trained psychiatrist who can monitor her meds, and her symptoms--a condition of release? I know it seems drastic as well as horrendously expensive. But the current pattern must also also be horrendously expensive in dollars but also in the toll it takes on you, as a person, as a husband, as a father, which pales in comparison with the cost to your children. And your wife.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

What you did was absolutely in the best interests and intentions of all parties involved. Fuck the moral umpires who have not lived what you are have lived through and will never be able to comprehend or appreciate one second of your experience.

Thanks for that. But I understand people being skeptical. It's such a wild out of the ordinary story, that I don't know if I'd understand myself if it hadn't happened to me. I think that people can only understand mental illness when they are directly affected by it.

I 100% understand everything you went through and are going through. We here are discussing things rationally, but there is no rational discussion with a person in the state you described. I learned that intellect and reasoning and being rational don't work. What works is cleverness, not ideology. I learned not to blame people or become upset when people offered reasonable and rational advice. When everyone who has contact with the person says they will sign a statement that this person needs medical help then at least you have something to use. People don't understand the experience until they are with the person for a while and see what you were talking about.

It's a living nightmare to see a formerly normal member of your family become this way. It may take a while to fully appreciate the situation, to educate yourself as to what is happening and to get other members of the family to stop living in denial. But that is what must happen if you are going to help this person. It is sad and unfortunate that we can do nothing more, that our options are so limited.

 

[another1]

If there were no kids involved I would say you did the wrong thing.

She was never violent towards herself or others you said. What was it, crying a lot and refusing to clean? You never described what she was doing so crazy. Sorry for asking, I know it is personal. It is a thread you made so I'll take the chance.

"She falsely accused me of terrible crimes and pent thousands and thousands of dollars". Did she accuse you of cheating or something? And what was up with spending thousands of dollars? Was she allowed to spend that much? Just wondering if you could be more detailed in that department.

But yeah... lie, even kill to keep your kids safe. I'd be all over you if it not for the kids part. Violently mentally ill people are usually medicated differently than the morbidly depressed. May want to tell them it was more of a poke than a stab, just to save her a few pokes. She'll probably get a total brainscan and everything on menu, now that they think she is stabbshly psychotic. $$$$$ down the drain man. A simple tweak in her medication could have worked but I wasn't there and I don't know so good luck bud.

In the beginning, she believed that I was trying to murder her and our kids. She initially thought I was trying to poison them. The conspiracy grew and grew from there in her mind. It got to the point that she'd pull our kids out of school every day and go to the emergency room and have them all tested. There's far more. She also started thinking that the kids were in grave danger if they were in our house. So she'd arrange to have them staying at friends house, grandma's house, and etc. It was scary for my younger kids. It got to the point where her family and the authorities (police and hospital staff) believed that she shouldn't be alone with the kids. Well, that put me in a bad spot. I was the only one who could put up with her. And I wanted my kids back. And I was tired of living with a crazy person. I was prepared to leave her with our kids. I was going to let her stay in our house. But there's no way that she could take care of herself. I had my attorney draft up the docs (her own sister!). We were moving out when she finally completely broke down and agreed to self commit to the hospital. Drove her to the hospital. Things were going great. She was finally going to get some help. But it takes time to find a spot in the psyche ward. Her mom came down and was encouraging her to commit. We all were. The doctors and nurses were gently encouraging her to keep it up. Then all of a sudden, at the six hour mark, she changed her mind again. Wanted to go home. Everyone tried to get her to change her mind again for several hours. Finally, I told the doctor what he needed to hear to commit her, then I filled out the paper work for the police.

Again, if I hadn't done the above, she would be homeless today. She might not have been directly violent. But in her crazy state, she was totally destroying herself and our family.

Maybe what she needs to be is homeless. Did she threaten suicide when you and the kids were finally picking up and leaving? Was that what you were saying? What do you mean by "I wanted my kids back". Sounds messy. Good luck.

 

[LordKiran]

I married my childhood sweetheart 23 years ago. Close to being my perfect match: she's beautiful, driven, hardworking, easy going, funny, and loves our children. We literally never had a single fight until about 10 years ago.

It started small. She would get stressed easily and worry. I tried to lesson her stress by hiring a housekeeping service and an infrequent nanny. To make a long story short, she had a first mental break down roughly 6 years ago. She self-committed herself to a hospital. She got better, and then returned. Then a pattern would emerge. She'd take her pills, get better, get off the pills, then a year later, and relapse. But she steadfastly refused to ever return to the hospital because she hated it. This made her recovery each year longer and more difficult for the family. Each breakdown was worse the previous. She gradually started losing friends, losing family members, and etc. But she was never violent towards herself or others. Finally, earlier this year, she really went off the deep end. She started to become dangerous with herself. I started to not trust her with the kids (especially our youngest). She falsely accused me of terrible crimes. Spent thousands and thousands of dollars. She moved in with one friend for a few days, until she drove them crazy. Moved in with another, drove them crazy. Moved in with her family for a while, drove them crazy.

She needed help. And I couldn't get it for her. Four times I went with her to get her committed. The doctor, nurses, her mom and dad and I all tried to get her to self-commit, she just refused. I kept trying to have her involuntarily committed, and it kept coming to this: in Washington and most states, you can't a person against their will unless they are a direct threat to themselves or a relative.

Finally, after 15 straight hours at the hospital, in a fit of exhaustion and desperation, I told the doctor that she had stabbed me last week. I had in fact fallen the week before and fell on a nail. It pierced my side requiring three stiches. I lied to the doctor. Filled out the police report. Then they took her away. The doctor, nurses, our daughters, my wife's family, and even the police knew that I was lying. They all accepted that this was the only way that our family could get help.

My wife spent 87 days in the hospital psyche ward. For the first 30 days, she hated me. She filed lawsuits. Wrote letters. Told me and her family that she'd never talk to us. But gradually she started to get better. She was ready to leave by day 66, but decided to stay in to continue to work on her health. By that time our relationship was healed. 6 months later, and everything is well. She's mostly repaired her relationship with her family, her friends, and our daughters. She sees a psychiatrist monthly. She's agreed to monthly blood tests. She takes her pills. But it's an unspoken truth between us that if she ever goes crazy again, that I could easily have her committed.

Was I morally right?
Should it be legal to commit an adult against their will if it is needed to prevent them from becoming homeless?

"Morally just" would have been to leave the home, take the kids and undergo whatever legal battle you had to to make sure she could no longer see them until she got the help she needed. You could argue that ends justify means or that all's well that ends well. But this outlook is untenable if you try to live your life by principles and virtues. When you break it down to brass tax, your wife is her own person and you had no 'right' to have her forcibly confined through falsifying a police report anymore than she would have had a right to ACTUALLY stab you. What if your wife had hurt someone while being detained? Could you have lived with yourself had she stabbed and killed one of her captors? Funnily enough, had this happened, you yourself would likely be in prison right now, and your children suddenly without parents.

When you actually stop and think about it, there are so many ways this could have ended tragically that it's nothing short of a small miracle that this ended well.

What you did was pragmatic and I wouldn't ever judge you for your decision, but I certainly wouldn't call it 'morally correct.' Especially if your personal morals include not lying/bearing false witness.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Again, if I hadn't done the above, she would be homeless today. She might not have been directly violent. But in her crazy state, she was totally destroying herself and our family.

Which in effect means she was a substantial danger to herself. Why isn't that enough to get committed?

I can't answer that. I know that the laws are different in each state.

 

[Harry Bosch]

AA: I appreciate your POV!

I appreciate you keeping an open mind about it. And the responses. Thank you. Again, consider the below 'devil's advocate' questions:

Again, it's difficult to explain to someone how a crazy person thinks, unless they have been through it! I was fully prepared for a divorce and restraining order. I had them legally ready to go. In her crazy state (I apologize if this word offends anyone, not sure of how to explain her state, manic does do it justice) she would not have cared about a divorce. She was completely lost in her crazy paranoia. Her mother, daughters, and sisters tried to talk sense to her. It did no good. No amount of reasoning would have done any good. Believe me, we tried.

I don't doubt the veracity of your reasoning, but was this a real 'ultimatum' or a bluff that she called? It sounds a bit like she got to exercise her free will, but you and your (and her) family got backed into a corner where your choices were limited. That situation sounds horrendous, btw, but if it was a bluff she still never had to make a choice. [/observation]

AA question #1: "Why do you suppose the law is crafted that way in the first place" To answer your question, I agree with Keith in post #4 of this thread that the law was probably tightened to prevent people from forcibly committing someone simply to gain an advantage over them.

Fair. Do you think the intent behind the law is morally justified? Given that some exceptions are warranted - probably yours - could it be better designed? If so - How? If not, how do you justify lying to circumvent a morally justified law, vs challenging it directly?

AA question #2: "would you generally condone this type of behavior in others - in other situations?" I don't know how to answer this! Again, I think that my wife would be homeless if I had left her and taken our family away.

And thankfully your decisions worked out. But the 'ends justify the means' isn't a true "moral" argument. Had she ended up homeless it would have been her choice to do so. You saved her by taking that choice away. Which is more important - having choice or salvation? (have no idea what the answer is, just positing it for consideration).

Furthermore,

What if this didn't work out at all?
What if she hated you and her family and remained comitted to an institution for the rest of her life?
What if the results were even more dire, fatally even?

I don't question that you had the best of motives in your heart, and again I cannot express my awe and inspiration for how successfully your decisions worked out, but had they a completely different outcome would you still be here seeking judgement? Should we rest our laurels on the results? If so, do we trod down a dangerous path of circumventing laws and/or inconvenience to achieve ends morally victorious to us?

Sorry to be so intrusive with my questioning, and I intuit that you've answered them already for yourself several times over before proceeding down the path you've chosen.

aa

Yes, this is the simple issue: If I don't lie -she ends up homeless. Another crazy person on the streets. If I lie, she gets forcibly committed against her will. She loses her rights. But she gets treatment. The doctors restore her to her natural state. In her natural state, she wants to be a wife, mother, and live in a house. I can also tell you that her mom and her sisters agree with what I did.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Oh, Harry! What a terrible situation.

Sometimes a lie is the moral thing to do. Thank god for the poke that required stitches!

The choices you face are bleak: let your wife remain untreated and know that periodically, she loses touch with reality and while she hasn't actually physically harmed anyone, I don't think you can discount that possibility. I'm sure you have not. Unfortunately, recently there was a tragic situation in the family of one of my friends and it involved the loss of 3 lives.

Someone upthread (and I apologize for being too tired to go through and find it now) correctly pointed out that the stringent laws about involuntary commitment are in reaction to people having 'inconvenient' relatives committed indefinitely or as long as convenient.

At the same time, the safeguards against abuses of involuntary commitment create a pretty terrible burden on the friends and families of people with serious mental illness. And the patient!

You did what you needed to do in order to protect your wife and your family. The laws make it nearly impossible for you to do the right thing and also comply with the letter of the law. It is cruel and wrong and not only morally wrong but also inefficient and often ineffective to treat serious mental illnesses in such a sporadic way. Meds until stable, patient decides to stop meds, instabilty ensures, hospitalization is required. This is not an uncommon situation and it is not new. 30 years ago, someone I knew described a similar situation with his cousin who had schizophrenia. The drugs would make her stable and then she'd begin to feel that maybe she didn't need the drugs. Fortunately, she talked about it rather than just going off the drugs. But the drugs made her feel not like herself. The side effects are not necessarily pleasant or easy to live with and it's hard to keep taking a drug that makes you feel not so great when the disease you are trying to control is not causing you problems. At that moment.

Many/most/possibly all psychotropic drugs have unpleasant side effects, including making the patient feel like not themselves. Often they don't simply alleviate symptoms but also mask so much personality, so much self. It's cruel that we do not have better, more effective treatment for mental illnesses.


It is obvious that your wife requires the medication in order to keep her stable. At the same time, it seems obvious to this outside (not trained or licensed in any way) person that your wife requires more than just meds and monitoring to keep her from going off meds/going off the deep end. She needs to be seen by someone very skilled and compassionate, who can help her gain the insight necessary to realize that meds are not optional but for her, are likely lifesaving. And possibly not only her own life.

Is it possible for you to find such a professional and to convince her current doctors at the hospital to make her continued participation in ongoing therapy --not just counseling--therapy, with a trained psychiatrist who can monitor her meds, and her symptoms--a condition of release? I know it seems drastic as well as horrendously expensive. But the current pattern must also also be horrendously expensive in dollars but also in the toll it takes on you, as a person, as a husband, as a father, which pales in comparison with the cost to your children. And your wife.

Thank you for your kind words! Yes, I can't allow this to happen again. The problem is that sometimes people in my wife's condition will lapse on their pills for a day or two. Maybe they forget, get tired and just decide to skip a day. The way that it's been described to me is that a person gets a natural high when they are off their meds. They get back on the meds, and it brings them down. Makes them sleep 20 hours a day until they get regulated again. It's no fun. Hence the challenge of keeping them on their meds. So, I've had to take a harder line. I require monthly psychiatric trips. Quarterly blood testing. If she starts going down the bad road again, we're going to separate. I've already worked it out. And she knows and agrees with this. I'm not going to put my kids through it again.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Thanks for that. But I understand people being skeptical. It's such a wild out of the ordinary story, that I don't know if I'd understand myself if it hadn't happened to me. I think that people can only understand mental illness when they are directly affected by it.

I 100% understand everything you went through and are going through. We here are discussing things rationally, but there is no rational discussion with a person in the state you described. I learned that intellect and reasoning and being rational don't work. What works is cleverness, not ideology. I learned not to blame people or become upset when people offered reasonable and rational advice. When everyone who has contact with the person says they will sign a statement that this person needs medical help then at least you have something to use. People don't understand the experience until they are with the person for a while and see what you were talking about.

It's a living nightmare to see a formerly normal member of your family become this way. It may take a while to fully appreciate the situation, to educate yourself as to what is happening and to get other members of the family to stop living in denial. But that is what must happen if you are going to help this person. It is sad and unfortunate that we can do nothing more, that our options are so limited.

Totally agree with you. I would say that one of my biggest pieces of advice is this: there is no reasoning with someone who is deeply mentally ill. Zero.

 

[Harry Bosch]

In the beginning, she believed that I was trying to murder her and our kids. She initially thought I was trying to poison them. The conspiracy grew and grew from there in her mind. It got to the point that she'd pull our kids out of school every day and go to the emergency room and have them all tested. There's far more. She also started thinking that the kids were in grave danger if they were in our house. So she'd arrange to have them staying at friends house, grandma's house, and etc. It was scary for my younger kids. It got to the point where her family and the authorities (police and hospital staff) believed that she shouldn't be alone with the kids. Well, that put me in a bad spot. I was the only one who could put up with her. And I wanted my kids back. And I was tired of living with a crazy person. I was prepared to leave her with our kids. I was going to let her stay in our house. But there's no way that she could take care of herself. I had my attorney draft up the docs (her own sister!). We were moving out when she finally completely broke down and agreed to self commit to the hospital. Drove her to the hospital. Things were going great. She was finally going to get some help. But it takes time to find a spot in the psyche ward. Her mom came down and was encouraging her to commit. We all were. The doctors and nurses were gently encouraging her to keep it up. Then all of a sudden, at the six hour mark, she changed her mind again. Wanted to go home. Everyone tried to get her to change her mind again for several hours. Finally, I told the doctor what he needed to hear to commit her, then I filled out the paper work for the police.

Again, if I hadn't done the above, she would be homeless today. She might not have been directly violent. But in her crazy state, she was totally destroying herself and our family.

Maybe what she needs to be is homeless. Did she threaten suicide when you and the kids were finally picking up and leaving? Was that what you were saying? What do you mean by "I wanted my kids back". Sounds messy. Good luck.

Well, living with a crazy person with kids in a house put me in a legally tough spot. I wanted to leave the house, she wanted me to leave. She mostly wanted me to take the kids with me (which is sad and not her normal state). But I was trying to do it legally correct. Secondly, it's not as easy to as you'd think to just set up in a new house. Our kids go to three different schools (big mistake in hindsight!).

 

[Harry Bosch]

I married my childhood sweetheart 23 years ago. Close to being my perfect match: she's beautiful, driven, hardworking, easy going, funny, and loves our children. We literally never had a single fight until about 10 years ago.

It started small. She would get stressed easily and worry. I tried to lesson her stress by hiring a housekeeping service and an infrequent nanny. To make a long story short, she had a first mental break down roughly 6 years ago. She self-committed herself to a hospital. She got better, and then returned. Then a pattern would emerge. She'd take her pills, get better, get off the pills, then a year later, and relapse. But she steadfastly refused to ever return to the hospital because she hated it. This made her recovery each year longer and more difficult for the family. Each breakdown was worse the previous. She gradually started losing friends, losing family members, and etc. But she was never violent towards herself or others. Finally, earlier this year, she really went off the deep end. She started to become dangerous with herself. I started to not trust her with the kids (especially our youngest). She falsely accused me of terrible crimes. Spent thousands and thousands of dollars. She moved in with one friend for a few days, until she drove them crazy. Moved in with another, drove them crazy. Moved in with her family for a while, drove them crazy.

She needed help. And I couldn't get it for her. Four times I went with her to get her committed. The doctor, nurses, her mom and dad and I all tried to get her to self-commit, she just refused. I kept trying to have her involuntarily committed, and it kept coming to this: in Washington and most states, you can't a person against their will unless they are a direct threat to themselves or a relative.

Finally, after 15 straight hours at the hospital, in a fit of exhaustion and desperation, I told the doctor that she had stabbed me last week. I had in fact fallen the week before and fell on a nail. It pierced my side requiring three stiches. I lied to the doctor. Filled out the police report. Then they took her away. The doctor, nurses, our daughters, my wife's family, and even the police knew that I was lying. They all accepted that this was the only way that our family could get help.

My wife spent 87 days in the hospital psyche ward. For the first 30 days, she hated me. She filed lawsuits. Wrote letters. Told me and her family that she'd never talk to us. But gradually she started to get better. She was ready to leave by day 66, but decided to stay in to continue to work on her health. By that time our relationship was healed. 6 months later, and everything is well. She's mostly repaired her relationship with her family, her friends, and our daughters. She sees a psychiatrist monthly. She's agreed to monthly blood tests. She takes her pills. But it's an unspoken truth between us that if she ever goes crazy again, that I could easily have her committed.

Was I morally right?
Should it be legal to commit an adult against their will if it is needed to prevent them from becoming homeless?

"Morally just" would have been to leave the home, take the kids and undergo whatever legal battle you had to to make sure she could no longer see them until she got the help she needed. You could argue that ends justify means or that all's well that ends well. But this outlook is untenable if you try to live your life by principles and virtues. When you break it down to brass tax, your wife is her own person and you had no 'right' to have her forcibly confined through falsifying a police report anymore than she would have had a right to ACTUALLY stab you. What if your wife had hurt someone while being detained? Could you have lived with yourself had she stabbed and killed one of her captors? Funnily enough, had this happened, you yourself would likely be in prison right now, and your children suddenly without parents.

When you actually stop and think about it, there are so many ways this could have ended tragically that it's nothing short of a small miracle that this ended well.

What you did was pragmatic and I wouldn't ever judge you for your decision, but I certainly wouldn't call it 'morally correct.' Especially if your personal morals include not lying/bearing false witness.

Well, I don't know if I agree that it would have been morally just for me to not lie, and then allow her to be homeless. The way that I look at it, I put myself in legally jeopardy, in order to save her. I think that its moral to sacrifice myself in order to save another person. I can tell you that my wife in her normal state agrees with me. Her family does. Her doctors and nurses do. Even the police officer totally understood.

 

[another1]

Yo Harry... I've worked in those places. Easiest job in town to get. I know they record patient calls to monitor progress. Something to keep in mind if you talk to her about the incident on the phone. Half of the hot girls in there are complaining that someone lied to get them there, and they would do anything to prove it. Know what I'm saying, Harry? Also be weary of men who go to those facilities as patients, just to exploit the vulnerable hot girls. She may need a shoulder to lean on, and believe me - there are plenty. So many things you should worry about, but not incriminating yourself on the phone should be your top concern.

This is a chance you take when you get with an abnormally hot chick. Add high intelligence to her features and you can almost guarantee that there will be mental drama. In every dream home a heartache. Same rule applies to men, so we're not being discriminative.

I think that its moral to sacrifice myself in order to save another person

I think you sacrificed her to save the kids. Still moral. I have thrown a hot chick or two under the bus. They whine suicide because I'm finally leaving. Such a stupid tactic, but it totally works the first few times. Actually, I raised this chick's kid for six years and felt like an ad litem them entire time. What a hell.

Anyways... you're not as defensive as you'd be, if you felt really, really guilty about this. Your mind is already made up. And what else could you have done, huh. Next time just let her be homeless. The Holidays fill the asylums to the ceiling, and every extra bed helps. An actualpsychopath may be pacing with a knife, trying to get into the behavioral health ward.. but she can't because someone lied. So not only is someone "wrongfully" incarcerated - someone else is wrongfully turned away. You said the authorities all agreed, but no mental hygiene judge would agree. Didn't you have to talk to a judge yourself? I don't know. They do things differently everywhere.

You still haven't explained her behavior in detail, but this must get painful sometimes. I'll not press on. Talking about it so much must be hard. I'd still like to know, but not knowing isn't going to kill me.

 

[LordKiran]

"Morally just" would have been to leave the home, take the kids and undergo whatever legal battle you had to to make sure she could no longer see them until she got the help she needed. You could argue that ends justify means or that all's well that ends well. But this outlook is untenable if you try to live your life by principles and virtues. When you break it down to brass tax, your wife is her own person and you had no 'right' to have her forcibly confined through falsifying a police report anymore than she would have had a right to ACTUALLY stab you. What if your wife had hurt someone while being detained? Could you have lived with yourself had she stabbed and killed one of her captors? Funnily enough, had this happened, you yourself would likely be in prison right now, and your children suddenly without parents.

When you actually stop and think about it, there are so many ways this could have ended tragically that it's nothing short of a small miracle that this ended well.

What you did was pragmatic and I wouldn't ever judge you for your decision, but I certainly wouldn't call it 'morally correct.' Especially if your personal morals include not lying/bearing false witness.

Well, I don't know if I agree that it would have been morally just for me to not lie, and then allow her to be homeless. The way that I look at it, I put myself in legally jeopardy, in order to save her. I think that its moral to sacrifice myself in order to save another person. I can tell you that my wife in her normal state agrees with me. Her family does. Her doctors and nurses do. Even the police officer totally understood.

You didn't really answer the heart of what my post says.

You robbed someone of their free will and right to self determine on the grounds that you know what's best. How would you have felt had she or really ANYONE done that to you?

If she had hurt someone, or herself when being detained, could you have lived with that? Any spilled blood would have been on your hands, Harry.

Is a police officer going along with what you did REALLLLLLY a proper metric to judge the moral integrity of your decision?

Again I don't judge you for your decision and have more empathy for your situation than this post might imply to you, but nor will I make excuses for your decision. The 'right' thing would have been to respect your wife as her own person, a grown woman who can make her own decisions and and has her own free will. To have taken the kids and fought her for custody and then if you wanted, to then help her from afar.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It's important that when you get a person back from this state that you don't use what happened against them. They will feel guilty and resentful, possibly become depressed or change their behavior. Just forget everything and stay with what is working is what I learned.

If the person lapses back to this behavior just get them back however you can. When they're crazy, they don't think they're crazy but that everyone else is crazy, the people trying to help them. You're literally saving their lives so if they are screaming at you to let go of the rope just grab it tighter.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Well, I don't know if I agree that it would have been morally just for me to not lie, and then allow her to be homeless. The way that I look at it, I put myself in legally jeopardy, in order to save her. I think that its moral to sacrifice myself in order to save another person. I can tell you that my wife in her normal state agrees with me. Her family does. Her doctors and nurses do. Even the police officer totally understood.

You didn't really answer the heart of what my post says.

You robbed someone of their free will and right to self determine on the grounds that you know what's best. How would you have felt had she or really ANYONE done that to you?

If she had hurt someone, or herself when being detained, could you have lived with that? Any spilled blood would have been on your hands, Harry.

Is a police officer going along with what you did REALLLLLLY a proper metric to judge the moral integrity of your decision?

Again I don't judge you for your decision and have more empathy for your situation than this post might imply to you, but nor will I make excuses for your decision. The 'right' thing would have been to respect your wife as her own person, a grown woman who can make her own decisions and and has her own free will. To have taken the kids and fought her for custody and then if you wanted, to then help her from afar.

Well, I think that the heart of the matter who do we allow to have free will? I took away the free will from an adult who was psychotic and off her meds. It sounds like you disagree with my decision. Fair enough. But what would you give free will to decide to a 6-year old who wants to sleep outside in the snow to wait for Santa? Would you give free will to an Alzheimer's patient who wishes to contribute his life savings to the Benny Himm fund to buy a new jet? Would you give free will to an intoxicated young woman to decide to have sex with 10 football players? These are not easy questions.