OR - Emilio Hoffman, 14, killed in Troutdale high school shooting, 10 June 2014

[Isabelle]

KOIN News ‏@KOINNews 4m Student witness: 2nd gunman arrested after students were searched: 'he was sitting there like a normal kid' #RHShooting

Wonder if second gunman was in on this incident or just happened to have a gun.

 

[time]

Wonder if second gunman was in on this incident or just happened to have a gun.

Sounds likes/he just happened to have a gun?

 

[human]

We don't have to live like this.

I look to the example of Australia, a country enough similar to our own, who decided back in the 90s they wouldn't live like this anymore.

And now they don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes!!!!!!

 

[human]

A teacher was grazed while he was running away from the shooter

they were in a weight room for 45 minutes before class


reporter just told two kids someone else died

children said thye already knew

they said they were in gym beofre class start

heard shot thought it was a lighbulb

100 kids inside gym wiht no adults in weight room 45 minutes with no adults ..........

knew to be quiet when in there

some kids took control telling everyone to stay quiet

when cops arrived they were told to run over to a church

in church for 2 hours

Tears when I was reading this.

How many more deaths are we going to accept?

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

U.S. School Violence Fast Facts

By CNN Library

updated 3:56 PM EDT, Fri April 25, 2014

(CNN) -- Here is a list of incidents of random elementary, middle and high school (excludes colleges and universities) violence with fatalities, from 1927 to the present. This list does NOT include suicides, gang related incidents, or deaths resulting from interpersonal conflicts...

http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/19/us/u-s-school-violence-fast-facts/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

[tlcya]

Wonder if second gunman was in on this incident or just happened to have a gun.

Sounds likes/he just happened to have a gun?

:sigh:

frightening either way. He was either involved or just another teen who thought hey, school is an appropriate place to take my gun, you know, in case I need it, like if someone comes shooting up my school or something.

WTH is happening here?

I cannot even begin to process another shooting rampage. I feel like I am becoming desensitized to the whole thing because literally every day now I am lambasted by headlines of another senseless shooting.

stepping out, will check back later for updates on shooter identity and motivation.

 

[human]

Desensitization? The "New Normal" An everyday occurrence? Part of their reality that they have come to expect? Children being raised in Violent American Culture? The success and effects of "shooter drills" as if they live in a war zone, because they do? Part of the effects of trauma from what they have just witnessed/experienced? Who knows anymore.

Unreal.

I believe it is a Federal law since Columbine that schools hold lock down drills several times a year.

At least we did it in my school.

The principal told us teachers to find a spot away from windows and exterior walls because the bullets can penetrate walls.

He also told us that if children were huddled together, the bullets would go through several children.

I have been enraged for years. But for me, the gloves are off now. No more trying to be polite, but I can't say what I think on here

 

[SilkySifaka]

:sigh:

frightening either way. He was either involved or just another teen who thought hey, school is an appropriate place to take my gun, you know, in case I need it, like if someone comes shooting up my school or something.

WTH is happening here?

I cannot even begin to process another shooting rampage. I feel like I am becoming desensitized to the whole thing because literally every day now I am lambasted by headlines of another senseless shooting.

stepping out, will check back later for updates on shooter identity and motivation.

One thing that gave me hope with the 3 mounties that were killed in Moncton was the shock and horror from around the nation. That the head of government flew back to be part of the service etc. I knew then we weren't used to shootings and hopefully never will be.

 

[Spice]

I believe it is a Federal law since Columbine that schools hold lock down drills several times a year.

At least we did it in my school.

The principal told us teachers to find a spot away from windows and exterior walls because the bullets can penetrate walls.

He also told us that if children were huddled together, the bullets would go through several children.

I have been enraged for years. But for me, the gloves are off now. No more trying to be polite, but I can't say what I think on here

It is....but laws are a response to culture and public health issues and it is truly upsetting that we would need to do this in general.

When I was in school, we had fire drills. That's it. We didn't have to hold drills to practice what to do if a shooter came into our school on a murderous rampage. It was unheard of and a rarity.

And I grew up in Connecticut not that long ago. Pre-Columbine, but not by much.

 

[Elley Mae]

I'm thinking it was boyfriend-girlfriend. jmo

 

[CARIIS]

But we can't stop trying.....for the sake of our children. Common ground must be found.

(Apologies, I'll take future comment to the gun control thread)

There is so much stuff with mental illness and this notion of background checks as it relates to mental illness. . The core of therapy is confidentiality and privileged communication, right to privacy, establish trust. Much less placing folks diagnoses in some data base.

Every single mentally ill person would have sign another confidentiality release. Legally , now in this country, clinicians cannot release any information, first without getting permission (documented) by parent if minor, or client themselves.

Mental health folks are not going to just waive that. It is ingrained, you violate it you lose your license to practice.

If you pass a client, in a public place, you cannot acknowledge even knowing them unless they approach you. IF you are married and your spouse is in therapy, you cannot even tell the spouse that their spouse is in therapy until the client signs a release. If they refuse you cannot say one word.

The mandated reporting is ONLY if there is [FONT=&quot]imminent[/FONT] danger(ready to take place). You have to be able to give a direct quote threat – the client stated to me that when they leave they are going to kill their boss. It must be concrete. As everyone learned with ER if it is a high functioning client they know what to deny.

Here is an informed consent form that MUST be signed first session. If they refuse you cannot treat them ( they do not refuse on this one). I just did this form cause it was the first google response! (they are all pretty much same):
Informed consent::
http://www.rochester.edu/UCC/forms/files/consent.pdf

Here is the, release of information, this one is specific.. If I wanted to talk to your spouse, I would have to ask for permission, ask you to sign , on the form it specifically states the person’s name you intend to speak with If the client refused you cannot talk to the spouse. Or anyone else. These depending on the situation in a lot of instances they refused and that was respected (you worked witht he client to understand the benefits of doing so etc) but until they signed no.

If your front end calls to remind a client of an appointment and someone else answers the phone they can’t say anything. If they had an answering matching you would have to get permission (I always had them sign this too) to leave a message on their answering machine reminding them of an appointment.

If you wanted them evaluated for meds, you would get a release giving me permission to talk to the doc and the doc me.

It is sacred, and so much stuff would have to legally be changed. The field by law cannot give a national data base information about any client receiving mental health services . It is an illness – would anyone want a HIV database. How about a sexually transmitted disease. HIV database? I know many of you are now tempted to say they don’t kill with guns. But for us in the field it is an illness, medical and privacy, just like medical is private information.
That information is not in LE data bases for the same reasons --confidentiality . Will never happen! It is against the law!

Background check for criminal activity charges etc. sure, but linking to one who is suffering with a mental illness is confidential and privileged .

Privileged is SOOOO complicated - even if subpoenaed by a court of law -- huge ordeal (kind like newspapers cant reveal sources) its huge . Can be years – remember James Holmes (Batman) and his psychiatrist. ,

Again this was the first result when I wanted to get an example of privileged communication
http://www.socialworktoday.com/archive/EoENovDec07.shtml

http://www.law.indiana.edu/instruction/tanford/web/archive/Psypriv.html

If it is like court ordered therapy, or employee assistance or probation treatment different rules
So, you have three things: confidentiality, privileged communication and informed consent.

Serious stuff………………………………..would take decades to try to connect mental illness to a national database listing everyone that suffers with mental illness available to many people without the patient consenting to that. You have to remember mental illness still has stigma.

Respectfully, look here on the posts. Many are angry with these folks. I sincerely doubt someone would rage at someone with cancer. And one has to understand that for those in the field they are sick, it is not a choice, it is an illness…………….
Teenagers, are adamant about not being put on meds, they don’t want their peers to know they are taking meds for craziness (there words not ours!)

 

[twocuriouscats]

:sigh:

frightening either way. He was either involved or just another teen who thought hey, school is an appropriate place to take my gun, you know, in case I need it, like if someone comes shooting up my school or something.

WTH is happening here?

I cannot even begin to process another shooting rampage. I feel like I am becoming desensitized to the whole thing because literally every day now I am lambasted by headlines of another senseless shooting.

stepping out, will check back later for updates on shooter identity and motivation.

How are these teens getting guns? WTF? Going back to Columbine, IMO the parents should have been prosecuted. Adam Lanza's mother paid the price for giving her son guns - if the father knew - he should be prosecuted. Enough already. IMHO, there are two types of shooters terrorizing the US: mentally challenged adults and children who perceive the world to be a bad place. We need to get help for these kids and identify them sooner - if parents got these teens guns - prosecute them. If someone is mentally or emotionally challenged - don't let them buy a gun. Geez, how hard can this be? Brokenhearted in Cali.

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

The thing is, the NRA (not that I am looking to stir anything up) is too powerful. I don't know that we could ever get mental health laws passed, in regards to guns. It's such a crazy uphill battle.

I'm not sure about that. Illinois has a law where your name will be listed in a database if you're admitted inpatient for psychiatric care. It states you've been notified your name will be placed in this database and thus prevents you from purchasing firearms, ammunition, or a FOID card for five years. I can't imagine Illinois being the only state with this in effect.

I only know this because it happened to me eight years ago. I had to sign a form that stated I was aware my name would be placed in this database. The laws can change.

 

[Elley Mae]

A student has been shot dead after a gunman reportedly armed with a semi-automatic weapon, dressed all in black wearing a bullet-proof vest and helmet opened fire in the gymnasium of Reynolds High School in Portland, Oregon.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tive-shooter-reported-Oregon-high-school.html

 

[Spice]

The mandated reporting is ONLY if there is [FONT=&quot]imminent[/FONT] danger(ready to take place). You have to be able to give a direct quote threat – the client stated to me that when they leave they are going to kill their boss. It must be concrete. As everyone learned with ER if it is a high functioning client they know what to deny.

Yup. Duty to warn or Tarasoff warning. It is the one and only instance that breaking confidentiality is allowed.

Mandated Reporting as different (Although tarasoff would certainly fall under that) As in, being legally bound to report an instance or suspicion of child abuse or endangerment. As a mandated reporter there is no choice, and you cannot do it anonymously, you must leave your name.

Duty to Warn is to break confidentiality when you have reason to believe that a client is going to harm themselves or others.

They are rare. My sister is an MSW and works in the ER. She had two in two weeks.LOL! She called me freaking out because she had to make sure she was within the parameters of Duty To Warn before calling the police and her supervisor wasn't there or answering her phone. She couldn't describe to me what was happening either. In the end, she gave both Tarasoff warnings and broke confidentiality and she was right to do so.

 

[Disguiseduser0308]

There is so much stuff with mental illness and this notion of background checks as it relates to mental illness. . The core of therapy is confidentiality and privileged communication, right to privacy, establish trust.

Every single mentally ill person would have sign another confidentiality release. Legally , now in this country, clinicians cannot release any information, first without getting permission (documented) by parent if minor, or client themselves.

Mental health folks are not going to just waive that. It is ingrained, you violate it you lose your license to practice.

If you pass a client, in a public place, you cannot acknowledge even knowing them unless they approach you. IF you are married and your spouse is in therapy, you cannot even tell the spouse that their spouse is in therapy until the client signs a release. If they refuse you cannot say one word.

The mandated reporting is ONLY if there is [FONT=&quot]imminent[/FONT] danger(ready to take place). You have to be able to give a direct quote threat – the client stated to me that when they leave they are going to kill their boss. It must be concrete. As everyone learned with ER if it is a high functioning client they know what to deny.

Here is an informed consent form that MUST be signed first session. If they refuse you cannot treat them ( they do not refuse on this one). I just did this form cause it was the first google response! (they are all pretty much same):
Informed consent::
http://www.rochester.edu/UCC/forms/files/consent.pdf

Here is the, release of information, this one is specific.. If I wanted to talk to your spouse, I would have to ask for permission, ask you to sign , on the form it specifically states the person’s name you intend to speak with If the client refused you cannot talk to the spouse. Or anyone else. These depending on the situation in a lot of instances they refused and that was respected (you worked witht he client to understand the benefits of doing so etc) but until they signed no.

If your front end calls to remind a client of an appointment and someone else answers the phone they can’t say anything. If they had an answering matching you would have to get permission (I always had them sign this too) to leave a message on their answering machine reminding them of an appointment.

If you wanted them evaluated for meds, you would get a release giving me permission to talk to the doc and the doc me.

It is sacred, and so much stuff would have to legally be changed. The field by law cannot give a national data base information about any client receiving mental health services . It is an illness – would anyone want a HIV database. How about a sexually transmitted disease. HIV database? I know many of you are now tempted to say they don’t kill with guns. But for us in the field it is an illness, medical and privacy, just like medical is private information.
That information is not in LE data bases for the same reasons --confidentiality . Will never happen! It is against the law!

Background check for criminal activity charges etc. sure, but linking to one who is suffering with a mental illness is confidential and privileged .

Privileged is SOOOO complicated - even if subpoenaed by a court of law -- huge ordeal (kind like newspapers cant reveal sources) its huge . Can be years – remember James Holmes (Batman) and his psychiatrist. ,

Again this was the first result when I wanted to get an example of privileged communication
http://www.socialworktoday.com/archive/EoENovDec07.shtml

http://www.law.indiana.edu/instruction/tanford/web/archive/Psypriv.html

If it is like court ordered therapy, or employee assistance or probation treatment different rules
So, you have three things: confidentiality, privileged communication and informed consent.

Serious stuff………………………………..would take decades to try to connect mental illness to a national database listing everyone that suffers with mental illness available to many people without the patient consenting to that. You have to remember mental illness still has stigma.

Respectfully, look here on the posts. Many are angry with these folks. I sincerely doubt someone would rage at someone with cancer. And one has to understand that for those in the field they are sick, it is not a choice, it is an illness…………….
Teenagers, are adamant about not being put on meds, they don’t want their peers to know they are taking meds for craziness (there words not ours!)

Please see my post above this reply. Confidentiality in IL goes out the door when a person is admitted for psychiatric care and is deemed a threat to themselves or others. I have a hard time believing the same laws can't be enacted even if a mentally ill person isn't admitted. It's being done here if you're inpatient... why can't it be done as outpatient as well?

That being said -- we don't know if this was related to mental illness. How do we get to the ones who are receiving no treatment at all? It's all just a great big mess.

 

[CARIIS]

I'm thinking it was boyfriend-girlfriend. jmo

Me too

 

[time]

School shootings since Sandy Hook map
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/10/5797306/map-school-shooting-sandy-hook

An as-yet unidentified school shooter attacked Reynolds High School in Portland Oregon today, killing at least one student. It was the 74th school shooting since Adam Lanza's infamous assault on Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut — and, as this map shows, they've happened all over the country.

 

[CARIIS]

Please see my post above this reply. Confidentiality in IL goes out the door when a person is admitted for psychiatric care and is deemed a threat to themselves or others. I have a hard time believing the same laws can't be enacted even if a mentally ill person isn't admitted. It's being done here if you're inpatient... why can't it be done as outpatient as well?

That being said -- we don't know if this was related to mental illness. How do we get to the ones who are receiving no treatment at all? It's all just a great big mess.

That is the imminent danger piece for admission. The only thing that "goes out the door" is the ability (for a very short time usually 72 hours) not to leave. If after 72 hours that individual wants DC they can leave unless it is taken to a court.

Being admitted involuntarily does not breach confidentiality or privileged communication. By that I mean no one "posts" releases etc. that Joe Smith was involuntarily omitted for evaluation of imminent danger.

Confidentiality, even in those instances is not breached.

 

[twocuriouscats]

I'm not sure about that. Illinois has a law where your name will be listed in a database if you're admitted inpatient for psychiatric care. It states you've been notified your name will be placed in this database and thus prevents you from purchasing firearms, ammunition, or a FOID card for five years. I can't imagine Illinois being the only state with this in effect.

I only know this because it happened to me eight years ago. I had to sign a form that stated I was aware my name would be placed in this database. The laws can change.

Sure sounds like a good start to me. Maybe there could be a national database for gunshops to check. Maybe then we could require a "release" from psychiatrists that you are judged to be ok to own a gun. I hate to put this on the medical field - but maybe that's what we have to do - get them to work with LE, but you can't hold them liable. I'm in the medical profession - I'm all about the right to privacy, but let's be honest - it's a fallacy in these times that you will have privacy in your medical records. IMO