[DRAFT] Promotion Of Better Mental Health Act

[Westarctic]

OOC:

Good Morning Everyone, this one is in its eighth form. As always, comments are appreciated (and encouraged). Would especially appreciate thoughts on category & strength.

Thanks, Westarctic

Promotion Of Better Mental Health

Showing time and time again that having bad mental health, and leaving it go untreated, can cause problems on both a personal and communal scale.

Recognizing the legitimacy of mental health patients and their problem's.

Hereby:

1. Defines:

1.1 Mental health as the mental status of a sapient being

1.2. Rehabilitation center as a center for treatment of a serious problem (in this case, for treating mental disorders)

1.3. And a mental disorder as a condition that arises in a person that causes impairment to an aspect/s of ones mental functioning, which can have the potential to lead to more serious things (such as bodily harm, self-hate, suicide, etc.).

2. Enacts new changes on a local level to the way that governments handle people with mental-disorders, including:

2.1. Regulating and ensuring that rehabilitation center operators run their facilities properly and efficiently by:

2.1.1. Having regular inspections done on rehabilitation centers by social service workers from the local governments that the rehabilitation centers are located in for maintenance and security reasons, by overseeing and controlling any possible safety violations, mistreatment of patients, etc. The standards for the rehabilitation centers can be set by the national governments and carried out by the local governments of that nation.

2.1.2. Ensuring that said rehabilitation centers can successfully rehabilitate a person with any mental-disorder that they take in, in an orderly and timely manner, while also being able to assume responsibility if they fail to do so.

2.2. Starting early with spotting symptoms of mental-disorders by having schools (primary to high) make sure that school counselors are available and ready to be able to help any child that needs to talk about their problems. Doing this could help eliminate preventable mental-disorders in the future and guarantees that students would have someone to talk to.

2.3. Offering pharmaceutical companies incentives (such as monetary incentives from the WA nation in question) for providing newer, better, and safer medicines and treatments for these mental-disorders.

2.4. Ensuring that businesses provide mental-health services, such as coverage for therapy or counseling with their health benefits for their employees, to help cut down on the rising suicide rate attributed to work-related issues.

[Tinhampton]

Why did you not draft this proposal first? I don't see why I should waste my time on helping an author to draft a proposal that apparently does not need drafting.

[Astrobolt]

OOC: I would strongly recommend that you unsubmit your draft, so that others can give you feedback. We can't really give feedback on a submitted proposal.

[The Land Of Wendy]

We’re all mental cases. Your crazy, she’s crazy, he’s insane. More nuts?? ............naked day is fun!

[Westarctic]

OOC: I would strongly recommend that you unsubmit your draft, so that others can give you feedback. We can't really give feedback on a submitted proposal.

I guess more for future reference, than for this one. If it doesn't make it, Ill edit it to better standards using y'all's feedback on this one.

[Denathor]

IC: Callahan stumbles into the drafting room and takes a copy of the proposal.
"Well, I’m a bit out of practice on this, but let’s see what I remember."

OOC:

Showing after time and time again

Remove the word "after."

hereby passes the BMH bill (Better Mental Health Bill).

You have two instances of this phrase, at the end of the preamble and at the end of the operative clauses. While not technically illegal, I’d still recommend deletion.

Defines... rehab as a center for treatment of a serious problem
(in this case, mental problems)

First, you should probably use the full term "rehabilitation centers" rather than the shorthand. Second, what is a "mental problem" defined as? You define "mental disorder" later, is that the same thing?

Regulating and ensuring that rehab centers operate properly and efficiently

How? And by whom?

Starting early with spotting early symptoms of mental-disorders such as inside of schools, homes, and other places of care by encouraging people to be on the lookout for children or teens showing signs of problems such as depression, BPD, and others.

Again, by whom? "People" isn’t specific enough.

I’d strongly recommend pulling this and redrafting it. Speaking as a delegate, there’s no way I’d approve it in this condition.

[Westarctic]

IC: Callahan stumbles into the drafting room and takes a copy of the proposal.
"Well, I’m a bit out of practice on this, but let’s see what I remember."

OOC:

Showing after time and time again

Remove the word "after."

hereby passes the BMH bill (Better Mental Health Bill).

You have two instances of this phrase, at the end of the preamble and at the end of the operative clauses. While not technically illegal, I’d still recommend deletion.

Defines... rehab as a center for treatment of a serious problem
(in this case, mental problems)

First, you should probably use the full term "rehabilitation centers" rather than the shorthand. Second, what is a "mental problem" defined as? You define "mental disorder" later, is that the same thing?

Regulating and ensuring that rehab centers operate properly and efficiently

How? And by whom?

Starting early with spotting early symptoms of mental-disorders such as inside of schools, homes, and other places of care by encouraging people to be on the lookout for children or teens showing signs of problems such as depression, BPD, and others.

Again, by whom? "People" isn’t specific enough.

I’d strongly recommend pulling this and redrafting it. Speaking as a delegate, there’s no way I’d approve it in this condition.

thanks, i appreciate the advice. I fixed it all up according to what you told me, added some new parts to the proposal, and I will be keeping it as a draft, until everyone seems to be happy with the draft. Thanks!

[Westarctic]

OOC:

Good Evening Everyone, this proposal has been submitted. Thank you all for the advice, I considered and applied all of it to my draft. Below, is the draft submitted to the WA.

Thanks, Westarctic

Promotion Of Better Mental Health

Understanding that good mental health of a nations citizens is key to upholding a fair and prosperous society, and for maintaining the well-being of its citizens.

Showing time and time again that having bad mental health, and leaving it go untreated, can cause problems on both a personal and communal scale.

Recognizing the legitimacy of mental health patients and their problem's.

Hereby:

1. Defines mental health as the mental status of a sapient being, rehabilitation center as a center for treatment of a serious problem (in this case, for treating mental disorders), and mental disorder as a condition that arises in a person that causes impairment to an aspect/s of ones mental functioning, which can have the potential to lead to more serious things (such as bodily harm, self-hate, suicide, etc.).

2. Enacts new changes on a local level to the way that governments handle people with mental-disorders, including:

2.1. Regulating and ensuring that rehabilitation center operators run their facilities properly and efficiently by:

2.1.1. Having regular inspections done on rehabilitation centers by social service workers from the local government that the rehabilitation centers are located in for maintenance and security reasons, by overseeing and controlling any possible safety violations, mistreatment of patients, etc.

2.1.2 Ensuring that said rehabilitation centers can successfully rehabilitate a person with any mental-disorder that they take in, in an orderly and timely manner, while also being able to assume responsibility if they fail to do so, if not an extremely severe case. If so, the rehabilitation centers should consult with close family members of the specific patient in question about the best course of action for the patient. Whether or not they want the patient to be taken out, is their decision and their decision only. As long as the patient in question poses no threat to society, rehabilitation will not be necessary, but only encouraged by social service workers. This will be determined by a trained psychologist. If it is decided that the person is unfit and unable to function even with medication, therapy, and/or rehabilitation, they (with the families permission) will be held indefinitely until deemed fit to be released.

2.2. Starting early with spotting symptoms of mental-disorders by having schools (primary to high) make sure that school counselors are available and ready to be able to help any child that needs to talk about their problems. Doing this could help eliminate preventable mental-disorders in the future and guarantees that students would have someone to talk to.

2.3. Offering pharmaceutical companies incentives (such as monetary incentives from the WA nation in question) for providing newer, better, and safer medicines and treatments for these mental-disorders.

2.4. Ensuring that businesses provide mental-health services, such as coverage for therapy or counseling with their health benefits for their employees, to help cut down on the rising suicide rate attributed to work-related issues.

2.5. Requiring noted people with severe mental disorders that pose significant risk to others to be sent to a psychological rehabilitation center for a certain period of time to ensure that the said citizen gets better, and can therefore go back to contributing to society, their own family (if applicable), and other important priorities of said citizen. If not severe, it would still be recommend by social service workers to see a psychologist or attend therapy. However, it would not be required.

Coauthored by tinhampton

[Drew Durrnil]

It kinda seems unnecessary to have a second thread for your proposal when you can just merge it into your first one.

[Tinhampton]

It's been a while since I've seen a proposal I haven't found fit to unilaterally rewrite buuuuuuuuut

Good Evening Everyone, this one is in its second form. As always, comments are appreciated (and encouraged) and you're getting them from me, Tinhampton. Would especially appreciate thoughts on category & strength.

Thanks, Westarctic

Promotion Of Better Mental Health

"Understanding that good mental health of a nation's citizens is key to upholding a fair and prosperous society, and for maintaining the well-being of its citizens.

Showing time and time again that having bad mental health, and leaving it go untreated, can cause problems on both a personal and communal scale.

Recognizing the legitimacy of mental health patients By forcibly rehabilitating them? and their problems, hereby passes the BMH Bill (Better Mental Health Bill) I'd take this out - explaining or using abbreviations that you never use again is a bad idea; taking such abbreviations to be the title of your proposal in the body of your text while the title of your actual proposal is completely different is a Very Bad Idea.

Hereby:

1. Defines mental health as the mental status of a human being Non-human sapient species exist in the WA and quite likely also have mental health, rehabilitation center as a center for treatment of a serious problem (in this case, mental disorders) Do you mean for "rehabilitation centers" to treat all "serious problem[s]" or only "mental disorders?" Never use many words when few words would both be more concise and less confusing, and mental disorder as a condition that arises in a person that causes mental illness What is "mental illness?", which can lead to more serious things (bodily harm, self-hate, suicide Firstly, do you intend for the category of "more serious things" to contain only the acts of "bodily harm, self-hate [and] suicide?" Secondly, there are many mental disorders which do not necessarily lead to these "more serious things;" do you seek to include all "mental illnesses" that "can lead to more serious things" under this definition?).

2. Enacts new changes On what level - the international, the national, the local, or some other governing body? to the way that governments handle people with mental-problems Here and below, you are extremely inconsistent in whether you refer to "mental disorders" or "mental problems," with or without a separating hyphen in lieu of the space, including:

2.1. Regulating and ensuring that rehabilitation center operaters operators run their facilities properly and efficiently by:

2.1.1. Having regular inspections done on rehabilitation centers for maintenance and security reasons And what aspects of a rehab centre will be looked into at these inspections?.

2.1.2 Ensuring that said rehabilitation centers can successfully have rehabilitated successfully rehabilitate a person with a What is with all of these line breaks everywhere? Is this the new craze among first-time drafters now?
mental disorder in an orderly and timely manner, while also being able to assume responsibility For what, and how? if they
fail to do so, if not an extremely severe case Will "extremely severe case[s]" be detained in "rehabilitation centers" indefinitely as per Article 2.5?.

2.2. Starting early with spotting early symptoms You use the word "early" twice in the first five words of this clause. You are writing a resolution, not a speech, here. of mental-disorders such as inside of schools, homes, and other
places of care "schools, homes and other places of care" are locations, not "mental-disorders" by encouraging parental figures, teachers, guardians, or other people of interest to said child to be on
the lookout for children or teens showing signs of problems Conversely, these are "mental-disorders" and not absolutely "problems" such as depression, BPD, and others.

2.3. Keeping up to date with the latest medical advancements by offering pharmaceutical companies incentives for
providing new and better Better for whom? medicines and treatments for these diseases Requiring whoever's supposed to be doing the enacting at the start of Article 2 to "[keep] up to date with the latest medical advancements" by incentivising "new... medicines and treatments" - that is, "the latest medical advancements" which have thus not yet been made - is paradoxical at best.

2.4. Ensuring that businesses provide mental-health services Such as what? for their employees to help cut down on the a rising
suicide rate attributed to work-related issues.

2.5. Requiring noted people with mental disorders to be sent to a psychological rehabilitation center How does this not contradict Article 1d of GA#540 "Supporting People with Disabilities" and why is this being imposed on all "noted people with mental disorders," no matter how mild? for a certain
period of time to ensure that the said citizen gets better It is possible to "[get] better" as such without having to be institutionally rehabilitated, and can therefore go back to contributing to society, their
own family (if applicable), and other important priorities of said citizen."

[Westarctic]

Good Evening Everyone, this one is in its third form. As always, comments are appreciated (and encouraged). Would especially appreciate thoughts on category & strength.

Thanks, Westarctic

Promotion Of Better Mental Health

Understanding that good mental health of a nations citizens is key to upholding a fair and prosperous society, and for maintaining the well-being of its citizens.

Showing time and time again that having bad mental health, and leaving it go untreated, can cause problems on both a personal and communal scale.

Recognizing the legitimacy of mental health patients and their problem's.

Hereby:

1. Defines mental health as the mental status of an organism (in this case, a human being), rehabilitation center as a center for treatment of a serious problem (in this case, for treating mental disorders), and mental disorder as a condition that arises in a person that causes impairment to an aspect/s of ones mental functioning, which can have the potential to lead to more serious things (such as bodily harm, self-hate, suicide, etc.).

2. Enacts new changes on a local level to the way that governments handle people with mental-disorders, including:

2.1. Regulating and ensuring that rehabilitation center operators run their facilities properly and efficiently by:

2.1.1. Having regular inspections done on rehabilitation centers for maintenance and security reasons, by overseeing and controlling any possible safety violations, mistreatment of patients, etc.

2.1.2 Ensuring that said rehabilitation centers can successfully rehabilitate a person with any mental-disorder in an orderly and timely manner, while also being able to assume responsibility if they fail to do so, if not an extremely severe case. If so, the rehabilitation centers should consult with close family members of the specific patient in question about the best course of action for the patient. Whether or not they want the patient to be taken out, is their decision and their decision only. As long as the patient in question poses no threat to society and is able to make decisions on their own without any assistance from others. This will be determined by a trained psychologist. If it is decided that the person is unfit and unable to function even with medication, therapy, and/or rehabilitation, they (with the families permission) will be held indefinitely until deemed fit to be released.

2.2. Starting early with spotting symptoms of mental-disorders such as by encouraging parental figures, teachers, guardians, or other people of interest to said child to be on the lookout for children or teens showing signs of mental-disorders such as depression, BPD, and others.

2.3. Offering pharmaceutical companies incentives for providing newer, better, and safer medicines and treatments for these mental-disorders.

2.4. Ensuring that businesses provide mental-health services such as coverage for therapy or counseling with their health benefits, for their employees to help cut down on the rising suicide rate attributed to work-related issues.

2.5. Requiring noted people with severe mental disorders (such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder) to be sent to a psychological rehabilitation center for a certain period of time to ensure that the said citizen gets better, and can therefore go back to contributing to society, their own family (if applicable), and other important priorities of said citizen. If not severe, it would still be recommend by social service workers to see a psychologist or attend therapy. However, it would not be required.

[Ardiveds]

OOC: In order to avoid confusion, I suggest keeping the the latest draft in the original post. Also, if you want to keep older drafts, perhaps spolier then like:

draft 1

draft 2

I do recommend keeping your latest draft unspoilered so that it's the first thing people see.

[Westarctic]

OOC: In order to avoid confusion, I suggest keeping the the latest draft in the original post. Also, if you want to keep older drafts, perhaps spolier then like:

draft 1

draft 2

I do recommend keeping your latest draft unspoilered so that it's the first thing people see.

thanks

[Denathor]

A general quibble about clause 1: you use the term "mental disorder" before defining it. I’d change that.

Defines mental health as the mental status of an organism (in this case, a human being)

No, I don’t like this because it’s somehow too broad and too narrow. I’d recommend replacing it with "the mental status of a sapient being," and remove any mention of humans.

Having regular inspections done on rehabilitation centers

By whom? A WA body? The member nation's themselves?

Articles 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 don’t really do anything. "Encouraging" means 2.2 is not binding, you don’t specify how incentives would be offered in 2.3 (does the WA pay for them?), and there’s no details given on how this would make employers provide mental health services. You can’t just wave a magic wand and make these things happen.

Requiring noted people with severe mental disorders (such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder) to be sent to a psychological rehabilitation center

As noted, a contradiction of GA Resolution #540, specifically article 2d. This makes this draft automatically illegal.

[Groot]

1. Defines mental health as the mental status of a human being

"I am Groot," says Groot, pointing out that he is, indeed, not a human being.

[Imperium Anglorum]

As noted, a contradiction of GA Resolution #540, specifically article 2d. This makes this draft automatically illegal.

(Also to the OP.) I think that resolution should be repealed due to that clause and would support a draft with appropriate argumentation.

[Daarwyrth]

Marie vyn Nysen takes a look at all the non-human beings that walk the halls of the World Assembly, and raises her eyebrows. "Dear Ambassador from Westarctic, I strongly recommend you excise the line 'in this case, a human being' from your proposal. It would be rude to only take human beings into consideration, or somehow elevate them above other species, when we have such a diverse body of sapient beings around us."

[Westarctic]

Marie vyn Nysen takes a look at all the non-human beings that walk the halls of the World Assembly, and raises her eyebrows. "Dear Ambassador from Westarctic, I strongly recommend you excise the line 'in this case, a human being' from your proposal. It would be rude to only take human beings into consideration, or somehow elevate them above other species, when we have such a diverse body of sapient beings around us."

I'll pass. This was really only intended towards humans. Not animals. Besides, this isn't a role-play board.

[Daarwyrth]

Marie vyn Nysen takes a look at all the non-human beings that walk the halls of the World Assembly, and raises her eyebrows. "Dear Ambassador from Westarctic, I strongly recommend you excise the line 'in this case, a human being' from your proposal. It would be rude to only take human beings into consideration, or somehow elevate them above other species, when we have such a diverse body of sapient beings around us."

I'll pass. This was really only intended towards humans. Not animals. Besides, this isn't a role-play board.

OOC: Then I guess you are quite new to the WA and that you haven't heard of World Assembly RP yet. Both the GA and SC sub-forums are very much intended to be In-Character, as well. Also, I am not talking about animals. I am talking about the fact that there are many nations in the WA that aren't populated by human beings, but either by alien species or different races altogether (like elves, or dwarves). They are also a part of the WA, they are also affected by WA proposals. As such, you'll be excluding a part of the WA if you only refer to humans, which will not be appreciated by those nations. And trust me, there are delegates among them with lots of votes. I suggest that you look to GA resolutions that have already been passed, to get a feel for the neutral language that would be appropriate to use. Also, it would be a good idea for you to also look at the rules and advice threads on how to write GA proposals.

[Westarctic]

Alright, I'll change it. But roleplay is pretty weird to me, if I'm being honest, and I'd hope you'd respect that by not doing that on my thread. Thanks

[Daarwyrth]

Alright, I'll change it. But roleplay is pretty weird to me, if I'm being honest, and I'd hope you'd respect that by not doing that on my thread. Thanks

You have the right to make that request, albeit I'd suggest you put "please no RP" or something along those lines in your original post, as most people here do respond to proposals through RP/while In-Character. That way they'll know to respond to you out-of-character. That won't be a guarantee people will listen though, so you will have to expect that others will respond to you through RP.

[Greater Cesnica]

Alright, I'll change it. But roleplay is pretty weird to me, if I'm being honest, and I'd hope you'd respect that by not doing that on my thread. Thanks

Ambassador McCooley looks bemused. "What an absurd request. Stop speaking? Of course not."

[Araraukar]

Alright, I'll change it. But roleplay is pretty weird to me, if I'm being honest, and I'd hope you'd respect that by not doing that on my thread. Thanks

OOC: You've come into ENTIRELY wrong forum, then, as the GA forum is an in-character forum. Mark your posts with "OOC" if you're not roleplaying, as otherwise people will assume you're an in-character representative talking for your imaginary nation.

[Westarctic]

Alright, I'll change it. But roleplay is pretty weird to me, if I'm being honest, and I'd hope you'd respect that by not doing that on my thread. Thanks

OOC: You've come into ENTIRELY wrong forum, then, as the GA forum is an in-character forum. Mark your posts with "OOC" if you're not roleplaying, as otherwise people will assume you're an in-character representative talking for your imaginary nation.

thanks

[Bananaistan]

OOC: The point about GAR#540, 2d has not been addressed. This is illegal for contradiction.