Well, it’s only if they can be considered a danger to themselves or others. Although, if all Sheen’s exes can be believed, he is a danger to others.
Clarification: danger to oneself or others is one (or should that be two?) criteria for a 72 hour hold. Another is inability to adequately perform activities of daily living. If he’s not eating, or sleeping, or bathing (all of which appear at least possible from those videos), those would also be grounds to hold him. Not necessarily for long, but long enough to do a mental health evaluation on him.
Inability to perform ADL’s isn’t grounds to hold someone for *treatment *against their will, I don’t think, but it is grounds for a temporary hold for evaluation. If you evaluate them and inform them that they’re crazier than a shithouse rat and they decline treatment, then I do believe you need the “danger to self and/or others” clause for forced treatment.
You no fool-a me - there ain’t no Sanity Clause.
Regards,
Shodan
I understand Chaim Levine/Chuck Lorre has a ‘$300,000 per’ reward for each of Sheen’s horcruxes that can be found. Until they’re all destroyed Sheen can’t be let go from the show. The problem is he’s believed to have hidden at least one in Vietnam while shooting Platoon and another in any one of several thousand hookers.
Getting Charlie Sheen committed probably won’t help him. He’s convinced that he’s sober, so he’s going to be entirely resistant to recovery treatment. The programs only work if you work them, and if you don’t think you need them and aren’t ready to take their lessons and the changes involved on board, then it’s a waste of time and effort. (See: Lindsay Lohan’s previous failed rehab efforts.)
Barring drinking and driving (he seems to be staying home) or accidental overdose (and he claims to not be using, remains to be seen) Sheen could go on as he is for quite a long time without mortally harming himself.
I would like to clarify, if I can. I was responding to the “It’s clear from the video [interviews and/or webcast] that he’s bonkers! Why can’t we DO something?!?” type of statements. While it’s tragic to watch someone appear to melt down, I think it’s a potential “slippery slope” to have a policy to commit people to involuntary confinement because of something we fear they “might” do. The bar should be high.
If he goes online and makes statements that he thinks he’s an alien warlock & rockstar from Zeta Reticuli, I don’t think that’s enough to forcibly commit him to psychiatric help.
If I want to take a bath in green (not red or yellow, but green only) jello for an hour each night, I don’t think that’s grounds for forcible incarceration.
I agree that those eccentricities usually don’t exist on their lonesome, and that there may be other (more serious) things going on. But having a big ego and being a dick about it is not a mental sickness in of itself, IMO.
He’s definitely got flight of ideas, and I’m hearing what I’d consider circumstantiality, derailment, clanging and hints of word salad, as well. Those are signs of thought disorders (mental illness) not drug abuse. I actually think he *might *be clean right now, and the drugs he was using to mask his thought disorder are no longer doing their job.
I forget who tweeted this but
Q: How much coke did Charlie Sheen do?
A: Enough to kill Two and a Half Men
I’d like to know how his dog died recently (11 year old pug named Betty). He mentioned “Betty” in his webcast diatribe which I quoted in post 37.
By posting this, I declare you to be WINNING!
Even with a clear thought disorder, the intake process to hold someone is going to consist of an interview with a psychatrist who will ask him, if he knows, who he is, is he aware of his surroundings, does he hear or see things and is he going to harm himself or someone else.
This is why you see so many homeless people with clear thought problems walking around.
It’s especially difficult in the case of someone famous like Sheen as they have lawyers to back them up and once you start a forced committment it better take. 'Cause let’s say they bring him in and he establishes he’s fine. Then he really goes downhill. It’s just that much harder to prove the second time around.
My guess is he IS being closely watched. Then these watchers will wait for the first chance for him to collapse physically. This will allow them to quickly bring him in to a hospital setting when he’s out of it.
Sheen is basically throwing a temper tantrum like a little kid. Well parents know how that is, the more you respond to it, the worse it can get.
And I agree, while it seems unorchestrated, you can’t be sure of it.
This is certainly not the first time this has happened. As I said, Rita Hayworth and her then husband, Dick Haymes locked themselves in a hotel room for a week refusing to open the door, because he was going to be served legal papers.
The difference is this kind of tantrums are immediate, while back in Hayworth’s day the papers could only report it twice a day.
[QUOTE=Markxxx]
My guess is he IS being closely watched. Then these watchers will wait for the first chance for him to collapse physically. This will allow them to quickly bring him in to a hospital setting when he’s out of it.
[/quote]
I dunno. Anna Nicole Smith had a bunch of leeches for an entourage, and, at best, it seems they did little to rock the boat [in other words: get her help she probably needed] so that they were able to live off her money and fame.
Hah! I agree completely. He’s 45 going on 14.
I swear, if I ever quit (or get fired from) my current job, I am so using the expression “never have to look at whatshiscock again” about my boss.
Dear Mr. Sheen,
Please adopt me.
Love,
RickJay
I wouldn’t mind . . . Having a father you can respect is, of course, one of life’s greatest blessings; but growing up rich and surrounded by cocaine and porn stars is a greater blessing still.
Problem is, high-quality drama shows like L&O are really expensive to make, almost like making a feature film; that’s why there are not more of them. To do a sitcom you just need two or three sets, and a studio audience, and some crusts and water for the writers; the only big expense comes when you have a big-name star like Sheen.
ER solved that problem by writing out/in new blood.
This is the Information Age; she was as famous as Sheen already. (The difference being that Sheen has a name people will admit they know. 
)
Same in Florida – it’s called the Baker Act. A phrase that seems so widely known, now – even in common parlance as a transitive verb, e.g., “He was Baker Acted” – that I suppose (some) other states must have copied Florida’s 1971 legislation.
At least that would simplify therapy . . .