Fake Suicide Attempt Tests Facebook Prevention Tool, Lands Man In Asylum 317
First time accepted submitter abhishekmdb writes Shane Tusch faked his suicide in an attempt to test the authenticity of Facebook suicide prevention tool and got detained for 72 hours. Facebook has rolled out a set of tools to keep a check on its users who are having suicidal tendencies and prevent these users from suicidal attempts. In case some user is having suicidal thoughts and mentions that in the Facebook posts and if a friend of that user reports it to Facebook then a third party will immediately review the post and Facebook would lock the suicidal user's account and the user will be made to read Facebook's suicide prevention materials.
Great example (Score:5, Funny)
This is a prime example of how NOT to start a career in software testing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, I still have 15 to 20 fake accounts set up in facebook early days...
Time to have some fun, each have addresses all over the globe
Made originally for trolling.
Which is my point, trolls will abuse the hell out of this, its easy to roll dozens of fake accounts and report posts for suicidal ideation
Re: (Score:2)
What about detection of terror actions? That would be even more useful.
B.t.w. Facebook is just troll heaven. It's for people that are narcissists.
Re: (Score:2)
See /r/forwardsfromgrandma. [reddit.com] (NSFW? Frequent racism)
The trolls who make those kinds of memes that are then shared by people who legitimately agree with their content must be wetting themselves laughing.
Re:Great example (Score:5, Insightful)
Worse, what I see as a lot more likely is people who see their friend's computer left logged into FB and want to prank them... these days they usually write some sort of embarassing post or message their friends. But if they would instead write a post talking about suicide, and then use their own accounts to alert Facebook...
Re:Great example (Score:5, Interesting)
The immediate effect I'd predict is more suicides, because the suicidal user who already believes they don't count because no one listens to them now has hard evidence that no one listens to what they have to say -- after all, they're just been silenced by Facebook.
Re:Great example (Score:5, Interesting)
Since Facebook doesn't verify your identity when signing up for an account.... how long before the bad guys start setting up fake accounts or hacking FB accounts and ransoming people?
Example would be: "Pay me $1000, or you will be picked up the police and put in mental institution. [insert pmt instructions]"
New tool gives the bad guys the means.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Great example (Score:5, Funny)
Don't worry I am pretty sure /. doesn't have a suicide prevention tool. It is far down the list after https/TLS support.
The project has been delayed several times due to a high rate of false positive. It is really difficult to adapt off the selves suicide prevention software to /. audience.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Great example (Score:5, Funny)
No, it was delayed until Dice could run a story on women's under-representation in suicide rates.
Oh, *BRILLIANT* (Score:5, Insightful)
Take someone who is suicidal and crying out for help and to talk with their friends, and you block them from talking to anyone!
Why not just had them a gun?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
hand.
Hand them a gun.
Time to clean the keyboard... :P
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sorry, this whole thing sounds BS to me. While it makes sense to have the Authorities to look at and interview the victim^Hsoftware tester, putting a 72 hour mental health hold on someone is hard. You have to convince more than one person that you are serious. Most places don't want to hold people - it's a lot of paperwork, hassle and expense and there are enough genuine fruitcakes so as to leave few extra rooms at the inn. Even if he got tossed in on a hold, it would be reviewed after 24 hours.
Eith
Re:Oh, *BRILLIANT* (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sorry, this whole thing sounds BS to me. While it makes sense to have the Authorities to look at and interview the victim^Hsoftware tester, putting a 72 hour mental health hold on someone is hard. You have to convince more than one person that you are serious. Most places don't want to hold people - it's a lot of paperwork, hassle and expense and there are enough genuine fruitcakes so as to leave few extra rooms at the inn. Even if he got tossed in on a hold, it would be reviewed after 24 hours.
Either San Mateo does really weird things or this was made up.
You are assuming that he was not complicit and wanted to be held for as long as possible. To me this whole thing sounds like a ploy for 15 minutes of infamy.
Re: (Score:2)
You gotta be pretty sick to pretend you're sick enough to be on a 72 hour mental health hold.
I suppose that's the catch.
Re: (Score:2)
Many times psychotic episodes (or looking episodes) are caused by drugs. Three days doesn't seem too long to see if the drug's effects wear off or the episode is "natural".
Also, the holding could be used to see of the patient isn't faking *not* being psychotic after the first day to get out.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, all of those things could happen, but they usually don't. If, indeed, this is a psychiatric holding cell / wing / whatever it will be staffed with people who have some sort of training in this field. They aren't perfect, but they typically see a lot of pathology.
If this guy really faked out a number of professionals for three days, he is a pretty good actor.
The other possibility is that the staffers were really clueless. Again, it's possible but I kinda doubt it. The whole thing smells.
Re:Oh, *BRILLIANT* (Score:5, Interesting)
You can find any number of stories about people without any acting skills convincing those professionals that they are psychotic. Frankly, it's just a question of presenting the correct initial criteria, of which the first one will be 'being delivered by the police', and confirmation bias will take care of the rest. Seeing a lot of pathology simply doesn't help that much when symptoms are as vague and subject to interpretation as they are with mental illness.
Usually people seem to have a harder time convincing the professionals that they are, in fact, perfectly rational and not suffering from any serious mental illness. That will of course be an uphill battle against confirmation bias; they are, after all, in a psychiatric holding facility.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"Catch-22. Anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn't really crazy."
Re: (Score:2)
No it isn't, at least not in Pennsylvania. You just need a mental health professional to sign a paper saying the person is a danger to themselves or others
Re: (Score:3)
I'm thinking that the police department thought because facebook was involves, if they screwed up and the guy offed himself, they would famously look bad. Someone was just trying to cover their ass and put the hold on him due to the potential publicity blowback.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Posting as Anonymous Coward for obvious reasons. I got really, really drunk one night, got really upset about stupid things and started texting people about all the soul crushing burden that was my life at the time. I wasn't going to kill myself. I never even mentioned killing myself. Regardless of any of that, I was picked up and eventually ended up in the psych ward. There is no 24 hour release. They are allowed to hold you as long as the Doctor on duty sees fit, usually a minimum of 48 hours. They
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What's wrong is that in the US system, it's possible to treat someone against their will and then bill them for it.
Someone just recently went on vacation from Europe to Florida, and a combination of sleep apnea and jet lag caused him to fall sound asleep in the hotel lobby before even getting to his room. They rushed him to an ER against his half-awake protests, and he ended up with an *enormous* bill. That's just not right.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're just totally wrong, and you seem to be making up numbers.
24 hours isn't any kind of limit or milepost here. 72 hours is the only checkpoint. The doctors can hold you for up to 72 hours based entirely on their own professional judgement.
Being held for over 72 hours requires other people to agree. Generally on a 72 hour hold, nobody is doing anything after 24 hours; that isn't a time frame that has legal requirements for a habeas corpus hearing, or any other review. It also isn't an amount of time wher
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed. That's my first thought - that if they're posting, you want to keep lines of communication open. Friends, family, or even a stranger might be able to write something that makes a difference. Cut them off, and everyone will think that the person has committed suicide. Stupid, stupid, stupid!
Then again, there's the flip side - that people (including family members) might just say "Get over it."
Re:Oh, *BRILLIANT* (Score:4, Funny)
Take someone who is suicidal and crying out for help and to talk with their friends, and you block them from talking to anyone!
Why not just had them a gun?
And... make them "read Facebook's suicide prevention materials." (I wonder what the legal disclaimer is on that?)
What happens if the user doesn't give it a "Like"?
Re: (Score:2)
Then again, that would be consistent. This feature is designed to appeal to parents and such, not suicidal people. Both suicide and self injury have a long history of being handled the opposite of how they should be since in both cases the focus tends to be on how it affects the people around them, people who do not understand what is going on and want to feel like they are doing something.
Re: (Score:3)
Account Closed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
There's more than 44 reasons.
The main reason I still have my 'account' open is diversion though, as with most of my publicly traceable actions on internet and phones - it gives anyone who might be mining/tracking/recording what I do completely misleading information (along with my fake gmail, fake public web usage, etc).
I'll admit it does making keeping in contact with family/friends a little harder though, no regular cell phone number is annoying - as is not being able to use a nice feature rich phone - bu
Re: (Score:2)
but tell that to people who, on the basis of Facebook posts by other people of the licensees page, have to defend their license at licensing board hearing.
I don't know. Will that take a long time or not?
Re: (Score:3)
I wish more companies had this stance, but alas.. When I worked for a DOD contractor we were warned monthly not to post personal information on Facebook, MySpace, Linked, or anywhere else that a person could track you. Not only do you not know how they will use what you post, you also put yourself and your family at risk by becoming easy to find.
Medical people can bet targeted for all sorts of nasty things, from drugs to free treatments. Defense obviously had state secrets to worry about. Any company has
Re: (Score:2)
He got what he deserved. (Score:3, Insightful)
He clearly stated that he intended to take his life. I'm glad he was detained. A first repsonder is not in a position to decide if someone who just threatened suicide is telling the truth or not when they deny it. What if the cops just took him at his word and left? They'd be held liable if he really did intend to knock himself off. If he really WAS just testing FB, the proper thing to do is to alert authorities in advance. Go to the cop shop and discuss the experiment with them BEFORE you go making people legitimately freak out. But I give FB credit for having real people actually review the post instead of relying on computer text-parsing algorithms.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
So it should be illegal to plan or attempt suicide, but legal to succeed? After all, nobody has been prosecuted for successfully committing suicide, have they?
Many civilized countries have removed attempted suicide from the criminal code. Here's a list [mentalhealthdaily.com], and 2 examples:
United States: In the past, many states had laws that regarded the act of suicide as a felony, but these laws were seldom enforced. In the 1980s, 30 out of 50 United States has no laws opposing suicide or attempting suicide. With that said, all 50 states had laws stating that assisted suicide is a felony. Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.
Canada: In 1972, the act of suicide was removed as being a criminal action. In 1993, a law was created that prohibited any form of assisted suicide. There has been some controversy in recent years surrounding the ban of physician-assisted suicide. Many disabled individuals feel as though they should have a right to assisted suicide under Canadian law. Additionally anyone who compels or entices a person to commit suicide is subject to criminal penalty regardless of whether the individual carries through with the act. In 2014, physician-assisted suicide became legal only in the province of Quebec.
versus these countries:
North Korea: This is a country in which suicide rates are considerably lower than average. It is thought that the reason suicide rates are low is due to the burden suicide would have on a person’s family. It is thought that if someone commits suicide, it is possible for the government to purge or ostracize the rest of that person’s family and relatives. In this country there is strict social pressure and an unforgiving nature surrounding suicide.
Singapore: Anyone who even attempts suicide can be sent to prison for up to a full year.
Re: (Score:2)
United States: In the past, many states had laws that regarded the act of suicide as a felony, but these laws were seldom enforced. In the 1980s, 30 out of 50 United States has no laws opposing suicide or attempting suicide. With that said, all 50 states had laws stating that assisted suicide is a felony. Currently there is no law against the act of committing suicide in the United States.
Yes, there's no law against it, but mentioning it gets you arrested and detained. Perfectly legal.
Re: (Score:3)
Well that, and the amount of bullshit dropped around the place...
Are we talking about Slashdot now?
Re: (Score:2)
Well that, and the amount of bullshit dropped around the place...
Nah that's just how you tell you're in the right wing of the field if you can't see the sun. It can save your life one day.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Glad to see that Facebook are reading Comrade Stalin's writing with such diligence.
Re: (Score:2)
This is word for word the first comment after the original story. However, as both commenters are named "Scott" it may not be plagurism but rather comment reuse.
Re: (Score:2)
Cops are not liable for anything like that. They have no duty to protect people from harm, self inflicted or otherwise. https://www.law.cornell.edu/su... [cornell.edu] being the key decision.
But they'll swarm on anything involving a someone who is mentally ill - and being suicidal qualifies for that - since there's a good chance they'll get to get their jollies shooting the person who likely won't follow instructions because they are mentally ill.
Re: (Score:2)
He clearly stated that he intended to take his life. I'm glad he was detained. A first repsonder is not in a position to decide if someone who just threatened suicide is telling the truth or not when they deny it.
What in the actual fuck does taking one's own life have to do with the police and on what grounds do you even consider detaining someone for a thought crime that someone intends to commit on ones self? How the hell should someone be held liable if you actually do off yourself? What is the alternative? Arrest the person and throw them in jail? Did suicide become illegal at some point and what is the proposed punishment if it has been?
None of what you said makes any sense at all in our legal framework. Or any
Re: (Score:2)
There have been prior cases, such as one woman who posted that she was going to kill herself. She quickly gathered over 1,000 followers, many of them egging her on. Not ONE person called the authorities. She killed herself.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But they can certainly contribute to the bad decision.
Re: (Score:2)
But they can certainly contribute to the bad decision.
Implying without context that it was a bad decision...
Re: (Score:2)
Given that practically everyone who somehow survives expresses regret for the attempt and how few try it again, it seems likely that it's a bad decision.
Note we're not talking about people with terminal medical conditions here.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahhh now you're adding the missing bit of context :-)
Re:He got what he deserved. (Score:4, Informative)
I guess you've never been there. Major depression is an illness, not "the blues". It pushes people to suicide.
Re: (Score:2)
Major depression is not a person and hence isn't being referenced by the "no one" claim.
If I die from cancer it is 100% my fault and not the fault of the people who told me "not to worry about it" and "doctor's are terrible, don't see them".
Re: He got what he deserved. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
welcome to thailand where it's regular that people shoot themselves several times to commit suicide and I suspect someone "made" them "do" it.
or this case of a russian stabbing himself 7 times.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There have also been cases of paint being green.
The premise -- collectivism (Score:4, Insightful)
is of course, that you do not own your existence. So if you "threaten" suicide, you may be forced to continue living.
I predict that there will be very little overall objection to this premise in the discussion that follows, as the present culture is rapidly converging toward the complete realization of the nightmare "the personal is the political" in which every aspect of everyone's life is going to be everyone else's business. With the individual a bit player.
Exist, dammit, or we'll put you in prison!
Re: (Score:2)
The people posting to Facebook about suicide want/need attention. So how does Facebook deal with this? Socially fucking isolate them??? Well done, Facebook! Now, I personally think more people should "just do
Re: (Score:2)
The idea that those who talks (or in this case: posts to facebook) about suicide just wants attention is bullshit. As is your idea of "true" suicidal people - most of them can't plan ahead. Most suicide attempts are impulsive.
Instead of regurgitating myths try reading some.
Re:The premise -- collectivism (Score:5, Insightful)
Nah, some people just give a shit about people who are not themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, not to let research get in your way, but the vast majority of suicides are the result of (a) fleeting desire and (b) opportunity. To wit, those stupid "anti-jumping" fences you see on bridges? Those lower suicide rates - not move them. Therefore, preventing someone from committing suicide is a good thing. Usually, they will be happy about it in the future and will keep living. If they really, really want to die, they will find another way that doesn't allow you to prevent it.
It's entirely possibl
Re: (Score:3)
Well, not to let research get in your way, but the vast majority of suicides are the result of (a) fleeting desire and (b) opportunity. To wit, those stupid "anti-jumping" fences you see on bridges? Those lower suicide rates - not move them. Therefore, preventing someone from committing suicide is a good thing.
I feel you're jumping the gun on that conclusion, because it would justify essentially all kinds of nanny-state behavior on what an alleged future self might want. The twenty-something me did a lot of things thirty-something me wouldn't have and didn't do a lot of things I would have, but that was past-me's choice. And I'm going to pass along my choices to forty-something me (hopefully) but I don't know what he'll think of them. Heck, hangover-me often thinks last night's party-me could have skipped those l
Oh, well that's okay then. (Score:2, Insightful)
I didn't really believe that the fire department would come when I pulled the alarm, so I ran a "test".
Who do all these people keep insisting that my actions have to have consequences?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't really believe that the fire department would come when I pulled the alarm, so I ran a "test".
Who do all these people keep insisting that my actions have to have consequences?
The consequence of false fire alarms are a fine for an incorrect call-out.
The consequence of a false suicide alarm is spending 3days in a mental asylum and getting a blood test for TB, HIV, and other diseases?
I don't think anyone here is saying there shouldn't be consequences for what he did. But WTF were they doing to him other than giving him a free health check and pushing a potentially unstable person over the edge by detaining them in quite bizarre circumstances?
Re: (Score:2)
I am saying there shouldn't be consequences for what he did. Nothing on Facebook is trustworthy. Nothing done by Facebook is trustworthy. Burning Facebook to the ground, scattering the stones, and salting the earth should not have consequences.
Broken Analogy (Score:2)
Broken to a point where I'll question your sanity if you defend it. Facebook is not a Government agency, and is not a Public service. They are completely unaccountable for their actions, and completely unregulated. Facebook is a private company that makes money off of exploiting people, both with and without their knowledge. As such, you can not compare someone posting something to Facebook to pulling a fire alarm or dialing 911. They are not the same thing on any level.
The real argument here is whethe
Re: (Score:2)
The real argument here is whether or not Facebook should be monitoring individual posts to the point of being able to call 911 on a person.
From TFA:
in the meantime some unknown person who read this post informed police
So it seems they don't.
FWIW I don't believe a word of TFA.
Re:Oh, well that's okay then. (Score:4, Interesting)
Who do all these people keep insisting that my actions have to have consequences
Yes indeed, and never mind the being held 72 hours. This is now in his medical records that he's suicidal. For the rest of his life he's going to be denied certain pain killers if he breaks a leg, held for additional time if he does anything that can be remotely identified as suicidal, etc. It might be bad enough he'll eventually kill himself.
Wrong title (Score:2)
Asylum not really a 21st century term. (Score:2)
Re:Asylum not really a 21st century term. (Score:4, Informative)
Deinstitutionalization for most categories of psychiatric patients started around 1950. Psychiatric units are just another specialization in today's hospital.
There are 6 major state hospitals in California which would technically qualify as asylums these days:
Atascadero State Hospital - a hospital primarily for housing the criminally insane (AKA a forensic mental hospital)
Patton State Hospital - a forensic mental hospital
Napa State Hospital - a civil and forensic mental hospital
Coalinga State Hospital - a forensic facility for housing sexually violent predators
Harbor View House - a private civil facility operated by a non-profit
Metropolitan State Hospital - a civil and forensic mental hospital
They are not some place you get sent for a 5150 72 hour hold, and they didn't hold him the full 72 hours in any case, they held him 40 and verified that he wasn't suffering from an altered mental state due to drugs or a disorder. He was either taken to the PES (Psychiatric Emergency Services) unit at San Mateo Medical center, or he was taken to Mills Peninsula Medical Center, which are the San Mateo County designated 5150 receiving hospitals.
In addition, there are two other semi-major facilities, which count a bit more strongly than PES intake facilities for 5150's which are normally handled by regional medical centers, since they deal with longer term holds:
John George Psychiatric Pavilion - which is primarily used for PES 5150's and longer term holds
Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute at UCSF - a psychiatric teaching hospital
Frankly? I'm surprised they took him on it; if he hadn't shown up on their doorstep (he visited the police station for another matter, and admitted to having made the Facebook posting), then they probably wouldn't have. I've had a hard enough time getting services for people who were obviously decompensating or off their meds, in the street in Santa Clara, and the county mental health wouldn't send out a social worker to help them out, unless I basically called the cops on them to have them arrested. There was really no call for that, as they weren't actually hurting anyone, just talking to their voices outside a Subway Sandwich shop or whatever.
But that kind of B.S. attitude would not have flow where I grew up and volunteered: there, they would have sent a social worker. California's mental health services have been going down hill a lot faster than they have in other states.
Re: (Score:2)
I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means (Score:4, Interesting)
Unless they track them down and go all clockwork-orange on them I don't really see how the user can be "made" to do anything. They can just you know, put down the phone and shoot themselves.
In fact a coworker lost a friend this way last week. Apparently he (the victim) had been talking to his friends about it for hours on FB and then killed himself. I assume this is all actually FB trying to stave off lawsuits, but I don't see that they could do more, nor that they could afford to ignore the issue.
Re: (Score:2)
I assume this is all actually FB trying to stave off lawsuits, but I don't see that they could do more, nor that they could afford to ignore the issue.
Doubtful, since when have you heard of a social networking site getting sued for failing to prevent a crime by snooping on its users?
Far more likely this is actually a sincere attempt to save lives. The US has 41,000 suicides annually [cdc.gov]. Assume 50% of those people are on FB, and 10% of those actually post stuff that's a really strong indicators (guesstimates). That would mean that every year there are 2,000 deaths that FB could prevent if they intervened early enough.
The realization you could save thousands o
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
The right thing to do. (Score:5, Informative)
Five days ago, when SFGate reported this story, it was made quite clear that Tusch's friends were not in on the hoax and took it quite seriously ---
and that someone reported it to the police independently of Facebook.
A mans fake suicide post gets him detained [sfgate.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Five days ago, when SFGate reported this story, it was made quite clear that Tusch's friends were not in on the hoax and took it quite seriously ---
and that someone reported it to the police independently of Facebook.
A mans fake suicide post gets him detained [sfgate.com]
There you go, bringing facts into a /. discussion. How are we to have righteous indignation over the Man's actions when you go and do that? Think of the /. posters, damn it.
The police have to treat such a threat seriously. Given the situation and his age he falls into a risk profile that says he might be serious about this, and according to TFA he didn't tell police he was just "testing" FB and failed to convince them he wasn't serious about committing suicide.Just because he posted on FB people seem to thi
What else are they watching? (Score:2)
I urge everyone to close all real name accounts and halt all activity on facebook not directly related to agitation of political ideas immediately. All cordination of facebook activities from this point on should be cordinated off site.
dangerous stuff (Score:2, Interesting)
This is exactly why I will NEVER use Facebook.
Your phone gets nicked. Thief thinks will be funny to send you to the loony bin, posts suicidal thoughts. Before you notice your phone is even gone you are in the asylum. Will they believe you when you say you never posted? Not without interrogation, mental stability analysis, and perhaps even some psych drugs being shoved down your throat.
Same thing with terror threats, personal threats, all which could land you in JAIL because your password got compromised
All I wanted was a Pepsi (Score:3)
I have found that the people who do not think they will be, and want most not to be confined, are. Society is against you. Don't you forget it.
Test passed (Score:2)
Sortof.
Is the linked article on techworm a fake? (Score:2)
"Testing" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm curious about the "very inhumane conditions". About the only thing I can find about the detail of his detention was the multiple blood tests that occurred (hardly inhumane, as they're part of assessing and assuring his health) and that he had to sleep on the floor.
No indication of whether that was forced or incidental, whether the floor was padded at the time, whether it was part of reducing/removing the means by which he might commit suicide, etc.
So really it's all just hearsay.
So negative feelings are sufficient grounds to lock people up
Explicitly stating your
Re: (Score:3)
Secondly, what is missing from the story is this: did he actually have Bank America trouble?
He did. This stunt was to draw attention to his mortgage problems, not a test per se:
San Mateo police took Tusch in their custody and inquired him regarding the post which Tusch confirmed was written by him however he also made it clear to the police that he was not planning for a suicide, this was just to release his frustrations regarding the First Amendment made by Bank America and he wanted to get this in public.
The whole "testing" is a post hoc excuse for pulling a stunt that should have him charged with public mischief.
Re: (Score:2)
Should there be gatekeepers to opensource that decide who may and who may not contribute.
Get over yourself, Hans Reiser.
Re: (Score:3)
Freedom of association... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nice try, dipshit. Facebook users are not a protected class.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Try posting that on Facebook.