As you may or may not remember, I recently wrote a column about gun ownership and people with mental illnesses. It got some people riled up. I used to hate it when people disagreed with something I wrote--I felt as though they didn't like me-- but now I enjoy it. It's the best way to create dialogue, and when you talk about guns, the arguments get pretty fierce.

Below is a response to that column, from the Mental Health Association of Southeastern Pennsylvania's Susan Rogers, who takes issue with my point of view. Susan and I go way back, and she's always been very supportive of me. So I'm especially pleased to hear from her, rather than, say, an angry NRA member. Let Susan know your thoughts on this issues. I suspect the healthy debate will continue for a long time.

Dear Liz,

As you know, I am a big fan of your blog and also love your PW column!

That said, I was disappointed by your column on guns (“Bullet Point: Guns and mental illness are a lethal combination,” PW 5/2/07), particularly by the following: “Whether we’re talking about depression that leads to suicide or the kind of mental troubles that engender mass slaughter, the fundamental problem is the same: We don’t effectively keep guns out of the hands of people who—through no fault of their own and for organic reasons they have no control over—should not be allowed to own them.”

I fear that one result of your article will be to feed stigma, which is largely based on the public’s fear that people with mental illnesses are violent and that we don’t recover. I wish that, at the very least, you had provided some information about how rare violence committed by people with mental illnesses is. For example, here is a quote from a Duke University researcher, Jeffrey Swanson, Ph.D., referring to his study “Three Risk Factors Cited in Violent Behavior Among People With Severe Mental Illness,” published in the American Journal of Public Health in September 2002: “Violent crimes committed by psychiatric patients become big headlines and reinforce the social stigma and rejection felt by many individuals who suffer from mental illness. But our findings suggest that serious violence is the rare exception among all people with psychiatric disorders. The public perception that people who are mentally ill are typically violent is unfounded.”

And, of course, I have lots more such quotes. For example, according to a study by noted researcher John Monahan, “Clearly, mental health status makes at best a trivial contribution to the overall level of violence in society.”

Here is a link to a fact sheet on violence and mental illness on the Web site of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Among the points it makes is that people with psychiatric disabilities are far more likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crime.

A study by researchers at North Carolina State University and Duke University found that “people with severe mental illness — schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or psychosis — are 21⁄2 times more likely to be attacked, raped or mugged than the general population.”

Frankly, I wish no one could buy guns! But, since they can, I am fearful that, when you start denying people with mental illnesses the rights that other Americans have, it’s a slippery slope. Clearly, any gun sales should be strictly regulated – which they’re not – and involve references, background checks and a waiting period. However, the thing is, as the American Psychiatric Association pointed out in a 1994 fact sheet, “Research has shown that the vast majority of people who are violent do not suffer from mental illnesses.”

Thanks for allowing me to respond!

Susan Rogers
Director of Special Projects
Mental Health Association of Southeastern Pennsylvania