Keep schtum Mike, don't get involved, these things have a way of turning around a biting you.

Thanks people for your responses, I am surprised, but somewhat pleased, the majority said leave well alone and that is what I have decided to do. I figure the guy is functioning on a daily basis and there are normally people in the vicinity if things go seriously wrong for him.

I am a big advocate of living our life as we choose providing we do not impinge upon others but I do suspect he may not be receiving the state benefits to which he is entitled - ho hum... cannot save the world. I'll try to connect with him again before I leave in a few days but I'm not hopeful.

Possum3 wrote:

---

Many reclusive persons suffer a range of psychological disorders, many are not on Government systems owing to their immigration status or Police/Legal status, some just want to be alone far from society and it's complications.

I would do what Cuppa has suggested; try another casual engagement - The old "I have too many fish" or "I bought extra for visitors that didn't come" - would you do me a favour and take some to save me wasting them? Is always an opening.

---

 I agree, nothing to lose by being friendly. 

 I have to reply to your post Dorian. As you know I worked in mental health for many years & I know that your description of how you found it is accurate. This is the dominant 'medical model' in psychiatry & whilst it helps a few, I feel, like you, that it does more harm than good. Incarceration & drugs are pretty much all it offers. It is the result of two things - primarily the 'medical model' (the realm of the expert) which is based upon the belief that all mental illness stems from physical causes (eg. brain chemical interactions) even if those causes are not well understood. This is what led to many of the often awful, but occasionally successful 'physical treatments' which remained prevalent in my early days of training. ECT, modified insulin therapy, anti-psychotic drugs & lobotomys, along with anxiolytics & anti-depressants. All of those had/have a place, but were commonly used because that was all there was/is to try within the 'medical model'.  Some have improved over the years, but the significant part of what is often still missing is precisely what you have identified. Empathy & time.  

I was lucky enough to work in areas where 'talking therapies' (Psychotherapy) dominated for most of my career, & subscribed to a movement within psychiatry which became known as 'anti-psychiatry. More specifically my work within family therapy was informed by what became known as systemic & narrative therapy. Expertise was a different sort, it was expertise in developing useful understanding together with the client rather than one of 'knowing' & doing stuff to them. 

In one place one role I had was as 'Intake worker' for a number of years. All referrals came to me. Together with colleagues we developed a model of triage which had therapeutic aims, in an environment where waiting lists were becoming ever longer. We called it SST - Single Session Therapy, in the belief that sometimes we could provide what was needed in a one off session without need for damaging labelling (diagnosis).If the single session proved inadequate the person/family went back onto the waiting list, but often the SST was remarkably worthwhile. It didn't sit well with management though, because government  cutbacks had reached a stage where Mental health funding was required to have a diagnosis before funding was made available, & here we were doing our very best to provide what was needed whilst keeping the potential patients out of the Mental Health system. 

There is a circular pattern in psychiatry which comes & goes according to government views & the country's prosperity or otherwise. Medical model is cheaper, especially when diagnosis can be reduced to checklists of symptoms. Talking to people is more time consuming & costly. When money is short talking & time are viewed as unnecessary luxuries. 

One (of many) similar experiences to yours:

As the intake worker I had received a cross referral from the education & social services department who were pulling their hair out over an 11 year old boy who's behaviour was described as as 'out of control' both in the classroom & in the locality where he was living. He was aggressive & uncontainable in the temporary 'respite' social services facility where he had been placed.

Based upon the info I was able to obtain, learning that the boys parents had been through an acrimonious divorce with the only child, the boy, having been weaponised by both parents & then placed with a grandmother it seemed pretty obvious that rather than the diagnosis of ADHD or Behaviour Disorder which was being bandied around that his behaviours were a childish means of letting anyone & everyone know that he was distressed & unhappy. I chose not to meet with him, on the basis that he had already had enough folk giving him the message that he was 'damaged goods' & I felt continuing to 'make him the problem' was unlikely to be helpful. The professionals who were pulling out there hair needed to debrief - but they already had regular consultations from our service where they could do that. Instead I chose to offer an appointment to the grandmother. 

It was a long session, almost 3 hours if I recall correctly, just her & me. It became clear during that time that she felt her parenting of her daughter had failed, & this in part contributed to her daughters failed parenting & failed marriage, but more than that she had never expected to once again be thrust back into a parenting role with her grandson, & whilst loving him very much felt many uncertainties about whether she was up to the task. I could see her love & I could see her fear. What I couldn't see was any acceptance on her part that there was something wrong with the boy. This was a beacon of light within the whole sad & sorry situation. 

My primary intervention, apart from 'hearing her' was a tearful (on both our parts) hugging her & telling her that in different circumstances I would have been more than happy for her to have been parenting a child of mine. Corny? perhaps, but it was precisely what was needed. No labels, no diagnosis confirming to the young lad he was the problem everyone else was telling he was. No psychiatric history to haunt him. 

I bumped into the grandmother in the street some 6 or more months later. Embarrassingly I didn't recognise her, but she recognised me & was very keen to tell me me how much difference our meeting had made. Her grandson had been living back with her since shortly after our meeting, & he had now settled right down & was attending school without any problems, in fact doing quite well. A different school where the previous history did not dominate, & knowing he was wanted & welcome living with gran.  Social services were no longer involved.

In another setting the boy could have very easily have been diagnosed with ADHD & put on Ritalin but I feel confident it would have had a far less positive outcome for him, his family & the ongoing support services which no doubt would have remained part of his life for a long time. 

This is one tiny anecdote among many which corroborates Dorian's post, but hopefully also informs there is a stream which exists within psychiatry which dislikes the mainstream Medical model. My story is from a Child psychiatry setting, but I have friends still working within small pockets of adult psychiatry ready to expand their services if/when funding models next allow it. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-psychiatry 

https://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Psychiatry-Electroshock-Biochemical-Theories-ebook/dp/B017RC8FZA