Actually, this isn't the case at all.
Laws favor (in fact, are absolutely against) people being held against their will unless they are proven dangers to themselves or to others. Paranoid schizophrenics, unlike the popular fiction, aren't raving lunatics.
What's that mean? A manid-depressive/bipolar person who goes into a manic rage can be detained until they're lucid/sedated, but once that occurs they HAVE to be let go. No if's and's or but's.
This is a HUGE source of conflict doctors, psychiatrists and psychologists because these people, including the previous example, cannot be held or forced to take their medicine, as they should be (manic-depressives are notorious for refusing to take lithium to amazing extremes).
Realistically, the only times that they can receive treatment is if they are in jail, and that's actually a very small percentage of cases.
As ExCyber previously mentioned, mental illnesses are taken with a grain of salt in this society (depression, a serious affliction, doesn't get treated nearly as often as it should). Case law like Tarasoff further highlights such a mockery of the profession.
Asylums (or what few there are left in this country) only take/hold people that have been committed either by their own cognizance OR by their family members. And again, the same rules apply - they can go whenever they want. Unless there's an extreme case, they cannot be restrained.
This is a well documented 'problem' (I use that term loosely - I think it's a significant *threat* to the health care profession, others think it's a violation of rights and that rot). You may do yourself well, deLuxe, by looking it up.
