There's always a lot that can be said for the levels of equality - or the lack of, in multiple situations/scenarios, for whatever reason there is likely to be a potential bias for discrimination. However, if someone is known to have a format of mental illness, and break the law, should they not be treated as a criminal would be? "Oh no, we can't do that, we could make their mental wellbeing worse" There's so much of this 'walking on eggshells' that I find personally is a bit - prejudiced and causes segregation. If anyone is astute enough with the way the laws are in place, they would be covered should it be proven that they weren't in a frame of mind suitable enough to make their decisions. (Refer to The Mental Capacity Act if in UK, or similar laws in your own country). After all - everyone who is guilty of breaking the law, is guilty regardless of the state of their health, be it physical or psychological. Would it not be considered a form of discrimination to allow those who are covered by the Mental Capacity Act to effectively 'get away' with their actions where a law-abiding citizen would not? An interesting topic - one with a potentially diverse range of answers. But this one I have wondered for a while... What makes them 'different' when it comes to breaking the law?