🇳🇱
Youd need a standardized way, and frankly psychiatry juat gets it wrong too often, e en if i did trust the govt to act responsibly i dont think the medical institutions are able to reliably and accirately diagnose people. False positives are rampant, which isnt so harmful for a person seeking help(you usually try deveral competing diagnosis ubtil one works). But in a gun ownership setting where the first, and likely wrong, diagnosis sticks... yea no sorry that just sounds like a bad move.
Why would the first diagnosis stick? I would expect the setup to be roughly along the lines "if you think it's wrong, you can appeal, but then a larger number of doctors get to examine you and their majority opinion is adopted". In such a setup, ignoring issues of cost, you'd be asking for a consensus of a random(?) subset of local psychologists. Are you pointing at the cost issues or something else?
@robryk @admitsWrongIfProven
Thats true, first diagnosis may not need to stick.
So how about this, handke it like a court. A person takes a standard test with standard questions. If all 12 of 12 randomly selected doctors who arent allowed to talk all come up with ide tical diagnosis it sticks. The person can appeal once a year and if even one doctor disagrees with the diagnosis the diagnosis is repealed.
I dont personally support this due to other concerns of abuse. But if this woukd be at all workable youd need a blind diagnosis requiring consensus.