I can reference the others.

On post 17.
For sure rule out medical issues first.
On the others it would depend on the severity of the symptoms and a persons history. If a person got fired and his wife left him and he had no history and he goes in then I would say don't use meds at all or only as a very last resort. Do all the other non med things.

If someone has family history, years of personal history, and comes in with suicidal plans then I would do all of them at the same time. The main thing would be to get them out of crisis but I thinks everything should be used provided the person is willing to take meds.
Some who is not educated is more likely to just follow doctors orders. However for many people their condition is so serious and they are so miserable that they want meds even though they are well educated on the risks. That has been my case. Quality of life outweighs risk. If it is true AAP's shorten life expectancy, which I don't know is proven, someone may not care if they are working and have vastly improved their life.

With serious bi polar I and schizophrenia I would lean more toward meds up front along with every thing else. Providing the person is willing to take meds. For sure with all other non med means.

One big area of controversy is whether someone in a full blown manic episode who is causing chaos should be forced on meds. One girl just posted on her brother who is diagnosed bi polar I but will not take meds and he is taking a baseball bat to every thing in the house and she fears her safety. Normally he is nothing like that but he is having an episode. He is not taking meds so you can't blame that. What do you do?

It's very much a case by case thing based on history and circumstances.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk