Borderline Families

Yes, CCHR is Scientology funded. Szaz of course has his own mind but I don’t know too much about his connections with scientology or what his justifications might have been.

Don’t give up though on finding lots of independent voices who aren’t part of cultish groups. There are lots of such people.

It is abuse. I’ve seen my daughter restrained on a gurney that had lacking velcro straps so they tied her arm with a piece of material at her wrist and tied her arm to the side so the arm was above her head. That, for “mental health court” where she was parked in a side room for hours. This is just one depiction of the abuse, because that is what it is, and so are the drugs used as chemical restraints esp in those settings it is done on purpose.

It may not be very well known that Scientology does a lot of work in prisons to help prisoners get off psychtropic meds. I don’t know much about Scientology, but I do like that part of what they are doing.
When I look at the CCHR website, it raises red flags to me. I wouldn’t be surprised if Scientology has some involvement with it, but as the saying goes, politics makes strange bedfellows. Depending on what agenda you want to push, you will get into bed with people who share that agenda. We all do it. Thomas Szasz has been maligned for years by those who are just fine with the idea that mental illness is a brain disease. He is widely praised by people like me who think that he knows what he is talking about.

I’m on Facebook under my real name, so will have to create a new account to get in on the fun stuff of reading your exchanges. I don’t have a particular problem with psychology – I generally think it’s better value than psychiatry and definitely more client focused. However, for myself, I think it is healthy to be skeptical of even psychology. Nobody knows the human mind and there are so many competing schools of thought. For the psychiatrists I deal with I reserve a certain place in me that says -one day, they will cross a line and that will be the end of that relationship. It has already happened with a psychiatrist that I really admire. Maybe what it gets down to is that nobody knows my son like I do, and even I only “think” I know him.

I never said I was vehemently antipsychitry. People can do what they want, I write about what I have seen which is pretty bad, and ppl such as Mark PS and Susan from going thru hell having been inside psych wards as patients have seen it, as well as others. I’ve never been involved w any psychologists to have an opinion, because frankly there are none or therapists in the psych wards I’ve been to with my daughter. As far as the antipsychiatry “label”, (it’s another label)I am against the unethical data producing to market medications and the corruption behind the scenes that get the drugs on the market…and the marketing targets being children especially. I am against drugging of children with antipsychotics due to the negative outcomes of growing brains and bodies by use of drugs not long term use studied and after watching my daughter live 1/2 her life on them w a less than best outcome. To be labeled antipsychiatry will often shut down conversations and bring on negative commentary lumping us into of all things “you are a scientologist”, of which I am not, could care less about that cult. The other organization listed here did produce a few good videos called “making a killing” which show kids on psych meds, in that respect who cares who made the films, to educate the public of the dangers of psych meds.

The fact that people have information regarding these drugs now makes it worse when they choose to medicate their children. The information speaks for itself.

Here’s a psychologist point of view by a popular pharma funded website
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/05/10/mad-pride-movement-meets-in-toronto/

Over the years, professionals such as Grohol and Carlat have lumped many of us (bloggers)into a ‘antipsychiatry’ crowd and quite often refer to us in that negative way, as if we are villains. When in fact we are voices of people who lived the horrors of psych med use or witnessed loved ones hurt by it. Dismissed. Just like the patients in psych wards.

For reference, here is the video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9083404572198377643# Making a Killing (not the Carl Elliott article)by CCHR

Much ado about nothing, whether CCHR has ties to Scientology or not is really a deflection issue. I have heard it a million times in every mental health forum possible. If you happen question the practices of psychiatry or the dangerous drugging paradigm you’re shrugged off as one of those crazy cult Scientology people or as one of those “anti-psychiatry” people, as if that was somehow a horrible thing to be.

Psychiatry is the huge and dangerous cult on the block that people should have their focus upon. They don’t use God, for they are Godless, they uses pills, and call them selves their own God. Yet, people just love to sink their teeth into the deflection issues so they don’t have to deal with the ten thousand pound gorilla standing in the room.

I’m absolutely anti-psychiatry, that is a conclusion reached based on the evidence. You would only have to analyze their actions, their outcomes, the damage they do, and the false science they use in formulating this rational position. As far as psychology goes, it’s a real toss up today. Psychology has for the most part walked the fence in embracing of a propagandized modern mental health pandemic (you have a great example written on the pages of this blog) and the more intrusive/far reaching DSM criteria.

We know the power lies with the key opinion leaders in psychiatry and the drug lords. Psychology is just a coddled bastard step child they will tolerate if they happen follow along in lock with their cults profitable believe system.

Getting critics mired down in the Grey areas while forming their special alliances works against focusing on the issues at hand. This is exactly what the drug manufacturers and psychiatry expect and rely upon. Divide and conquer has always been a successful tactic for all the ages.

I decided to not use CCHR’s website as a primary resource, or link to it from my blogs. I do link to Thomas Szasz’ website though, and do quote him occasionally. Anyhow, I don’t have a problem with CCHR’s ties to Scientology. Their criticism of psychiatry is well-researched and waterproof, and tossing the “You only say so because you’re a Scientologist!”-”argument” at someone is nothing but a personal attack, and has got nothing to do in a factual discussion. Nevertheless, CCHR often makes use of the same “tactics” psychiatry makes use of: fear mongering and polemics. We critics have the facts on our side. Why devalue them by making use of an extremely polemical style in our presentation of them?

@Rossa Forbes My problem with psychology is that most of it still today is based on Freud’s theories/psychoanalysis, and unfortunately not on his early ones, but on those he developed to replace his Seduction Theory, and that, by and large, do blame the victim. One of psychoanalysis’ (Freudian in particular) basic beliefs is that “the client is always wrong”. That is, whatever the client says, it means something entirely different. If you for instance criticize the therapist, get angry with him/her, it’s most certainly “transference”, you’re projecting – your own flaws into the therapist. It is not that you react to your therapist repeating any of the violence/abuse that has been done to you in your past, which also is a kind of transference, but, contrary to the first mentioned, a kind that validates the client and his/her past and present experience.

Psychology has developed a set of ingenious theories, based on Freud’s, that, all in all, could be called master suppression techniques. In fact, the idea that “the client is always wrong” is equivalent to biopsychiatry’s idea of the brain diseased individual, suffering from meaningless madness. In psychology it’s all in your head, in biopsychiatry it’s all in your genes and brain.

Therapy can be, and often is, just as toxic as psychiatry, even on a physiological level. I know people, who suffer from CFS due to having been heavily retraumatized by their therapist. But, of course, they can’t prove therapy to be the cause, so, it’s probably all in their head…

I had a look at the exam requirements for psychology in Denmark the other day. It consists 100% of “expert”-authored literature. Nowhere are students required to read as much as one single testimony authored by an expert by experience, or at least one of the very, very few papers that focus on these people’s experience as valid (and there actually is almost no research done into the “side effects” of therapy, while I know innumerable people, who have been more or less seriously harmed, retraumatized, and assaulted by their therapists). Of course not. Since these people are “always wrong” (while the therapist-narcissists are always right… ). So, psychology (in general, there are of course exceptions) is no more client-focussed than biopsychiatry, and I think, we need a radical change, a radical “de-professionalization”, also in the field of psychology, if we want to make sure that people are really helped and not harmed by therapy, too.

The woman in the NYT article suffered from a few factors – she was young and naive – she has been indoctrinated into this by what she sees all around her. I am way older than her, so when my children were in school back in the late 80′s and 90s, all the kids in school seemed to have a label and were lining up for their ritalin at lunch time. I didn’t think too deeply about it at the time. I had no experience with psychiatry. When my middle son acted up, we finally took him to a psychologist and it was over and done with in about three sessions. (We changed. He remained his wonderful, but challenging self.) The mother did what others are all doing. If I blame anything, nobody has any business having children without a husband, particularly at that age. Recipe for disaster. There are services for people like her, but she would have had to first figure out first that her situation was the problem. She could have taken a parenting course. Few people do. Instead, her environment told her that her kids were the problem, not her.

Hi, Marian, You are as usual, right. However, when it comes to psychologists, at least the client gets to pick and choose (and fire) more than with a court ordered psychiatrist. Most psychologists aren’t licensed to push drugs. The public (me included) can be pretty illiterate when it comes to knowing who to trust.@Marian

Thanks, will check her out!

@Kris I think, society won’t be able to really help anyone, unless it realizes that it is itself that is in dire need of help, and that the people who get labelled aren’t the problem themselves, but the ones who desperately try to alert society to its own dysfunctionality by reacting to it, protesting it. We have created a culture that is extremely and increasingly inhumane in that it has waged war on nature, not least human nature. Psychiatry as an institution is probably the most insidious, vicious, and efficient weapon in this war. It has people turn against their own nature, against themselves. Helping people would require society to realize that it isn’t “mental illness”, or criminality, or substance abuse, for that sake, that is a danger to humanity, but our civilization’s own insane, suicidal behavior, which “mental illness”, criminality, and substance abuse are nothing but reactions to and reflections of. So far, I don’t see it happen, though. More and more people get labelled, many of them are actually begging for a label — it is absolutely mind-boggling to witness young people, teenagers, writing on their blogs about how much they look forward to their next appointment with their shrink, who, hopefully!, eventually will have a label (and a prescription) for them, how wonderful it was to have received the label (and the prescription), and, if you venture to tell them that maybe, just maybe, they aren’t really ill, don’t need to suffer side effects for the rest of their lives, you get the “How dare you, you insensitive bastard!”-response. Imagine someone who’s been tested for cancer, or any other real illness, respond like that to the message that the test result is negative… — and they get labelled more and more early. Look at this for instance: http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2010/09/06/early_warning_signs_of_schizophrenia/, and shudder. Almost 3 more years to go before it, maybe (or probably… ), will be in the DSM, but they’re already selling it, wholesale.

We’d need radical social and cultural change. But I fear, it won’t happen without a catastrophe. It has never before in humanity’s history happened without catastrophes. Unfortunately, by now we’ve developed the technical, chemical, etc. skills and means to make it a globally devastating catastrophe.

Thinking Critically About Scientology, Psychiatry, and Their Feud

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-e-levine/thinking-critically-about_b_125019.html

Important article…and some thoughts on the politics of psychiatric oppression by Will Hall:

Finally I want to point to something I think is the problem of the survivor movement. We identify primarily as people harmed by drugs, diagnosis, and force. As a result we do not have a politics around homelessness, criminal justice issues, health care coverage, and employment. We contributed to our own isolation when we narrowed our agenda. The original survivor activists were part of broad popular movements for social justice. We’ve lost those alliances. One of the most wrongheaded directions I’ve seen recently is how the right wing family values movement has gone against screening as invading privacy, and the survivor movement has felt comfortable allying with them. That’s been a mistake. Our allies should be broader progressive disability movement, the prison reform / abolition movement, the homeless movement, and healthcare reform movements.

Personally I feel wary about aligning myself with the right or other extreme groups who happen to share an abhorrence of psychotropics…it’s not just about being politically correct…often times the motivation behind a similar political goal can be grossly different and it pays to be aware of such things.

@Rossa Forbes Yes, in theory you can fire your therapist at any time. In practice though, this is often just as difficult as walking out on an abusive partner, involving a lot of fear, as Kris writes, and also feelings of guilt.

This is a valid question Kris; one I asked myself. Personally – I’ve chosen to make my choices based on one criteria: anyone who is “all for” or “all against” any one thing or who attacks another s opinion or dismisses another s experience I choose to not become involved with.

Again – we create change by talking, sharing, educating those who can hear not arguing with those who won’t listen. As soon as the finger pointing starts – I walk away. I really try to not get into the “black and white” thinking behind a lot of anti psychiatry – although have much respect for those who carry their message respectfully. I”m just cautious about jumping on any more “bandwagons” that have the message “we are the only way”. Everyone has a right to be informed and to choose – or not choose – their path even if I don’t agree with it or would not choose the same for myself.

This is why I’ve connected with the current “recovery” movement. While I don’t agree with everything they offer or say – they are open to hearing about the idea of non medical options etc. This movement in my opinion is way too influenced by pharma and “disease” (ie “recovery”) – but the people are open to the message and to me that is what matters. Pharma may try to influence “recovery” but this is the idea – that we are all free to choose vs being told we have no other choice than to be drugged into a stupor when we face life issues and distress.

This organization (CHHR) touts “help” to survivors but they had no resources to offer me as a psychiatric survivor in the way of legal resources or recourse; it appeared to me that CHHR touts that they “help” survivors but when it came down to it they just wanted my story to add to their archives and use to obtain funding for their “cause”.

Susan, you say that CHHR doesn’t provide legal resources or recourse, but there it is, under Alternative, a list of law firms and other resources. From my perusing of their website, it looks okay to me. It is trying to get people to help themselves and provides some links and articles that should help people get started. At the end of the day, nobody helped me until I began to help myself to what was available. I like the motto of the website doctoryourself.com (the world’s largest health homesteading website): “If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. This especially includes your health care.” @Susan

Rossa; I appreciate what you have to say and thought I had done my own due dilgence – which is why I agreed to talk with them. They were eager to add my “story” to their rolls as more evidence but their response about legal assistance was to look in my local yellow pages that they did not have attorneys to refer me to that would or could even refer me to someone in my area or offer me any kind of direction to take legal action.

I had already attempted to contact local attorneys for malpractice including those that advertised psychiatric malpractice. The response I got was that once I told them that I had been misdiagnosed and in a drugged stupor for all these years – no one ever called me back or was willing to talk to me beyond a first phone call.

In addition to the legal issue – I’ve spent the past nearly 3 years in withdrawals from all the drugs I was on, Rosa; in the first 18 months I was rarely coherent and my thoughts were completely disorganized and physically exhausted and in constant pain from the withdrawals.. While I was willing to advocate for myself – I truly needed help that was not available. Iowa’s statute of limitations for legal action ran out for me in 2009.

Having been disabled by the drugs I was told I had to have “for life” nearly 20 years ago – I became a recieptient of the welfare roles because I became completely disabled once starting “drug therapy”. I have no resources to hire an attorney. I entered the “mental health system” a healthy productive 30 something with no health problems and woke up when abruptly taken off the drugs in 2007 to find myself nearly 20 years older and facing discrimination at every turn as I have attempted to reclaim the life that was stolen from me by this pseudo science.

So I turned to this organization and discovered they are taking in money, collecting stories and offer no real resources to the victims of this joke called psychiatry. Their website looks good and they seem to tout hope – and I agree with a lot of what they say – which is why I initially turned to them.

What I found was quite different than what their promotions presented. In the end – I decided that any organization that is focussed on creating dissension instead of creating solutions was not where I wanted to spend my energy cultivating anger. I am interested in cultivating change. The fact that CCHR attempts to hide that they are actually connected to scientology for me causes me to question their authenticity and intention.

I”m glad for you’re experience has been different Rosa and completely agree that we need to be responsible for our own lives and outcomes which is why I have chosen to not associate myself or my message with either Scientology or CCHR.

Just to clarify what scientologists actually believe: that all mental problems are caused by space aliens called body thetans, who have been hanging around the earth for millions of years. They think that all psychological problems can be cured through their e-meter machines by a process called “auditing.” E-meters basically measure galvanic skin response like machines used in biofeedback. As you go through with their “cure,” the procedures get more and more expensive – eventually costing thousands of dollars per treatment. Oh, and they have a god too – a volcano God named Xemu. Very anti-Christian, by the way.

Just so you know.