Warning to Parents: Psychiatry is How Kids Get High and Die in the USA


I previously reported numerous statistics which implicated psychiatry’s creation of ‘ADHD’ as the root cause of our heroin epidemic. Overdoses are killing so many young adults that they have shortened the mean lifespan of white Americans.1 It is likely only for whites, since white kids are the only ones commonly ‘treated’ for ‘ADHD.’ Stimulants are the drug class most prescribed to teenagers;2 nearly 10% of American male teens are started and led down a path of lifelong drug addiction via their being given daily stimulants for “ADHD.”3 (Stimulants sedate young children but produce euphoria and are addictive for teenagers and adults.) Doctors do this despite or perhaps because these are the prescription drugs teenagers love to abuse the most.4 These amphetamines then often become gateway drugs to opiate pill use, which can then lead to heroin.

Doctors try to justify their actions by claiming that addiction is less likely to occur if addictive drugs are dispensed/supervised by doctors to ‘treat illness’ than if obtained from dealers, parents, or friends for ‘non-medical use’ (partying). But how can a chemical know what it’s being used for and then decide to only be addictive if it’s obtained illicitly? Can it think: “I had better be on my best behavior and not cause trouble, since doc is watching closely” in one situation, and: “Doc is not around, so I can get away with being a real bad boy now. When the cat’s away, the mouse can play!” in the other?

Of course not. If a chemical is intrinsically addictive, you’ll get addicted to it if you stay on it too long, no matter how or why you get it. If a 10-ton boulder is dropped on your head, you won’t get less injured if it is done by a doctor. Besides, ADHD is not a real disease, so getting high via drugs prescribed for it isn’t real medical treatment, anyway. It’s just using drugs.

In fact, addiction is actually more likely to develop if you get stimulants from doctors — if you get them from friends or dealers, you’ll likely get only a few pills at a time due to high street cost and limited supply. It won’t be enough to get addicted right away, especially since you will probably only use them on weekends. You will have time to think that maybe it wouldn’t be a good idea to get more pills from the friend/dealer. But MDs give full-month supplies of affordable (insurance-covered) stimulants at a time, which the prescription says to use daily, and they come with indefinite refills.

Even if you plan to only use them at weekend ‘pill parties’ or all-night cram sessions before tests, with so many euphoria-giving drugs around it’ll be hard to resist taking them more often, since crashes from stimulant highs can be very debilitating/depressing. By month’s end they’ll no longer elicit euphoria, but now you will need them to curb unbearable withdrawals since you’re addicted.This explains why college students who use stimulants to aid grades actually have far lower GPAs.5

Street drug dealers and stimulant-peddling doctors both get clients high and addicted for profit. So there is really no difference between what they do except that doctors are more ‘successful’ at it, since they enjoy many advantages over illicit dealers. Doctors get away with doing it legally, so clients don’t need to put much effort, cash, or risk into getting drugs. Doctors’ clients can’t be fired for drug use, since they’re merely doing ‘needed medical treatment.’ Its legality allows it to be done openly in nice facilities that can be openly advertised. Medical degrees empower doctors to invent legitimate-sounding diseases (such as diagnosing normally immature kids with ‘ADHD’) to lure people in with easy-to-obtain drugs, while passing it off as altruistic desires to relieve the suffering from such ‘illnesses.’ If parents find out their son is scoring ‘speed’ from a meth dealer, they will get angry and stop it. But if their son is given the same amphetamine by a doctor, they will not only allow it, but will probably monitor their son daily to make sure he “takes his meds.” Youths involved in probation, child custody fights, or CPS may even have psych evals court-mandated, which then enforce “medically necessary treatment” with these addictive drugs.

MD degrees also get clients to automatically misplace their trust and faith in doctors and follow all their orders, believing: “It must be safe, effective, and necessary if a doctor prescribed it for my child.” And when withdrawal symptoms inevitably result, doctors can fool their clients into staying on drugs by saying these are really symptoms of their underlying mental illness recurring, whereas street drug clients will likely realize they’re in withdrawal and may thus consider ending their drug use. All of these advantages have enabled psychiatrists to adapt to their therapy niche getting usurped by social workers and psychologists, by usurping the drug-dealing niche from illicit drug dealers. But they are much worse than illicit dealers, since at least you know what you are getting into with illicit dealers — with doctors it may be the last thing you would expect.

So parents: Be warned and wake up — your family is under attack! Don’t offer your children for sacrifice on the altar of modern psychiatry. Biological psychiatrists don’t treat real disease. They lie about kids having disabling illnesses in order to get schools/parents to ruin their upbringings by easing all demands, doing helicopter teaching/parenting, and replacing discipline with sedatives. Then even that’s not enough, so they turn kids into addicts. These MDs are making a real killing.

Show 5 footnotes

  1. Kolata, G, and Cohen, S. “Drug Overdoses Propelling Rise in Mortality Rate of Whites” New York Times, Jan 17, 2016.
  2.  Chai, G, et al. “Trends of Outpatient Prescription Drug Utilization in U.S. Children 2002-2010” Pediatrics 2012, 130, 1, 23-31.
  3. Express Scripts “Report – Turning Attention to ADHD” Mar 12, 2014.
  4.  “Monitoring the Future Survey 2013” National Institute of Drug Abuse.
  5.  Clegg-Kraynok, et al. “Sleep Quality and Characteristics of College Students Who Use Psychostimulants Non-Medically” Sleep Medicine 2011, 12(6), 596-602.


Mad in America hosts blogs by a diverse group of writers. These posts are designed to serve as a public forum for a discussion—broadly speaking—of psychiatry and its treatments. The opinions expressed are the writers’ own.


Mad in America has made some changes to the commenting process. You no longer need to login or create an account on our site to comment. The only information needed is your name, email and comment text. Comments made with an account prior to this change will remain visible on the site.


  1. A sweet sight for sore eyes. I love this post. Not sure how the author would call his overall views, so I don’t mean to say his are the same as mine, but I’m personally so over the whole “critical psychiatry” nonsense. For me,anti psychiatry and very clear, explicit exposing is the only rational way to approach things. This piece is a form of justice for what I went through. It calms me as a sufferer of “PTSD” caused by the quacks and their gaslighting lies and someone with firsthand experience of the drugs in question. To hear someone speak what i know to be the truth plainly and without the watering-down effect of using psychiatry’s cult speak is what I am here for. Too many people are sellouts to “compromising” with psychiatry, the “critical” psychiatry crowd who are quick to shut down pieces that are “too anti-psychiatry” (which begs the question, for who are things ever “too” anti? Psychiatrists who might get their precious fee-fees hurt? Because I’m a survivor of abuse,force and chemical maiming and I’ve yet to see something “too anti” for me). Another category of sellout is those who support “choice” which is a joke when we are talking about a field entirely built on aggressively propagandist lies. Keep writing clearly and without moral and intellectual dilution! Pieces like this are why I donated to MIA in the past.

    Report comment

  2. Dear Dr. Kelmenson, MD. Thank you for sharing your views so directly. I agree with all of your views and I admire your courage and openness. I myself wouldn’t be this blunt to acquaintances of mine who opted to put their children on medication but I am glad you are stirring the pot. Someone in your profession has to turn the heat up. One concern though:

    I hope that individuals on the licensing board in your state are not aware of this article. Otherwise, they may feel motivated to fabricate some kind of phony grievance and call you in for a psychiatric evaluation and recommend some kind of disciplinary action, and should you dispute their recommendations, it could put your license to practice at risk.

    My uncle was a volunteer doctor for a community clinic launched by the Black Panthers in the early 1970’s in Portland, Oregon. Fortunately, his license was never at risk as he was well liked at Good Sam and Kaiser where he practiced, but the government did tap his phone even though he was never involved in politics, let alone radical politics. He simply wanted to help low income people gain access to healthcare. Take care.

    Report comment

    • Madmom:

      Thanks for your concern. If that ever did happen, it would mean that our message is getting out there, and the most important thing is that the public hears the truth. It would also make for another article. But I think that in the future it is the doctors who continue to create addictions that ultimately kill people who will have to worry about losing their licenses and perhaps their freedom. Once before in this country, doctors who did this were prosecuted and jailed for it, in accordance with the Harrison Act of 1914. This put great fear into the medical profession, leading to doctors dramatically reducing their addictive pill prescribing.


      Report comment

  3. Thank you for spotlighting this systemic gateway to childhood drug addiction and death. As a former educator, I saw firsthand how school districts essentially take laundered money from pharma/pharma organizations for “mental health and suicide prevention” curriculum that is, in effect, a thinly-veiled drug promotion program.

    As the parent of a child who suffered and died from unnecessary SSRI prescribing, I was uninformed despite my best efforts to gain accurate information from our doctors. Today I understand SSRIs are also a conduit to drug use and abuse. SSRIs often diminish children’s sense of self and their ability to consciously recognize risks but increase impulsive behaviors. It’s a tragedy so many parents, including myself, learn of these often fatal ADRs far too late.

    Report comment

  4. I would argue anti-anxiety prescriptions to those under 18 are likely at direct fault for a higher number of substance related deaths.

    I also bristle at the idea at the attempt to labels others experience, my treatment with stimulants (while problematic) is also the only reason I got through many years of school. I ultimately took myself off the substance as maturity and coping skills allowed me to complete college and grad school without them. I would however, never have finished my early years in school without the medication that made it possible for me to sit through class.

    I may agree ADHD isn’t a illness as such (nor my diagnosis) but I will argue that it is a specific cognitive/biological category, and those fitting the category have a very difficult time preforming in classroom environments. Stimulants may have a severe downside, but so does dropping out of HS, or failing out of college (lets not forget the risks of poverty in this nation).

    If the argument is for a more fully discussed, drug-based understanding of why one might use or prescribe these substances, I’m in full agreement. However, if the point is meant to be that no one should ever utilize stimulant medications to survive/achieve in a classroom setting, I have to respectfully disagree, and support a subjective understanding of personal need/priorities and inherent dignity of risk.

    Report comment

    • MadnessCivilizaton:

      Yes, it is not just stimulants. Benzodiazepines and opioids have also been increasingly prescribed directly to teenagers, or indirectly to them via their parents or friends, during the past 27 years. But as far as “ADHD” being a specific cognitive/biological category that only some people fit, I disagree. What differentiates us from animals is that we do not have simple brains that are hard-wired with instincts. We instead start life completely helpless but with amazing abilities to learn infinite ways of coping. But we depend on our upbringing by parents, teachers, and society in general, to gradually master our challenges and develop the skills needed to successfully thrive as adults.

      So we all start out life with “ADHD” – just look at how toddlers are excited about things at first, then get bored and move on to the next new thing, constantly moving, making messes, and bringing chaos and disruption wherever they go. It is true that stimulants have a calming effect on all of this, but if parents take the medication route, then they and teachers don’t need to do as much raising, and the child does not need to learn how to control their own impulses, avoid distractions, or manage their temper on their own. You were able to break away from this and successfully develop the mature coping tools needed for independence, but all long-term studies show that the vast majority of “ADHD-treated” children fare poorly in adult life. The consistent pattern with all long-term psych “meds” is initial “improvement” followed by long term deterioration, often resulting in permanent disability, whereas people who cope with issues without “meds” may have some trouble initially, but then recover well and are much more successful in the long-term.


      Report comment

      • Thank quick reply, I agree with your well extremely reasoned (and informed) view far more then with the mainstream logic regarding ADHD, and childhood prescriptions.

        However, in my personal and professional experience I have met many individuals diagnosed as “ADHD”, who, in my opinion, clearly lacked specific skills/coping skills. In these cases, I imagine therapy, or a radically improved education system, would easily replace the need for medication.

        I have also met many with this diagnosis, and others, for whom attention simply did not come without chemical aids. I myself achieved an advanced degree despite “pathological” issues with attention, not because I learned to attend in the rather “grey” classroom settings, but because I became adapt at gaining knowledge outside the classroom. This took maturity that no amount of therapy was able to induce in my younger self. Without stimulants, years of academic failure would have worn down my self esteem, had me taken out of the elite public school district I was attending, or both.

        I know many with similar experiences. I also fully understand and appreciate your argument, I recently lost a dear friend as a result of substance abuse. His substance abuse unquestionably began as a direct result of a (especially ludicrous) benzodiazepine prescription he was written as a young child. The risks of utilizing these tools is stark.

        However, I fear that an absolutist attitude towards their use (in either direction) risks failing to account for the subjectivity of our human experience. I feel a drug based understanding of these tools is critical to our ability to integrate them safety, only when necessary, and with true consent.

        I won’t go into my full view of how psych meds can be utilized effectively, as it is far too long. What I will say, with specific regard to stimulants, is there is simply no reason they should be given for daily use. Stimulants are not generally beneficial for anything but the most academic tasks (I don’t regard boosting physical energy reserves as the purpose of taking strong psych-stimulants). As such, they seem pointless on the weekends. Many subjective reports from individuals utilizing psycho-stimulants 3-5 times a week indicate no, or minimal discontinuation effects.

        And the doses are too damn high!

        Report comment

  5. great,as always, lawrence.

    madness civ., in this area “absolutes” are necessary. drugs are never the answer to a problem that is not chemical or biological. period.
    once you start making exceptions, everyone believes he is the exception. like, psychotropic drugs are bad for most kids but MY kid really needs them. or, psychotropic drugs are not necessary in most cases of depression/bipolar/blah blah but MY case is severe…
    drugs are for medical illnesses ( at best). never for a quirk in behavior. never for just being on the spectrum of humanity. never.

    Report comment

    • I agree with your comments and wish with all my heart I could turn back time and make different health “care” decisions. Unfortunately, when my child was prescribed SSRIs for mild anxiety and “OCD-like” symptoms, (yet never receiving any specific diagnosis), we were told she likely had a “mild” chemical imbalance. When I initially refused drugs, I was told I was harming my child by withholding treatment and that “there were pictures of the brain that showed anxiety has a permanent adverse impact on the brain.” Of course today I know this is a marketing lie but it’s too late for my family as her brain was chemically disabled by SSRIs and she died a violent akathisia-induced death at barely 19.

      Report comment

  6. i know this, kristina. we “spoke” a couple of weeks ago on this forum. i told you then i remembered your name from “letters…” and i told you how badly my heart is hurting for you and your beautiful daughter ( saw the film many times, i know she was beautiful).
    your speaking out is saving countless lives, and you are awesome for doing so.

    all the best,


    Report comment

    • It’s amazing how many psychiatrists and pediatricians have resorted to, and have ‘succeeded’, in deceiving and pressuring parents into complying with their kids being given what are supposedly helpful medicines, but are actually harmful, addictive, and often lethal drugs. But these physicians had the support of schools, government agencies, advocacy groups, medical and research institutions, the media, celebrities, the law, and of course the wealthy drug companies. Parents understandably could not imagine that so many trusted authorities (basically every authority) would stoop so low as to take part in such a heinous plan.

      Report comment

      • yes. it is amazing how, when i speak the truth, people ask if i am a doctor and, if not, why i think i know better than them…

        if the plumber you hired or the landscaper you hired suggests a work solution that makes no sense to you, you’d question his methods, no?
        why can’t i question a doctor whose methods run against common sense, science, and, most of all, the oath to first do no harm?!?

        once upon a time, all people in the world thought the earth was flat. every authority figure said so. well, “everybody” can be wrong. in the case of psychotropic drugging, all these authorities are wrong.
        am excited for the day that the world wakes up to the truth, hopefully soon…

        Report comment

  7. Erin and Lawrence-I really appreciate your sharing such spot-on insights. I’ve met many intelligent parents who’ve also lost children to unnecessary drugging and we speak out in hope that other parents might understand these tragedies can and do happen to families from all walks of life. Some of the bizarre comments we receive include that our children died because we “never taught them about God” that we “were bad parents” and/or we are “dishonest” about prescribing events and doctors’ treatments. These comments don’t really bother us on a personal level, but they do reflect the larger public health issue Lawrence pointed out: Many people refuse to believe their doctors, government regulators and institutions (schools, suicide prevention organizations, AMA etc.) have created a business model that causes avoidable harm to unsuspecting consumers.

    Erin, I do recall our previous conversation and thank you for supporting Letters. All the best,

    Report comment

  8. Nicely written article Doctor K. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as of 2011, 11 percent of people ages 4–17 have been diagnosed with ADHD. I wonder what it is today with that gold mine out there for doctors. Young adults are abusing prescription stimulants to boost their study performance in an effort to improve their grades in school, and there is a widespread belief that these drugs can improve a person’s ability to learn (“cognitive enhancement”).

    Really, or is just the competitive nature that society has become today to make someone think this way. In regard to society, family structures have changed, where as both mom and dad have to work long hours to pay the bills leaving junior or sissy home alone. Doctors pour more fuel on the fire by prescribing these addictive stimulants that need to be taken under doctor supervision. Yeah right, is a doctor going to be at your home 24 hours a day to monitor the situation, I think not. Too me, this is where the parents come into play. In other words, the doctors that prescribe these addictive medications rely on the parents to supervise, who of course are not home because of today’s society and the large amount of monthly bills.

    Just think about this for a minute, home alone from school @ 3:00 PM. Mom home by 6PM and dad by 7PM. Unless I’m way off base here, stimulants increase dopamine in the brain, why not enjoy the euphoria and leave the stress behind for another day sounds like a great excuse to get high and supposedly be more focused. If mom and dad are not home, and junior and sissy like the feel, why follow the prescription, take more medication right. These stimulants need to be supervised and controlled and they are not, perhaps they are not even needed. To me, that’s the biggest problem with society today. Mom and dad away, junior and sissy will play. Did you also know this effects white males more than any other race or sex. Ever wonder why? Answer: The white race still is the largest population in the United States and most if not all of these parents have what? You guessed it, health insurance.

    Clearly the doctors who prescribe and fool these patients & parents into thinking these stimulants will help, do they really? Clearly, they are addictive and as you clearly pointed out Doctor K, quite addictive the longer you are on them.

    I 100% agree with Doctor K, but in my opinion, parents play a key role in this also. It’s become far too easy for doctors to prescribe these addictive medications, supposedly taken under doctor supervision and not fear the consequences. Either they didn’t factor in the parents long work days or simply they didn’t care as long as they were receiving kick backs and discounts from big pharma. Bottom line here is that Doctors need to be held responsible for not considering all the factors in society, including mom and dad’s work schedule.

    Well written article.

    Report comment

    • I guess i’m not certain why young children are administering, or even have ready access to their stimulant medication.

      For me it all comes down to an utter lack of effective “informed” consent. When we pose something as a miricle cure, it gives people no reason to worry. Due to the changing nature of medical liability, I have noticed many doctors are now extreamly honest about the risks for chronic benzo prescriptions (many still remain in the dark ages). Some will readily inform patients of addiction rates, and the mid-high risk of discontinuation symptoms even from low dose, chronic use.

      I hear everyone’s tragic stories, and I feel them deeply. There is a photo on the wall of my office with the picture of my brother (chosen, not blood) who I will never see living again. I feel the pain of his loss each, day and the anger at his doctor.

      However, I will always believe in choice. The calculus is somewhat different with children, as the parents make the primary choice (and I do feel that it is unethical, and immoral to force children to take meds they don’t want). I suppose I place my trust in people to make the choice that is right for them, at least a fair percent of the time, when given all the information.

      If the doctor presents medication as a tool, as an option, alongside other options including therapy, and even acceptance, many of the concerns I have seen mentioned vanished. If SSRIs were presented as a drug with about as much positive as negative efficacy research, with powerful discontinuation effects, and mid-high level risk of adverse reaction, I don’t imagine many would utilize the tool. This has happened with opioids during the epidemic, more and more doctors are providing accurate information, and posing a choice post minor surgery/injury. Many of my friends and colleagues now find themselves saying no thank you to pain medications that a few years ago they would have been asking for.

      Same applies to stimulants in my mind. We should be telling people that stimulants do not correct or cure anything, they are a tool, and one that should not be expected as a long term solution. They are a tool that enhances focus, at the (high) risk of abuse, (mid) risk of dependence, and an unpleasant discontinuation syndrome if taken too regularly. If we explained that they should be utilized as sparingly as possible, and not regarded as a daily “behavioral control” or “personality correction”. Finally, if we explain that there are other options, which may take longer to show results, but lack these inherent risks (therapy), I imagine we would see less people opt for stimulants, and more attempt therapy.

      I feel much of the legitimate concern is inherent to the status quo, where the medical world deludes people into feeling medication is the ONLY solution, and one must be unethical to refuse it to children. I don’t feel doctors have a place in pushing their views, but rather should, non-judgmentally, present the facts and research. I fear that many doctors in the psych world finish med school, and then limit their reading to publications from pharma companies, and perhaps psychiatric times (both provide a biased, limited perspective.) While havens for drug abuse advice, the primary SA harm reduction forums, especially Bluelight are a remarkable resource for exploring honest accounts of the real life effects of these substances, and should be regular reading for those prescribing the medication. The number of stories that begin with some form of “I had no interest in substances until I was RXed X substance” might make folks think a bit.

      But equally, the stories of those who have tried every solution, only to return to an RX that provides them relief when everything else fails touch me equally. I oppose painkillers, but also don’t feel one should be condemned to experience pain if they would prefer the risks of taking the medication.

      For me, it all comes down to the need for the medical field to provide accurate and well rounded information allowing for proper informed consent regarding utilization of these tools. We have the right to feel that chemicals are never the answer, we also have the right to every option possible.

      I respect everyone’s view, and prefer what everyone is saying to the current status quo.

      Report comment

      • Many people hooked on prescribed addictive drugs swear that these drugs are the only thing that helps them with their anxiety, pain, concentration/motivation problems, etc., because they don’t realize that these problems became chronic/severe as a result of having become addicted to these drugs which put them in and out of withdrawals on a daily basis. Since the only thing that ameliorates the withdrawals is more of the addictive drugs, this fools them into viewing the very drug that produced their overwhelming problems to be effective “treatments” for their “underlying disorders”. If they try stopping the drug, the withdrawals can last for months after, which again misleads them to mistakenly believe that their “disease” has returned, since they misconstrue withdrawals to be “disease symptoms”. This is the business formula of modern medicine, and many other businesses have also profited immensely from it (disability lawyers, drug companies, drug rehabs, undertakers, etc.).

        Report comment

        • There is immense truth to the idea of substance dependence being mistaken for medical need of a substance. I am acutely familiar with this occurrence and agree it is of clinical import; however, this is not the experience to which I speak.

          I will leave my argument as it stands, except to say that in this particular reply to my thoughts; you seem to fall into the logical and ethical trap that psychiatry so often suffers from: you are fully confident you know the subjective experience of everyone else. When we say that the meds are harming us, most doctors reply that it must be our disorder. However, in this instance, you attribute any instance of one finding effective use in a medication to substance dependence. Especially with regards to focus, I argue that myself and many others are able to notice that the substance is an effective and costly tool. To speak from my own experience, therapy was ineffective as a young child because I was not open to it. Even at a young age, I had an awareness then being on medication was less then ideal (and others would benefit from a similar attitude from their doctors) but that it assisted me in a way that was worth the cost (to me, and my parents) at that time. I’m not claiming this is true for everyone, but I am also aware that I am not alone and that my experience is accurately reported and valid (as it is, my own subjective reality). Another individual comes to mind who suffered with crippling anxiety/panic attacks for decades, despite extensive and varied therapy, and other holistic techniques. In the end they found benzos (the drug class I happen to most disdain) provided relief from the psychic pain, and despite a full accounting of the risks and debilitating long term effects decided they would take the (temporarily) increased quality of life even at the high asking price (long term symptoms). Many years later they have achieved goals they never imagined, and have no complains.

          I issue this reply more to assert the need for us to always remain open to all experience, and never assume we know more then the individual whose experience it is.

          You are bringing light to critical issues that I don’t often hear discussed by those practicing medicine, despite my philosophical disagreement, I respect you deeply for it. And I thank you for engaging me in this discussion, I have found it enjoyable, and stimulating.

          Report comment

          • While I don’t have statistics, I believe when people discontinue SSRIs and start experiencing anxiety, suicidality, irritability and “depression” that weren’t presenting symptoms, they are more likely to be experiencing drug withdrawal ADRS than they are likely to be experiencing a worsening of said “illness.”

            Doctors routinely break the Hippocratic Oath by not first informing potential drug consumers that the product they are promoting:
            1) Has serious and possibly permanent ADRs
            2) Has shown limited effectiveness in clinical trials
            3) Has possibly never been approved for the consumer or his/her symptoms (off label, prescribing to children, etc.)
            4) Might be impossible to ever stop taking due to withdrawal ADRs.

            My teenager was unknowingly prescribed SSRIs off label. She later told the doctor she wanted to stop taking them. The doctor provided no instructions whatsoever regarding tapering nor did the doctor inform us that new and/or worsening symptoms upon withdrawal could be related to SSRI addiction and not to any new possible “illness.” As a result, my child asked to restart Zoloft because she believed she was very ill and “needed it.” She then experienced akathisia, Serotonin Toxicity and died. Our avoidable tragedy is very common.

            Doctors who fail to inform consumers of the withdrawal issues are, literally, torturing and killing their patients. They should error on the side of ADRs and not automatically attribute such symptoms to possible underlying “illness.” However, it seems doctors have difficulty honoring the Hippocratic Oath because it requires that they acknowledge the real possibility that their own pharmacological intervention has harmed their trusting patients. Far easier on one’s ego (and bank account) to blame the patient and book weekly appointments for life.

            Lastly, I contend it is misleading and incorrect to automatically refer to chemicals as “medications.” To do so implies the prescriber knows that the substance will be helpful to the consumer. Given that nobody knows if a chemical will serve as a medication or a toxin until after the consumer ingests it, it would be more honest and accurate to discuss proposed drugs as simply chemicals or pharmaceutical products.

            Report comment

  9. what is the problem with the kids that are being treated…
    we must look to causes..
    we need to look to the model— bio/psych/social/econ/political

    i am a person with a mental illness… for a very long time…
    i like the talk from antipsychiatry and critical psychiatry and psychiatry…

    Report comment

    • Little turtle:

      Once you accept your so-called “mental illness”, you are giving up on using your resourceful, adaptive capabilities to understand and address your own problems, which might involve making some changes in yourself or your life. You are instead needlessly seeing yourself as permanently defective, and turning responsibility for helping yourself over to people who financially benefit from your staying “ill”, helpless, and dependent on them. Unpleasant feelings are not diseases, but are normal responses to upsetting events/circumstances, which help us by motivating us to make choices that can lead to improving our lives.


      Report comment

    • Marilyn:

      Thank you, Marilyn. Hey – How about a sequel to “A Disease Called Childhood” entitled: “A Disease Called Life”. Because it is not just the normal trials and tribulations of child-rearing that psychiatry is tricking people into giving up on, and into replacing with its debilitating, addictive drugs. It is all unavoidable struggles and challenges throughout life, which psychiatry is dissuading people from using their resourceful, adaptive capacities to master, so that they will instead give up, and get on psychiatry’s assembly line to dysfunction, drug addiction, disability, and early death. What do you think?


      Report comment

  10. killer in a white coat ( sounds like a mystery)

    the emperor is completely naked

    bible of psychotropic drugs, their lies and their devastation

    when legal drugs kill:the biggest epidemic in modern times

    i’m sure i could come up with many more!

    all the best,


    Report comment

    • Hi Dr Kelmenson

      I don’t know. Maybe try brainstorming different titles:-

      “There’s no such thing as a Successful Tranquilliser”

      “Pharmaceutical Holocaust”

      “Taking one wrong turn…”

      “Operation Drug Everybody”

      “Lets not Kill the Teenagers”

      “I’m Sorry”

      Report comment

  11. dr kelmenson——-I am having a problem with your concept of mental illness…I have a mental illness… it was mental and I was ill.. I didn’t have just “unpleasant feelings”…
    and it wasn’t due to just my “own problems’….

    I really don’t know what caused all my problems with depression and anxiety…but my life has been broken apart….and I don’t believe that this was only a personal moral failure…I think there also was something biological going on in my brain….

    Report comment

  12. little turtle- it helps to think like this: i am human. i have a brain. i have struggles and weaknesses and vulnerabilities. everybody in the world has some. some are the same and some are different. i find tools to address mine , to live my best life.

    no two brains are the same. none are “ill” with thoughts or feelings. we are all human. we are all mentally ill or no one is. we have free choice to live our best lives, despite the thoughts and feelings that want to limit us. we always have the power. if i say ” i can’t get out of bed” because of a thought it is not true. i choose not to, that is all.

    throw away what you think you know. throw away your labels. choose life. you have the power inside of you. everyone does.

    best of luck.

    Report comment

  13. I think what are called by many the mainstream medical professions – the guilds AMA ,APA, ADA(dental) – three associations – loaded with varying amounts of pseudoscience – their symbols some variation of the staff and the coiled snake – which to some is a picture symbolic of a human being enwrapped within the coils of the anaconda – controlling – squeezing the money and/or life out of the human being – sometimes in a time release fashion and sometimes almost instantly – the 3 work together in effect – like some kind of 3 part epoxy glue – creating ever increasing numbers of coerced/voluntary desperate customers for each other – First the AMA’s mandatory growing number of vaccinations administered even right at birth and continuing onwards – then the ADA’s heavy metal dental work much of it 53% mercury amalgams – ( I wouldn’t want to forget the part played by the ethicless food and water and even air adulteration industries ) – then of course – in the most outrageous one upmanship in the vast field of pseudoscience – we have the American Psychiatric Association – so far beyond any real human oversight that anti-psychiatry is the only known antidote – and even farther beyond any human oversight – with its deadly overview – the pharma cartel from hell . As we reflect how kids get high and die in the USA .

    Report comment