Is It Time to Rethink Mental Illness in Light of the Pandemic?


As many Americans currently struggle with mental health issues arising from the coronavirus and its fallout, can we not now begin to understand that people who have experienced what gets labeled and treated as mental illness have also arrived at their distressed states through difficult life and situational experiences?  It’s easy, under normal circumstances, to explain away other people’s distress as a biochemical imbalance in the brain or faulty genes.  Now that so many are experiencing distress because of fears of their own mortality and that of their loved ones, economic hardship, isolation, great uncertainty about the future, and a loss of a sense of control, can we not appreciate that many who have been labeled mentally ill have long experienced these kinds of hardships?

Are people who are experiencing the worst of the coronavirus fallout today and the resultant mental distress the new mentally ill, or are they just normal people responding in understandable ways?  If they who are currently experiencing distress are just normal, who is to say that the mentally ill are not also just normal too, but we are in the dark about what caused their distress.  Is there a clear dividing line between normal and abnormal people?

The mental health industry, in its various forms throughout the centuries, has a long history of pathologizing and inhumanely treating the mad to great profit.  The antidepressant market value in 2018 was over $13 billion, and it’s predicted to rise as an ever-expanding group of people are driven into its web.  Are these people really mentally ill and in need of medication?  Should people who are experiencing distress because of the coronavirus take psychiatric drugs?

Congress has recognized, and to some extent tried to alleviate, the economic fallout of the pandemic.  There are people who have experienced economic hardship that has nothing to do with the coronavirus, and I am one of them.  Rather than being helped financially in 2002, I was started on antidepressants.  This was to the great profit of the mental health industry, but not to my benefit.

Financial help when you’re experiencing great financial hardship can bring great mental relief.  This is common sense.  Why is it, then, that we as a society treat people’s life difficulties with psychiatric drugs and other mental health treatments rather than lending a helping hand?  Is it appropriate to label someone with a mental illness when he is only expressing a normal human response to unspeakable difficulties?

Pathologizing and subjecting people to inhumane treatment can have its own consequences.  In Catholicism, there is the concept of “believing into.”  It’s like the placebo effect.  In light of the coronavirus, it is commonly recognized that there are some things that are outside of our control.  Yet there are some things that are within our control.  American psychiatry tends to believe that if people are not the architects of their own “successful” destinies, they must be mentally ill.  If someone believes that he has a biochemical imbalance in his brain that causes his depression, and that he can never truly recover from his “mental illness,” he may never recover, simply because of that belief.

When someone asked Jesus what works we must do in order to be saved, he answered simply, “The work of God is this: To believe in the One He sent.”  Belief is powerful.  Oftentimes, when Jesus would heal someone after an act of faith on their part, he would say that their faith had healed them.  Too many of us have put our faith in psychiatry.

One of the things that makes psychiatric drugs so effective is the placebo effect.  Because some people believe so strongly that the medications will be healing, they are.  The same effect can work with pain management as well.  Ordinary human kindness and decency can go a long way in helping people with what gets labeled as mental illness.

Sometimes this comes in the form of practical support.

A well-thought-out universal basic income (which was even, at one time, suggested by Republican President Nixon) might help to alleviate some of the economic injustices, as well as ultimately boost the economy, improve people’s mental health, and improve the whole country.  The past forty years have proven what a lie trickle-down economics is.  It has not trickled down to the least of us.  The rich have only gotten richer, while the middle-class evaporates and the poor get poorer.

You grow the economy from the bottom.  Free public colleges and universities would not only give book-smart poor people greater opportunity, and likely better mental health, but also ensure a well-educated populace—something much needed if we hope to thrive in the future global economy.

Healthcare is a human right, and universal healthcare, or at least greater access to healthcare, would not only keep us healthier, but likely also reduce overall healthcare costs, as people would have greater access to preventative care.

A $15 minimum wage would ensure an essential standard of living for all full-time workers.

From my own experiences with poverty and “mental illness,” I can assure you that these kinds of economic opportunities and stability would have improved, and would still improve, my mental health a lot.

The disability benefits given to many of the “mentally ill” are problematic for many reasons.  The most obvious one is that the payments are so low—always low on SSI and usually on SSDI.  Without family support, someone on SSI may become homeless or have to spend their days neglected and abused in a boarding home.

Another big problem with disability benefits for the “mentally ill” is that it incentivizes mental illness.  If your very survival is tied to being mentally ill and taking drugs, hoping and believing that you can recover might be a risk that you decide is not worth taking.  These programs also punish you for working, even a little, with a reduction in benefits, so that you can end up with little to no net gain, and by working you put yourself at risk of losing all of your benefits with no way to support yourself.  The social interaction and pride in a job well done can most assuredly improve mental health.  So, a universal basic income would be by far superior.

Economic stability and knowing that you have options other than lifelong homelessness or living in a dangerous shelter most certainly improves mental health.  There is a complex interplay between “mental illness” and poverty.  The life experiences and despair that so often arise from poverty could drive nearly anyone mad.  Not only this, but many of the standards used by the mental health industry to define mental illness are derived, not from some objective measure of good mental health, but middle-class American norms.  If you’re long-term unemployed, you’re probably mentally ill. Unemployment that arose from the pandemic, however, is likely not seen as proof of mental illness.  Mental health professionals understand why people lost their jobs, and it seems a legitimate excuse because of the pandemic.  They do not have such empathy for those whose stories they do not know or understand.  Don’t have a stable home environment, a spouse, and children who are well cared for?  Mental illness.  Homeless?  Definitely mentally ill.  Goodness and love, which should be hallmarks of good mental health, usually never enter the picture.

To help stave off any mental health crises that might arise from the coronavirus, we ought not invest in more psychiatric drugs, but would do well to look to practical solutions to people’s difficult experiences that result from this crisis.  That includes things like financial support, perhaps job retraining for people whose jobs have disappeared, and anything that can give people hope.  For some it’s faith and prayer.  For some it’s the hope of a vaccine and a cure.  For some it’s finding ways of helping others, which can take the focus off ourselves.  It may be a combination of any of these things or something else entirely that gives people hope.  Hope can help us to endure hardship.  So, hang in there.  Things can get better.


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. “Why is it, then, that we as a society treat people’s life difficulties with psychiatric drugs and other mental health treatments rather than lending a helping hand?”

    I thought when I read this that actually we don’t ‘treat’ anything with psych drugs. We simply change the shape of it and call it treatment. If I put my foot on a baloon it changes shape, but it’s still a baloon. And with enough force applied in the right way look, I can make it burst.

    The other thing I noticed was mention of trickle down economics. The only thing I have seen trickling down has been what looks like a ‘protein spill’. I guess that form of recycling by the elite is seen as their contribution to the welfare of the planet lol

    “Australia, A land of corporate gains” (a land of sweeping plains), where ‘branch stacking’ isn’t the weight of the fruit crops. lol

    Report comment

    • Caroline, unless you really don’t know about “Crimson Contagion”, and “Event 201”, i think you should be honest, and call it a PLAN-demic!… So-called “mental illnesses” are exactly as “real” as presents from Santa Claus, or unicorns, but not more real….

      Report comment

      • Hi Bradford,

        I totally agree with you about the fact that “mental illnesses” are not real. I guess I was using those phrases to express commonly accepted perceptions or what are really the commonly accepted wrong-headed ideas about some people, myself included.

        Report comment

  2. “Is It Time to Rethink Mental Illness in Light of the Pandemic?”

    Nope, it’s time for people to wake up and realize that there is no such thing as “mental illness” or “mental health”. It’s time for people to understand that psychiatry is a pseudo-scientific system of slavery that masquerades as a medical profession. It’s time to slay the dragon of psychiatry. 🙂

    Report comment

  3. Thank you Caroline.
    One should never use the word “health” and “psychiatry” in the same sentence. There is one thing psychiatry never lets people know, that the belief or trust in, or desperation to access that system, is simply giving up power.
    It is as if standing in front of a judge, yet having done nothing wrong.
    Personal empowerment is not something they teach.
    There are other systems that were similar, but have mostly become clubs all to themselves, celebrating their cloaks, standing for “something”, but not really getting the fear and belief people once gave you. When you practice something that takes advantage of people being disadvantaged, eventually it won’t hold up, although it can be pretty powerful for a long time.

    Report comment

  4. *An important timely article – thanks for writing it.

    In case it helps further, readers might find the below recent YouTube interviews of interest, as they similarly question the ‘mental health’ zeitgeist and whether it medicalises (and profits from?) citizens’ proper, sane and healthy human distress responses – to an unjust political-economic system?

    Dr Ron Roberts (clinical psychologist-university academic London) in interview with Martin North (Australia) – June 2020

    Dr Ashley Frawley (sociologist Swansea University, Wales) interview with Martin North (Australia) – May 2020.

    Report comment

  5. I recently ran into someone with a conspiracy theory to explain corona-virus. I generally think in the opposite direction, that is, “mental illness” = fictive (i.e. fraudulent) illness, corona-virus = real (i.e. authentic) illness. Another way to put it is to say that either illness is physical or it is not illness. The idea that people panicking over corona virus have some kind of “mental illness” doesn’t appeal to me so much. Hypochondria may be encouraged by the “mental health” coppers on “normality” patrol, but one ought to know better than to go along with such nonsense. Tolerance is the word. We’re waiting for black people mattering, and then maybe we can make mad people matter a little bit more, too.

    Report comment

    • In the English language, the term “ill” or “illness” has never been limited to the body. This is partly because people used to be more “superstitious” about what caused physical illness. But it also reflects the recognizable fact that something can be “wrong” with a person even though their body seems healthy.
      Tolerance of different mental reactions is fine. But if your baby is screaming because something is bothering him that isn’t really there, you want to be able to do something about it. And if you can observe well enough to get an idea what is causing the reaction, then you can do something about it, if you have that training.
      The use of “mental illness” to accuse people who “act odd” of being unfit for human society is a whole different matter. But there is a piece of reality attached to the term that shouldn’t be overlooked.

      Report comment

      • I can’t disagree more with this perspective. A person can be physically ill and exhibit symptoms of mental distress but that does NOT make the condition a mental illness. Syphilis, Lyme Disease, and a host of other medically curable pathogens that can exhibit emotional manifestations are never going to be cured with improved living conditions, they are merely physical illnesses with mental effects. Likewise, altered mental states due to horrid living conditions are NOT a physical illness that can be cured with medicine. That these states get conflated is the real issue.

        Mental illness is a misnomer that hurts both physically ill people as well as the masses of emotionally distressed people whom are reacting to culturally created violent oppression.

        Report comment

        • I agree that “mental illness” at this point is such a tainted term, it can’t even be referred to in the metaphorical sense without instant connection to the DSM and all the stupidities inherent in assuming a “real disease” is present and exists in the brain. It is a term that needs to be tossed and never used. For certain, people experience confusion, illogical urges, emotional distress, even experience seemingly unavoidable sensations, voices, etc. that other people don’t perceive. None of this implies “illness.” It might very well imply some sort of causation, which in SOME cases COULD be physiological, but the idea that we lump all “depressed” people together as having an “illness” that needs to be “treated” is reductionistic and scientifically invalid.

          I very much favor the idea of simply describing what the person is experiencing and going from there. “I feel hopeless and am not sure why my life is worth living” is something I can related to. “I feel like killing myself because I’m mentally ill” is not something that I can find any shared reality with. It doesn’t really mean anything. The first one allows that a person is doing something and can potentially take action to remedy the situation by answering some of these difficult questions or refocusing his/her attention on meaningful activities. The second implies powerlessness and lack of agency, and that for me is enough reason to bag the idea of “mental illness” altogether, bad “science” notwithstanding.

          Report comment

        • You can talk about the anguish of the physically ill or the desperation of the impoverished, but those both make sense as normal reactions and I don’t consider those “mental illnesses.”
          But what do you call a doctor who would prescribe a child harmful drugs because he doesn’t much like to sit still? I would call that “doctor” “mentally ill!” I wouldn’t call him physically ill. I wouldn’t call him emotionally distressed (though that is a possible alternate description) and I wouldn’t treat him for his problem the way psychiatry treats us. For me, they are the leading examples of the most flagrantly mentally ill.

          Report comment

          • How about “dangerously irrational?”

            But of course, his “illness” lies to a large extent in the society in which he practices. His behavior is sanctioned by the social mores of the time he lives in, so he is considered “sane” while his victims are considered “ill,” simply because he pronounces it is so. This “illness” would not be possible without the huge power imbalance he enjoys. So again, if the psychiatrist is “mentally ill,” what is actually ill? Him? His theories? His group (psychiatrists)? Society at large?

            Report comment

          • Ah Steve, this gets into higher-level concepts that we can toss around if we want, but I’m not sure it’s worth it. “Illness” is an intentionally vague term and always has been. Doctors have always had a sort of imperious air about them that will not soon disappear, for it is quite obvious that society as we know it supports them in this illusion.
            Social mores can change. We have had a Universal Declaration of Human Rights since 1948. The UN Rapporteur has condemned psychiatry’s barbaric practices several times, and we have laws passed to try to protect people from their worst behaviors.
            You can’t treat an entire society for an “illness.” You identify the ill people one at a time and try to make them well. If any person, any mental health worker, acts like a criminal towards others, particuarly people under his care, than he is “sick.” (That’s a possible alternate term, “sickness” instead of “illness.”) It is the job of those who can see that this is so to make it obvious to the general public. To many it already is, and they want nothing to do with psychiatry (what psychiatry fatuously calls the “stigma” problem).
            But we are up against some subtler social problems and lacks of understanding that make our job much harder. Society’s infatuation with drugs and with bodies is one problem. And the sense that we have “no alternative” is another. I don’t try to tackle all of that. But I don’t want people to think that by denying that “mental illness” exists they have solved the problem. That doesn’t solve it, and that’s really my main point on that issue.

            Report comment

          • This type of doctor is the most abundant in my experience. They are lazy and clueless but they think they know better. Too many of them are true psychopaths. It is a good field for them to flourish.

            Our society sanctions this type of behaviour so I would say it is our society that is “sick”. Part of the problem is that all this is hidden to the public because patients voice is suppressed so easily: “they are nuts”.

            Although it is not easy, we should try to fix all this more often in the tribunals.

            Report comment

        • Don’t forget those branded at hopelessly “severe mental” cases to help cover some doctor’s butt because he refuses to acknowledge that his precious SSRI’s can drive people crackers.

          Heaven forbid he let you go off the drugs so you can function again after catching up on sleep after he kept you awake for 3 weeks in a row. Better label you a “bipolar” menace to society so everyone will shun you till you die. And Dr. Quackenbush can bill your insurance for 3-6 drugs instead of just 1. Including the very drug he KNOWS caused the problem. 😛

          I imagine these un-healers cackling with glee and sipping champagne to celebrate every time they ruin some young life this way. Cha-ching! Souls for cash.

          I’d say “Shame on them.” But they are as shameless as they are remorseless for all the people they’ve harmed and killed.

          Report comment

  6. Wow! All comments are in italics! OK…
    The subject of mental health and mental “illness” has at its core real phenomena. They are actually quite common, although they affect some people much more than others. These phenomena were not well-understood. Today most people still don’t understand them well at all. It is this lack of basic knowledge that allowed psychiatry to step in and tell society, “we’ll handle this for you.”
    They couldn’t handle it, of course. A lot of them were more loony than the people they locked up and tortured! And the fact that a much better understanding of mental health is now possible only serves to emphasize the psychoses of psychiatry.
    The socioeconomic environment of the individual IS an important predictor of dramatized mental “illness.” And those reactions are, basically, “normal.” But the core phenomena that underlie mental operation and subsequent behaviors lie deeper than the immediate environment. Because of this, those phenomena inhibit our progress in leveling the socioeconomic playing field. Mental illness is part of the reason why those disparities are held in place by people “in power.” And even if we succeeded in leveling that playing field, problems of mental health would still be with us. We may note that indigenous cultures had those problems, even where socioeconomic differences were minimal. Leveling the field is a “sane” thing to do, but will only happen if we learn how to bring sanity to our planet.

    Report comment

  7. Caroline, thanks, your article is great and you make many good points.
    It seems the general view of the “MH” system (for now anyway) is those experiencing distress regarding Corona Virus may not immediately need psych labels slapped on them because the distress is understandable due to difficult circumstances (heck even psychiatrists are stressed about it) But this makes it quite glaring that those who had worry or distress due to difficult circumstances prior to Corona virus were quickly labelled and drugged and all context conveniently ignored.

    Report comment

    • Thanks so much, Rosalee D! Yeah, I guess this experience with the coronavirus really demonstrates that the labels of mental illness and psychiatric drugs aren’t meant for any dominant majority, but only a marginalized minority of people. If “mental illness” is common and normal, then it somehow ceases to be mental illness. It is only when people deviate from accepted, common socioeconomic norms in thoughts or behavior that we are labeled mentally ill.

      One of my friends once commended me for being original in my thinking. While if someone is a successful business person, creative person, researcher, or some other sort of successful person, this kind of attribute may be commended by society, but if you are a starving artist, you are probably “mentally ill.” I hope to cover this kind of difference in perception by the “mental health” industry and society at large either in an article or in my book. I never know how an essay will turn out.

      Report comment

  8. I actually find it really interesting that through recent events in my area in Australia where we have had massive bushfires, followed by Covid-19, I have witnessed people exhibiting (what they might call) signs of severe “mental illness”.

    They have been doing far more in the way of weird behaviour (panic stockpiling of goods, displaying financially, emotionally, and socially appalling behaviours, circulating ridiculous conspiracy theories, talking to imaginary friends, excessive gambling, drinking and drug taking, increased use of anti depressants, psych services etc).

    Some have actually sympathised with me for what they imagine I, as an officially designated “mentally ill” person, MUST be going through. Yet, while concerned and taking reasonable precautions, I have been no where near as flipped out as they have been.

    I remember a time when I was locked up and forcibly drugged for far less extreme behaviour than many now exhibit. Yet, some in my community justify their behaviour as related to the “shocking events” (bushfire and Covid-19) while putting my (justifiable) response to events at the time of my struggles down to the character flaw of “mental illness”.

    But through this period, their characters apparently will remain unblemished. Their “madness” (and need for “medication” and support-both financial and psychological etc) is a justifiable response to circumstance, while mine was, and apparently always will remain an irreparable failure of character, even though I have accessed neither “medication” nor psych support for over 10 years, including through recent events.

    I guess acknowledgement of such facts would create within them cognitive dissonance too great to deal with, and so they need a screen on which to project their own fragility.

    The nice white label of “mental illness” stuck firmly on someone else provides them with just such a screen.

    It is interesting to watch the double standards and mental gymnastics people, and society in general employs in a bid to establish equilibrium, and the vital role in society those of us with the “mental illness” label actually fulfill.

    Report comment

    • mik
      You hit the nail on the head with your observations.
      I have found it quite shocking, upon my first realization, how it is always was “someone else” that has the “mental illness” and how perfectly it performs that function of hiding behind the screen.

      Report comment

    • I agree with what you say mik.

      “But through this period, their characters apparently will remain unblemished.”

      Oh no, their contact with ‘mental health services’ has been recorded and like a cancer may sit there for years before being activated should there be a need on the part of some doctor to ‘bring them in for questioning’. Then , like me, they might find themselves being dragged out of their bed by police for no other reason than they were asleep (reasonable grounds for a mental health referral in Western Australia), that they can be ‘spiked’ with stupefying/intoxicating drugs, injected with a “chemical restraint” that may take them within an inch of their life, and any complaint might result in an ‘unintended negative outcome’ in an Emergency Dept if they continue to insist on the fact they have human and civil right (a known delusion in the area of mental health as a result of the lack of protections of the law which have been removed via the negligence of those charged with a duty to ensure their enforcement ie the Chief Psychiatrist and Minister).

      [“an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder”. If you have no rights as a result of the dereliction of duty then surely it is delusional to believe you can sleep in your bed when a doctor wishes you to be delivered to a hospital by police for treatment of an illness you don’t have, with drugs you don’t want, and your complaint is proof of this delusion. “You live in a democracy? Nut job; billing code 12bfu’ed”]. I couldn’t help but be effected by images of Jewish people being dragged from their homes in the 1930s, and the similarity to the way Mental Health Services simply call police to have people dragged from their homes here.

      Combined with our introduction of a “wild” (or decentralised Euthanasia program I have concerns about where my community is heading. There are laws to protect the public, but one can not have them enforced as a result of the negligence of authorities who are enabling this National Socialist environment, and denying a right to access remedy in the courts via fraud and threats to legal representatives (all lawful as a result of HCA 47 [2010] ACC v Stoddart). They can lie to the public who have no right to access the truth (fraud), and they can threaten and ‘coerce’ to deny access to legal rep. Even down to retrieving documents (my own personal medical records) and then replacing them with fraud (to lawyers) to conceal acts of torture by police and mental health services. Got to be a dollar in this for me knowing how to do this, and the good news is it’s so easy. Torture, kidnapping, maiming and killing and it can all be disguised as ‘medicine’ and not a damn thing the victims can do about it?

      So they are certainly not “unblemished”, it’s just that for now we need to control the flow of victims through the system to not overwhelm the hospital with new clients. Aren’t they in for a surprise when they are introduced to the ‘new normal’? Because I simply can’t imagine doctors letting such a great opportunity to change the status of so many people to “patients” and profit from that to pass without at least grabbing as many as they can. Like snake whacking day on the Simpsons lol

      Report comment

      • I say above they can lie to the public. The courts have identified this lying as being a ‘massaging of the truth’.

        The targets appear to be the ‘disabled’ (genetically inferior?) who are particularly vulnerable. I like the question raised by the now ex nurse regarding where does one turn when the person abusing you is the person your supposed to turn to when your being abused. I can appreciate her problem now I know that there is no avenue for complaint regarding the use of known torture methods by our police. Not even the Attorney General can direct me to the appropriate authority due to the fact that they deal with complaints via refoulment and fraud with the assistance of legal representatives. It’s not that we never torture, we just ensure that no complaint is ever heard with a ‘massaging of the truth’, and the slandering (or ‘fuking destruction’) of the victims.

        Report comment

  9. Doing fine despite the lockdown and Covid19 fear.

    I say fear because I have had no direct encounters. My sister’s roommates caught it and recovered without hospital care. She tested negative. My rural community has no cases yet. A family friend in a city caught it and got better. As did my 89 year old great aunt.

    The lockdown itself is stressful. But I’m okay.

    Before stuff started opening I used Skype and Zoom to visit along with letters and phone calls. Way better than social media for human connection.

    Now we go to church–with S.D. in place–and I visit my neighbors in the open air.

    Since going off my psych drugs I’ve developed an emotional resiliency I never had before. Violating Expert orders was the scariest thing I’ve ever done.
    But I ignored the Experts after doing a lot of homework. According to them I should be acting like Eric Harris/Ted Bundie/Norman Bates/a rabid dog. Or at least unable to talk coherently or care for myself or get along with people I meet. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

    No more mood swings, better at reading social cues, normal heart rate, improved hygiene and home maintenance. All these horrible things happened after I fled the mental illness makers.

    Stories like mine are an embarrassment to the APA and the AMA too. Psychiatry is cancer on western medicine. Not to mention the legal system–which now has a way to bypass due process and punish the innocent.

    Report comment

    • Thank you so much for your comment, Rachel777. I hope to be where you are someday in terms of being totally off all medication. Just by greatly reducing antipsychotics, I am also beginning to get better. Like you, I find defying mainstream psychiatric opinion to be incredibly scary. Once diagnosed, the theory goes, you need your medication for life, or else you will be a raving lunatic. That kind of threat can certainly create long-term submission for far too many of us, even while the drugs are actually destroying us. I have also done my homework, including reading Robert Whitaker’s work, as well as becoming familiar with psychiatric survivor stories where people actually did improve. Although it is a big risk, the alternative of being a zombie for life, ending up in some sort of shelter, and definitely never getting any better, helped me make my decision. I am beginning to feel hopeful again.

      Report comment

  10. Mental distress is just our unavoidable reaction to being made insecure, drugs only interfere with the functioning of the mind. We are born needing substance or money security, relational security, and also security with God, so we don’t fear death. We can’t do without any of those and feel secure. It’s ignorance of our nature that leads us to neglect the needs of others, since we get what we need from each other.

    Report comment

    • Good point dfk.

      I note that when the people at the hospital said they would ‘fuking destroy’ me, these were the very things they went after in my life. They had my wife destroy all of my family and social relationships*, they ensured I did not get access to my documentation, they ensured I was cut off from my home, and access to my money. They did a mock execution on me and deliberately baited me with lies and deceit, sent out fraudulent documents to lawyers to ensure I didn’t receive the help I was entitled to ….. and then I walked into a Mosque and got down on my knees. (funny but it was at that point that the police simply disappeared and I felt a peace I hadn’t for months. The really did push hard to have me commit suicide though) And I now know there is a God because everything He promised is coming to pass, though it’s sad that what is said regarding hypocrites is true. Yes they are all against the use of torture and convenience killings, well, when it is having an effect on their families. Otherwise, the State must have their reasons, and those reasons consist of the State not being exposed as torturers, kidnappers and refoulers.

      It confirms that they know these things you speak of, and it’s no accident when they deny the real reasons and exchange it for a preferred model that sees them profit from the sale of drugs. Judge them by what they DO, not what they say.

      * two points about why my wife did these evil things to me (and let me say it hurts coming from someone that close) [a] she had ‘set the scene’ to enable them to conceal torture and kidnapping as ‘medicine’ by dropping me with the ‘spiking’ and planting items for police to refer, and [b] they were her drug pushers (in the Steppenwolf sense), good medical people who had the power to cut off her supply of drugs. The idea that they were ‘experienced’ in ‘helping’ people no doubt a major reason she went along with them, not understanding what a vile bunch of people they really are [something they rely on as many here now know] …… I wonder what she thinks now, though care very little tbh. I understand but will never forget.

      Report comment

      • “not understanding what a vile bunch of people they really are [something they rely on as many here now know] …… I wonder what she thinks now, though care very little tbh.”

        She did obviously finally ‘smell a rat’ because she went to someone else who was waiting to interrupt the psychologist and her husbands plans for me. Something which no doubt ensures her silence now given she knows what the State will do to her if she does speak the truth. An unintended negative outcome, arranged by someone not unlike her who can be allowed to commit offences (spikings/kidnappings and …. anything really when police are looking the other way and refusing to perform their duty).

        Funny how people assume it’s my illness because what i’m saying couldn’t possibly be the truth. I don’t see the truth as being linked in any way to my illness which I deny emphatically, I was subjected to some extreme abuse by people in positions to threaten and intimidate witnesses while they did it, the State. If I have an illness by their definitions okay, but hiw does that effect what I’m saying happened. And my community is prepared to accept this being done to someone with the status of “patient”? That says it all in the end. The bitch was asking for it is the equivalent.

        Report comment