Celebrating the Anti-Psychiatry Movement


Say not the struggle nought availeth,
The labour and the wounds are vain,
The enemy faints not, nor faileth,
And as things have been, they remain. 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[But] not by eastern windows only,
When daylight comes, comes in the light,
In front the sun climbs slow, how slowly,
But westward, look, the land is bright.

(“Say not the struggle nought availeth”, by Arthur Hugh Clough, 1848)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

On November 14, 2020, a regular reader and commenter on my posts, who uses the handle registeredforthissite, posted a comment which ended with this:

“When people end up suffering due to psychiatry, they end up here, but it’s still a niche minority.

Also, I’ve noticed for the last many years, it’s the same old commenters (including myself) who post here. Lots of comments. But very few commenters. Hardly a drop in a massive ocean.

Compare this to psychiatry sites which have memberships in the thousands, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands.

You’re drowned out.”

Similar sentiments were expressed by Yulia Mikhailova in a recent excellent article on MIA.

I’ve been giving this comment and Ms. Mikhailova’s article a great deal of thought, primarily because my own perspective on the anti-psychiatry movement is quite different.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

When I started writing these posts over eleven years ago, I had imagined that I would work on these topics for a year or so; that in that time I would write 20 or 30 posts; that I would attract about 20 or 30 readers, half of whom would hate me, and half would be supportive; and that then I would move on to other topics that interest me.

Obviously, things didn’t go as planned.  In the past eleven years, I have written 560 posts, containing well over a million words.  My posts are routinely read by two to three thousand followers on my own site, and presumably a good many more on Mad in America.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The general point I am making here is that although Ms. Mikhailova’s and registeredforthissite’s observations are factually accurate, I remain entirely optimistic about the future of the anti-psychiatry movement.


And I use the word battle with no apologies or misgivings.  Psychiatry has been utterly unreceptive to the concerns of our movement.  In fact, the primary response of the APA has been to hire a PR company to spruce up their image! while condoning, and indeed promoting, the spurious medicalization of virtually every problematic thought, feeling, and behavior and the routine prescribing of neurotoxic drugs and high-voltage electric shocks to “correct” these “medical” problems.

Another facet of the matter that contributes to my optimism is the sheer number of people who have come to identify themselves as anti-psychiatry.  When I started writing these posts, I searched the Internet fairly thoroughly but could find only a handful of anti-psychiatry bloggers.  Today we can be found in every corner of the blogosphere.

We are not an organized entity, but we are vocal, committed, and persistent, and our numbers grow by the day.  Some of us have worked in the system and have come to see its central concepts as flawed and destructive.  But most have come from the ranks of those individuals who have been harmed or damaged by psychiatry’s stigmatizing labels, neurotoxic drugs, and electric shocks.  These individuals had been effectively silenced for decades by the psychiatric deception that their “treatment resistance” stemmed essentially from the severity of their “illness”; their “non-compliance” with “treatment”; or from their own lack of motivation, rather than from any deficiency in the system or from the toxicity of the “treatments”.

It occurred to me that this might be a good time to identify a list of some of the important turning points in our struggle, as well as available resources.  Many of these are well-known, others less so.

I realize that some of the individuals and groups listed below don’t identify themselves as anti-psychiatry.  And, of course, I respect this.  But it is nevertheless true that people who throw pebbles into ponds are – ipso facto – water-ripplers.  Similarly, people who speak out against psychiatry are having an anti-psychiatry effect, and are inspiring others.

So here’s my list of the people and incidents that have played a key role in this movement.  It’s by no means complete or in any special order.  I encourage readers to use the comments section to add items that have significance/importance for them.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Electric Shock: Its Brain-Disabling Effects (1979) and Psychiatric Drugs: Hazards to the Brain (1983), among other publications, by Peter Breggin MD.

Prozac Backlash, 2001, by Joseph Glenmullen, MD.

The outing of Joseph Biederman, MD for his ties to drug companies.

Exposure of the ghostwritten textbook by Charles Nemeroff, MD and Alan Schatzberg, MD.  According to a November 2010 New York Times article, Drug Maker Hired Writing Company for Doctors’ Book, Documents Say, documents say the book was actually written by a writing company hired by the pharmaceutical company SmithKline Beecham:

“Two prominent authors of a 1999 book teaching family doctors how to treat psychiatric disorders provided acknowledgment in the preface for an ‘unrestricted educational grant’ from a major pharmaceutical company.

But the drug maker, then known as SmithKline Beecham, actually had much more involvement than the book described, newly disclosed documents show. The grant paid for a writing company to develop the outline and text for the two named authors, the documents show, and then the writing company said it planned to show three drafts directly to the pharmaceutical company for comments and proposed a timeline for the writing company to furnish the doctors and SmithKline with draft text and final page proofs for approval.”

Creation of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act in 2008 which required pharma companies to divulge payments they have made to physicians.  There is now a government site, OpenPaymentsData, where one can enter a doctor’s or hospital’s name to gain access to this information.  ProPublica’s Dollars for Docs is a similar site.

Unhinged: The Trouble with Psychiatry – A Doctor’s Revelations about a Profession in Crisis (2010) by Daniel Carlat, MD, which gave insight into the “thought leader” system.  Dr. Carlat was interviewed about this on NPR in 2010.

Mad In America continues to grow by leaps and bounds.  In 2020 they had 3.7 million visitors to their site, and their global affiliates, outside the US, had about 1.1 million visitors.  The site continues to publish an interesting and compelling mix of science reviews, blogs, personal stories, original journalism pieces (MIA Reports) and podcasts, with two or three new pieces posted each day.

There are so many good bloggers on MIA that it is impossible to mention them all.  They include psychiatry survivors, psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, bioethicists, free lance journalists, and others.

The MIA Global network includes Mad in the UK, Mad in Brasil, Mad in Sweden, Mad in Norway, Mad in Italy, Crazy in Finland, Mad in Asia Pacific, and Mad in America for Spanish Speakers.

Diagnosisgate: Conflict of Interest at the Top of the Psychiatric Apparatus, by Paula Caplan, PhD.  Paula Caplan’s indictment of Allen Frances, MD, for his paid role in the promotion of risperidone in 1995.

The Council for Evidence-based Psychiatry.

The books Mad in America (2001) and Anatomy of an Epidemic (2010) by Robert Whitaker.

Movement in the UK to create a government body to study addiction to prescription drugs, which led to the production of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Prescribed Drug Dependence Report.  An important research article on this topic is the 2019 A systematic review into the incidence, severity and duration of antidepressant withdrawal effects: Are guidelines evidence-based?, by James Davies, PhD and John Read, PhD.

Various publications and movements from the British Psychological Society including The Power Threat Meaning Framework, Understanding Psychosis and Schizophrenia, and Understanding Depression.

The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct, by Thomas Szasz (1962)

The Open Dialogue movement.

Over the years I have read many good books on the subjects covered by our movement.  There have been too many to list here individually, but by clicking on the Books Worth Reading tag on the right side of my website, a long list of book review posts appears.  For health reasons I finally had to stop doing book reviews, so the most recent review is in 2017.  Many more exceptional books have been published since that time.

The Inner Compass Initiative, with its sister site Withdrawal Project, co-founded by MIA authors Laura Delano and Rob Wipond, among others.

Monica Cassini’s Beyond Meds, which was one of the first blog sites I discovered when I started my website.

PsychRights: The Law Project for Psychiatric Rights.

Bonnie Burstow Scholarship in Antipsychiatry, set up in 2016 by Canadian psychotherapist and anti-psychiatry scholar Bonnie Burstow, PhD, who died in January 2020.

The many blog posts and books by psychologist Jay Joseph, PsyD, on the spurious nature of “genetic” research in psychiatry, in particular, twin studies.

The 2002 article It’s all done with smoke and mirrors.  Or, how to create the illusion of a schizophrenic brain disease, by British psychologist Mary Boyle, PhD, which I read when it was published, and came across again recently on Jay Joseph’s twitter site.

The chapter The Concept of Mental Illness, in Stickley & Bassett 2008, by British psychologist Anne Cooke, PhD, is one of the classic pieces in this field.

The various, and patently futile, attempts by Ronald Pies, MD, to support his inane, pro-psychiatry claims, which I have critiqued hereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehereherehere, and here.

David Oaks and MindFreedom.

The Internet and social media sites have been a great addition to our tools.  I communicate with people in various countries around the globe.  With my own social media accounts I have over 5000 followers.  Then consider the number of people who read other bloggers’ sites, and the Mad in America site.  The Internet has greatly increased our ability to communicate with like-minded people, and especially to bring survivors together.  I know of at least ten Facebook groups that deal with anti-psychiatry and survivor issues, some of which are:

Let’s Talk Withdrawal; Letters from Generation Rx; Murder & Suicide by Prescription; ‘Drop the disorder!’; Speak Out Against Psychiatry; Professionals Critical of Psychiatry; Philosophy, Psychology and Politics.  Some of these groups are private (membership by invitation only), and others are open to the public.

I am sure there are many other social media groups of which I am unaware.

AntiDepAware, a site written and maintained by Brian, that promotes awareness of the dangers of antidepressants, particularly the danger of suicide.

Rob Wipond, independent investigative journalist, as well as MIA author, who is currently writing a book about people’s experiences of psychiatric power and forced psychiatric interventions.

Anti-psychiatry cartoonist and blogger Auntie Psychiatry, who also wrote a book with her cartoons, titled: Of Course I’m Anti-Psychiatry, Aren’t You.

Article on stigma by Brett Deacon, PhD, The biomedical model of mental disorder: A critical analysis of its validity, utility, and effects on psychotherapy research (2013).  “But despite the public’s increasing endorsement of biological causes and treatments, stigma has not improved and shows signs of worsening.”

Madness Explained (2003) and Doctoring the Mind (2009), by Richard Bentall, FBA, Professor of Clinical Psychology at the University of Sheffield.  The following is a quote from the back cover of Madness Explained:

“We need, Bentall argues, a radically new way of thinking about psychiatric problems – one that does not reduce madness to brain chemistry, but understands and accepts it as part of human nature.”

Models of Madness (2004), edited by John Read, Loren R. Mosher, and Richard Bentall.  From the back cover:

Models of Madness shows that hallucinations and delusions are understandable reactions to life events and circumstances rather than symptoms of a supposed genetic predisposition or biological disturbance.”

The late Loren Mosher, MD, psychiatrist, resigned from the American Psychiatric Association in 1998.  His letter of resignation can be read here.

There are online sites that make searching for journal articles easier for people around the world.  Two that I use here in the US are:

PubMed –  “a free resource supporting the search and retrieval of biomedical and life sciences literature with the aim of improving health–both globally and personally.

The PubMed database contains more than 30 million citations and abstracts of biomedical literature. It does not include full-text journal articles; however, links to the full text are often present when available from other sources, such as the publisher’s website or PubMed Central.”

PubMed Central, “…is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of health’s national Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM)”

If I can’t find articles that I need, or if they are too old to be online, I go to my local university library, which is open to the public and also a good place for browsing.

1 Boring Old Man, the blog site of the late John “Mickey” Nardo, MD.  Mickey’s posts were always full of interesting and useful information.  Mickey died in February 2017.

Ignorance is Bliss, 2020, an excellent critique of psychiatry by Sam Lieblich, MD, psychiatrist.

Professor Peter C. Gøtzsche, MD, Danish physician and medical researcher, who is outspoken on the need to preserve honesty and integrity in science.  His Mad in America author page is here.

The Myth of the Chemical Cure (2008) by British psychiatrist Joanna Moncrieff.  More of her work can be found here.

A Psychological Approach to Abnormal Behavior (1975), by the late psychologists Leonard Ullmann, PhD, and Leonard Krasner, PhD.  Also Blaming the Brain (1998), by Elliot S. Valenstein, PhD, professor emeritus of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Michigan.  These books have been two of my main resources for years.

The akathisia foundation MISSD.  “MISSD (The Medication-Induced Suicide Prevention and Education Foundation in Memory of Stewart Dolin) is a unique non-profit organization dedicated to honoring the memory of Stewart and other victims of akathisia by raising awareness and educating the public about the dangers of akathisia.”

Multiple movements to investigate/stop the use of electric shocks to the brain, including this study by John Read, PhD, Irving Kirsch, PhD, and Laura McGrath, PhD.  If you do a browser search for “UK + ECT investigation 2020” you will find that there was a good deal of media coverage on the topic.  One of the people involved in this movement is Mary Maddock, a survivor of electric shock “treatment” and co-founder of MindFreedom Ireland.

Mad in America author Lawrence Kelmenson, MD, psychiatrist, whose author page is here.

Daniel Johnson, MD, psychiatrist, apologizes to his clients here.

Paul Minot, MD, psychiatrist, whose website straight talk about psychiatry includes A Poem: “I Went to a Psychiatrist”, and the article Psychiatry’s Inconvenient Truth: We’re Not Saving Lives.

Gwen Olsen’s 2009 book Confessions of an Rx Drug Pusher, which exposed the marketing tactics of pharma with regards to captive audiences (e.g., people in group homes, nursing homes, etc.).

Citizens Commission on Human Rights, Scientology.org.  Despite widespread criticism of its activities in other areas, it needs to be acknowledged that CCHR has been at the forefront in challenging the principles and practices of psychiatry.  Although it is often stated that I must be a member of CCHR, this is not the case.

So many other fellow anti-psychiatry bloggers that I lose track of their numbers.  Every time I think I have completed this list, more writers, campaigners, vocal survivors, and websites come to mind.  So I have to call a halt, and turn this over to my readers.

As I mentioned at the beginning, I invite readers to identify other individuals, groups, or sites that have contributed to the anti-psychiatry movement.



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. I really appreciated this article. I may disagree with the author at times, but this article presents an excellent chronicle and review of “anti-psychiatry” on the internet and otherwise. Although, the “anti-psychiatry movement” does not at seem organized as other movements seem to be, it is actually alive and vibrant. Sometimes, good, caring people try to force people to protest or speak out before they are ready. When you have been so damaged by psychiatry and its associates, it takes courage to even speak out on a mostly friendly site as this. The damage can be so overwhelming and the fear of how others may react can invoke a unique type of cautiousness. First, we were mistakenly diagnosed as “mentally ill” in some alleged form, then the drugs and treatments caused real harm. In a way, we have been at least doubly harmed and probably shunned by family, friends, and others. Many of us hide in the shadows of plain sight. We can not necessarily speak in large rallies in cities across the country. We can not necessarily speak or write in the presence of a mass media affiliate. It may take a while before our voice can be heard so broadly. But, in the meantime, we have sites like this and those sites, etc. listed above. Our time will come, but, we need to do our homework first in some many ways. Thank you.

    Report comment

  2. We are living through a take over by social scientists (SAGE in the UK who ‘advise’ the UK govt) under cover of a virus which will ever mutate until it’s aims are met: technocratic communism and eugenics to a near clueless fear brainwashed public.

    “Why did Cameron commit himself to this work? If one considers the impact of the Nuremberg trials on him, some clues emerge. It appears that in the late 1940s and early l950s, he became obsessed with a need to control social deviance and to prevent the transmission of negative traits and attitudes from parents to children. Did his later attempts to change human behaviour represent his response to this concern? Cameron’s presidential address to the American Psychiatric Association in 1953 suggests his involvement in the Cold War and his concerns about communism. Although he also used the opportunity to express his concerns about McCarthyism, Cameron held to a now familiar position — our best hope for a new world order and without hysteria, one without the totalitarianism of either the right or left, lies in science. With behavioural scientists as leaders, order would emerge from chaos. Were these attitudes a factor in his determination to change behaviour? It seems likely.”

    6 paragraphs up from the bottom of link

    “our best hope for a new world order and without hysteria, one without the totalitarianism of either the right or left, lies in science. With behavioural scientists as leaders, order would emerge from chaos.”

    This from a monster psychiatrist whose sadistic torture desires caused life long harm of many who paid for his MK-Ultra ‘treatment’


    Here are the weekly reports of notifiable diseases in the UK for the past year. On page 14 of each one you can see the numbers for Covid-19 in UK towns and cities:


    Here is a German Lawyer determined to expose what is happening:


    Can only hope many more lawyers follow.

    Never more so was encouragement needed to expose the true nature of psychiatry.

    Report comment

  3. Thank you for this recap of successes in the movement. It can get discouraging at times. I would like to thank everyone who has helped me learn the truth. The movement saved me from so much further suffering. Please keep up the efforts to defeat what I experienced as Evil.

    Report comment

  4. Phil, thanks for this. You know, it seems people are worried about the word “anti”.
    It just seems so “anti”. Yet there are scores of people that are in fact anti, terrified
    to lump anti and psychiatry together, and yet they denounce all it’s bullshit.
    Sami Timimi says he is “anti bullshit”. Well then, psychiatry as he points out, is
    bullshit. We literally could just say that we are anti-bullshit. Same thing.

    I’m anti bullshit and the APA should be renamed the ABA. The DSM is bull, the drugs are bull,
    the whole thing is a complete disaster and mess. And yes of course if we look at time and how slowly things move or change, it’s based on our silly little 80 year blip. LOL as if we can see big change in that time. And sure, psychiatry is busy as ever, but not for a second do I think or believe that they are comfortable. Liars are rarely comfy. They have no idea when that shit show can go bust.

    So I definitely think we are constantly making a difference. Nothing is stagnant. LOL it would be really silly to say “oh me oh my, psychiatry is just too powerful, I better give up”. Really for me it is about education and trying to keep people safe…. To find at least enough oomph to engage their “anosognosia”. That “anosognosia” that sits there in their sub or unconscious, warning them and to realize that the thing that psychiatry accuses them off is actually the thing serving themselves. Staying away from psychiatry can at least give people the chances they deserve.
    I think we do need a hell of a lot more “therapists” that FULLY support “anti bullshit” and identify bravely as such. It might help get the clients out of therapy much quicker.

    Anti bullshit is evolving and growing, and not just in the psych industry. It’s not going away AT ALL. When something gets exposed, it gets bigger. And something definitely comes of it.
    Nothing, nothing is ever in vain. Psychiatry made big bucks on BS. Well in reality, they are not doctors anyway, they really are just a form of government. And we cannot have our governments continually harming it’s citizens, whether colour or behaviour is involved, or indeed, feelings.

    People seem to think that some shred of psych can be saved. What they fail to see is that there is NOTHING about psychiatry that is somehow “good” for the person involved in psychiatry. It’s not a “mental health” entity, just the opposite in fact.
    There are a FEW shrinks that are actually caring and concerned about people but they do NOT practice what they were taught.

    Report comment

  5. I don’t call myself anti-psychiatry. I don’t care what happens to psychiatry. It can go up, down, or sideways for all I care. That psychiatry insists that we all worry about its future is yet another sign of the hubris of the profession.

    What I want is injury to patients to stop — the sloppy diagnoses based on bad research, overprescription, disregard of adverse effects, and outright clinical error. Just cleaning up its own avoidable patient harm would revolutionize psychiatry. Eventually, this may reach GPs, the sorceror’s apprentices who actual provide most psychiatric drug treatment in the world, with even less knowledge and fewer patient safeguards.

    Psychiatry could disappear tomorrow and there still would be millions of people stuck on the drugs with no clear way to go off. This is a gigantic public health mess of its own making.

    Report comment

    • GP’s are huge in prescribing, but I would say that some GPs only take direction from shrinks regarding
      the bad effects of drugs. A GP will call up a shrink to verify and shrink will say “nope, those are not the effects most people experience”. Doctors call each other about matters of the patient lol. they do not care what a patient says.

      Report comment

    • I come to this site for hope that there are people who are actively trying to educate about the dangers of psychiatric drugs and the harms of psychiatric care. I wish that there were many more voices and more outrage and concern. I remain discouraged that any “survivors” will be taken seriously regarding the disabilities and damages they have suffered, particularly those that are the most damaged or who have died because of psychiatric drugs. The suffering can be immense and long term, then the patient has to accept responsibility for their circumstances and the trust they placed in their doctor. Lives are ruined and often lost. I think Altostrata is right that a huge step in reducing harm would be for doctors to reconsider their quick diagnoses, overprescribing, ignoring adverse effects and learning to safely support those tapering. Psychiatrist vs. GPs appear more likely to prescribe more than 1 drug and also to push meds to highest doses. I have heard from psych doc that rationale for multiple meds was that less was needed of each med, however I was also told I was not willing to work on my depression if I would not take the highest dose of drug despite the numerous adverse effects. I was convinced to add another medication to cross taper then given another med to deal with side effects of drugs. I think all of these prescribing practices greatly contribute to patient harm. When multiple drugs are added and patient spinning out of control, doctor’s only resource appears to be prescription pad. A group that could certainly help with educating on psych drug harms are consumer drug safety groups, watchdogs, pharmacists that are trying to inform and protect patients but it’s an uphill battle. It’s nearly incomprehensible that a patient can go to a doctor for healing and then be seriously damaged or killed without someone saying “what went wrong here?” and “how can we prevent this from ever happening again?”

      Report comment

  6. Fantastic read Phil.

    It is really nice to recount the wins and the damning case built against psychiatry. Also, subsequently the relentless drive of outspoken human resistance.

    In my mind it compares and contrasts the approach of psychiatry to regurgitate clinical rubbish in order to color their agenda – to the diversely and incredibly well articulated argument against psychiatry and for the brilliance of the human condition.

    Its nothing short of amazing really. Its those moments I like to cling to, when I’ve met one more person dealing with the infinitely painful damages of psychiatry and I feel like I am dyeing a little bit inside.

    I think there’s a clear place here for those who have chosen to live with their eyes open.

    Report comment

  7. Psychiatry will continue to exist like it is because there is no replacement. Some aren’t considered worthy to have basic needs of feeling known, and acceptable. You can criticize and find every fault with what they do and the drugs, but it’s what they have. By the common rules of culture, only some can exist in other minds sufficiently to feel secure. Psychiatry is a symptom of the sick society.

    Report comment

  8. Dr. Hickey, I’m grateful for all you have so brilliantly written to expose the deception and dangers of psychiatry. It’s been very helpful and validating when one is trying to recover from the gas-lighting, lies and harm psychiatry flippantly inflicts on anyone who dared to enter psychiatry’s snare. Maybe the widespread suffering this pandemic has caused will finally expose the abusive practices psychiatry has to immediately affix disempowering, harmful labels on people while completely ignoring/dismissing all context of their stressful life circumstances or suffering.

    Thanks for the list of other resources. I believe the movement will keep gaining traction as more become aware of lives lost and the egregious harm being done to so many.

    I would add this book I recently read to the list of great resources exposing the industry of psychiatry for what it is:

    Smoke and Mirrors, an Insider’s Warning to Consumers – by Dr. Chuck Ruby

    Report comment

  9. Yes Rebel, women are regularly drugged for reactions, responses to motherhood. 31 years ago I had my first baby. I can confidently look back and see that drugs are an assault to some very important processes taking place. And for those that want to point to one or two cases of mothers killing their young, to warrant drugs, in fact, many were ON drugs. If people are truly concerned about babies and new moms, they can go into a home to stay with the family, to become part of the family, until there is equilibrium.
    I could write a book on how insane and dangerous it is to use drugs. Safety is in support and attendance, guidance and love. Understanding. Calm. Even therapy is absolutely insane in many or most instances.

    Report comment

  10. You forgot a few major things… there are thousands of videos on YouTube chronicling the people who have been harmed by psychiatry, who are tapering off of psych drugs, or healing from the above.

    New non-profit organizations that have been formed to help people who have been iatrogenically harmed: Benzo Info Coalition, The Alliance for Benzodiazepine Best Practices, Akathisia Alliance, among others.

    Film: Crazywise, Medicating Normal, Letters from GenerationRX, Healing Voices, and Daniel Mackler’s many films!

    Report comment

  11. Although I’m not so optimistic all told, great article. The fight goes on.

    Celebrate Anti-Psychiatry? You betcha! Psychiatry has done a great deal of harm, and the sooner people wise up to it the better.

    The struggle against psychiatry is actually older than the profession proper, and it continues. I see celebrating this struggle as a very good thing indeed.

    I would never wish psychiatry on a friend. I don’t think anybody else would either. Psychiatry is one of those things you do to people you don’t like as a rule. Personally, I think the world needs more love, and less drugging, labeling, and imprisonment in the name of “medicine”.

    People who care for people don’t psychiatrize them. I wish the practice was going to end tomorrow, however, I don’t think it will end that easily. Conceiving of it’s end is a first step to getting there. I think eventually we might be able to pull the money rug out from under the feet of the psychiatric establishment, and when the oppressor is not paid, he (and/or she) is going to move onto something else.

    Boycott psychiatry and eventually it will dry up and die. Such a death will mean a better world for all, and with nothing “other worldly” about it.

    Report comment

  12. Thank you for mentioning CCHR.
    For years I thought this was the only group doing anything about this problem.
    I wish we could have a place to discuss the resources it provides more openly.
    I feel the group that supports it (my church) has been demonized beyond all reasonable bounds.

    Report comment

  13. Dear Dr. Hickey,
    Thank you for your kind words about my post and for this wonderful collection of resources.
    I think, the notion of winning or losing depends on one’s definition. Yes, there are all these great publications, groups, organizations, and websites. Yes, it’s great that use of electroshock was greatly reduced. But other than electroshock, were there any other changes in real life? If we count not informational resources, but the number of involuntary hospitalizations, prescribed drugs, laws that govern both, number of people on mental illness disability, will we see a change for the better?
    Also, the Internet is a double-edged sword in many respects. For one, it greatly encourages polarization and compartmentalization – there are now a lot of groups that only talk to themselves and do not have any relevance to the outside world. To take an extreme example, you may have heard about the “flat earthers,” who probably also think that they are winning the battle. There are many thousands of them, with a lot of internet resources (I know, because I used these resources to discuss pseudo-science with my students). To have internet resources is good, but this does not necessarily lead to a real impact, alas …

    Report comment