Blogs

As I look back on the civil rights movement and all that my ancestors marched for, I sometimes feel as if the civil rights movement has been a dream deferred. We have come far but still have a long road ahead. The intersection of civil rights, poverty and the psychiatric survivors movement has played out now for four generations. Now the psychiatric movement faces its biggest hurdle. We are asking our allies, representatives and members of our community to stand up. We urge you not to endorse the Murphy Bill.

By 2002 GlaxoSmithKline had done 3 studies in children who were depressed and described all three to FDA as negative.  As an old post on Bob Fiddaman’s blog reproduced here outlines, several years later they undertook another study in children in Japan. (Editor's note: This is a re-print, by David Healy, of a post by Bob Fiddaman)

It has been a little more than a year since you perhaps read Rob Wipond's story about Siddharta and I, From Compliance to Activism: A Mother’s Story. Some of you may remember that in August 2014, Siddharta was freed at last. His recovery from years of being drugged and treated as less than human, and the traumatization of confinements and imprisonment became my main focus. And how is Siddharta doing now? Well as his Mother, I would say he has made remarkable progress!

One of psychiatry's most obvious vulnerabilities is the fact that various so-called antidepressant drugs induce homicidal and suicidal feelings and actions in some people, especially late adolescents and young adults. This fact is not in dispute, but psychiatry routinely downplays the risk, and insists that the benefits of these drugs outweigh any risks of actual violence that might exist.

There are an ever-increasing number of professionals and lay people who advocate for reforms within the mental health system. Even the staunchest of biological psychiatrists agree that changes must be made. When I first decided to pursue clinical psychology as a career, I did so with the intention of trying to change the system for the better, or at least to offer a different experience to individuals in distress. Personally, I believe that peer-led alternatives and independent funding are the things that advocates should focus more heavily on, but that does not solve the problem of what to do to decrease the amount of harm that is being done on a daily basis in the present. In this sense, I believe that a “harm-reduction” approach to dealing with the current system is the best way to get what we can until something better exists.

I believe if the public really knew and understood the reason why we who have survived medically-induced harm, and who do not have the human right to — with real evidence — legally expose this, they would support psychiatric survivors and help us to put an end to what has been called ‘the tyranny of good will.’

In the wake of yet another national uproar about a mass shooting, much of the public once again turns its eye towards supposed mental health reform as the solution to the atrocity of acts of gun violence carried out in public spaces by primarily young, white men. The issue of gun control has soared back up to the top of concerns being addressed by presidential candidates, and national discourse has fallen back into its routine, polarized stances. The Republican leadership continues to suggest that gun control is not the solution — there must be something wrong with “those people’s” brains.

We are among an increasing number of people around the world who know the importance of holding on to a humanistic idea, and of keeping in mind that people need—first and foremost—other people. People who are willing to take part, to share with us the horror and confusion, to invite the telling of a narrative, and to keep the hope alive.

For most people in the transgender community our earliest memories are experiences of being bullied, or not being loved by some family members because we looked and acted differently than other male or female-bodied persons. For me this led to an early onset of depression and being diagnosed in the third grade. My first attempt at leaving this world and the body I had grown to hate was at the age of eight. Feeling unloved by my family, and being in a body that had betrayed me, I felt disconnected from the world in general.

After each highly publicized gun violence incident, some lawmakers—whether with good intention, for political gain, or both—declare that we must have laws to keep guns out of the hands of people with mental illness. It is therefore stunning and profoundly important to note Sunday's blog post from the American Psychiatric Association's president, Dr. Renee Binder.

The joint ISEPP/UCLA conference was held in Los Angeles on November 14-16, 2014. Today, ISEPP and the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs are delighted to bring you videos of 13 of the 15 invited plenary talks. Each video is accompanied by a crisply written interview with the speaker, focusing on the goals of their work, challenges facing their profession, and how they evaluate any salient changes in mental health practice and research. These smartly produced and edited videos range from 20 to 30 minutes in length and are freely available on www.TransformingMadScience.com

Integration of physical and "mental health" care has been a popular topic in psychiatric circles in recent years. I've never been entirely clear about the nature of this proposed integration of psychiatry with primary care, though from what I've gathered, it sounds like there will be a psychiatrist, or other mental health worker, attached to primary care practices, either in the flesh or via computer screens. What has always been crystal clear, however, is that the proposal would entail a huge expansion of the psychiatric net.

The controversy over “Study 329” on the effects of Paxil in teen depression has raised questions about the state of ALL medical research. I decided to look at the research for the most recent psychiatric drug approved by the FDA, a new antipsychotic called cariprazine or Vraylar.  I located twenty studies of Vraylar on www.ClinicalTrials.gov, the U.S. government-sponsored registry for clinical trials.  Three were still in process, and seventeen were completed.  Not one had shared its results on the government website, a supposedly mandatory step.

In reviewing the classes I took in graduate school, nowhere was I taught that mental disorders are an illness arising from a chemical imbalance which needs to be treated with medication. If my university professors did not teach it, then where did I learn it? The answer lies in working in the field itself and hearing it from supervisors and other colleagues. But where did they learn it? Why do we to continue to blindly go along without questioning whether or not any of this makes sense or is helpful? We need to do better.

Psychiatry, at large, is coming under correction after decades of collusion with industry and media. Yes, those “healers of the soul” (can you believe that’s what the original meaning of psychiatrist actually derives from?) have to begin to take responsibility for their part in overdiagnosis and overtreatment of vast swaths of the population. What has been less explored is the collusive role of the media in generating public beliefs about mental illness and its best treatment.

This thought-provoking reflective checklist strategy is designed to challenge the increasing 'quick fix' mentality of many doctors who decide to move immediately from a possible diagnosis to medication. With school-aged children we need to promote their Safeguarding, and a Pause-Reflect-Review process that will, hopefully, reduce unnecessary prescribing.

A screenshot of the Facebook of the Oregon shooter, taken by a colleague of mine before the site was taken down, has the following comment from the shooter: “Chris Harper Mercer, August 16: I have a pill bottle with like five types of pills mixed in. I don’t know which ones are the sleep aids, so I just took four of each.” Once again, we have a shooter who has been through the “mental health” system and has probably been taking drugs.

Benzodiazepines may be the most popular, widely used, and immediately effective of all the psychiatric drugs. At the same time they are perhaps one of the most dangerous, addictive, and abused mind-altering substances on the planet. Since the 1980’s psychiatry and their partners in the pharmaceutical industry have spent billions of dollars marketing these drugs and justifying their efficacy in the “treatment” of anxiety and insomnia. Psychiatry has been able to create a patient base of millions of people who are dependent on these drugs and are forced to remain “co-dependent” customers of psychiatrists and other medical doctors in order to procure them.

Recent calls for screening for a range of mental health problems point to an important recognition of the need to identify and address emotional suffering. Such screening offers an opportunity to decrease the stigma and shame that often accompany emotional pain. A powerful new documentary, The Dark Side of the Full Moon, calls attention to the under-recognition and under-treatment of postpartum depression. In one scene, a mother refers to resistance from doctors who lack resources to address positive screens as "absurd.” She is correct, if the alternative to screening is to look the other way in the face of women who are suffering.

In July, 2015 an article was published in the ^{New York Times Magazine} about a pair of male Colombian MZ twins (monozygotic, identical), where one member had been accidentally switched at birth with the member of another MZ pair. Historically, the ^Times and other mainstream (corporate) media outlets have reported on genetic and biological theories of human behavioral differences from the perspective that these influences are important, usually quoting the statements of scientists and twin researchers who promote these positions, while largely ignoring the views of their critics. The genetic determinist theories they often promote coincide with the interests of the economically and politically powerful sections of American society (including the drug companies), who finance and promote the research.

I think it is indeed true that many people go to psychiatrists specifically to get drugs. This is because it is widely known that psychiatrists will prescribe psychiatric drugs readily. In fact, since about 1980 or so, they really don't do much of anything else. For most psychiatrists, a "patient" returning at regular intervals for "med-checks" and refills is the ideal scenario. Within the psychiatric community, there is, I think, a great deal more concern expressed about non-compliant "patients" than there is about those who adhere faithfully to the prescription and keep coming back for more.

When I was twenty-eight, I had what is commonly referred to as a “psychotic break.” It was nothing like what I would’ve imagined, given the cultural stereotypes. It was not in the least nonsensical. There was an exacting inner logic and meaning. Twenty-two years later, I continue to believe in the harrowing greatness of what my younger self went through.

'How to Touch a Hot Stove' (the centerpiece of what is being called 'The Hot Stove Project') is a film that professes to be about a new civil rights movement. It employs interview clips from a wide array of 'big names' on all sides of the 'mental health' world, in a purported effort to compare and contrast the many voices that lay claim to that concept. In fact, the filmmakers did a fairly good job of writing about a film that would surely have stood out in a sea of chemically imbalanced cinema. Unfortunately, the film they wrote about is not the film they made.

There is a hunger out there for a foundational critique of psychiatry—something that pulls no punches, minces no words. That is, there is a hunger for a reasoned antipsychiatry position. Something that explains how we ended up here, provides solid evidence that psychiatry should be abandoned, and begins theorizing what we might do instead.

Good Pharma is the story of the Mario Negri Institute. Mario Negri was a wealthy patron who on his death in 1960 bequeathed a large sum of money to support independent pharmaceutical research to an upcoming researcher Silvio Garattini. Garattini and Alfredo Leonardi set about building an Institute centred on the new drugs and new techniques. They continue to grow without ever having patented any of their many discoveries or concealing any of the data from experiments that didn’t work out or accommodating any of their trials to industry’s wishes.