Monday, December 9, 2019

Comments by dkjamil

Showing 78 of 78 comments.

  • Oldhead, you said on 6/23/16 at 8:20 pm on this thread, “…If there’s been a consensus on anything in the organizing forum and elsewhere it’s that anti-psychiatry is the most effective term by which to define ourselves, and the histrionic reactions to it by those associated with the ‘mental health’ industry confirm this. The International Conferences were also strongly anti-psychiatry btw.” I already pointed out those International Conferences have gone away. As for the term anti-psychiatry getting “histrionic reactions from the ‘mental health’ industry,” the people reacting are doing their job, which is to divert everyone’s attention from the real issues of abuse and oppression, and the anti-psychiatry crowd are helping them do it. As long as that is the case the anti-psychiatry movement is better off not going anywhere.

  • I clicked on the wrong reply–my response is above this, and I would like to add, I don’t see anything funny in any of this. The general populace needs help understanding that the sexual abuse of children is not acceptable. The fact it is against the law doesn’t seem to matter to anyone. In addition, the children are blamed and punished for the sexual abuse from beginning to end. It doesn’t seem too much to ask that the people responsible for this are targeted and held to account. The psychiatrist’s only job is to deflect that targeting.

  • R.D. Laing said he only provided the standard psychiatric services because people wanted him to, and I believe him. People must keep their respectability. It’s a matter of supply and demand. People want to hide their dirty laundry, and the psychiatrist helps them do this. Same goes for the society when it uses psychiatry to get rid of the undesirables. As long as you use the term anti-psychiatry you are missing the mark. You can keep shooting it off all you want–you aren’t going to hit anything, because there is nothing to hit. It’s a false front for something that nobody wants to tackle–respectable families protecting their reputations.

  • Frank, you said in one of the replies above, “Psychiatrists are not the only people corrupted by drug companies…and that it, in fact, extends to so-called peer run alternatives in many cases.” The problem is so much more than psychiatry. In my experience it begins with, and includes the families all the way down the line to where we are today–the Murphy Bill, families that support the system and demand more forced treatment all the time. We are talking about human rights and psychiatric oppression–in that order. The term anti-psychiatry has become all tangled up with Scientology, making confusion inevitable when you use it. Now, when you realize the psychiatrists are not the only problem, but the entire psychiatric system is, as well as the entire mh system, and an awful lot of the families involved, and the taxpayers willing to pay for the whole lot, then everyone becomes the enemy, and you just end up looking paranoid. When I got sucked into this whole mess and had to deal with the doctors, social workers, therapists, and mh workers, my first reaction was, and still is today: where is all this prudery coming from? The point of the entire exercise is to silence people. Really, the main thing going on here is the keeping of family secrets. Since we see ourselves as civilized, we are going about it through psychiatry. In other countries with fewer resources they simply kill the troublesome family member outright, even if it is their own child. Saying the movement is about human rights and psychiatric oppression is inclusive and clear.

  • I’m not trying to be difficult–just trying to explain a difficult concept. I grew up in a family opposed to allopathic medicine, and psychiatry was not considered a legitimate part of any kind of medicine. Also, psychiatrists were never considered to be real doctors. Yet, I could not relate to anti-psychiatry when I heard it. It’s like it was giving psychiatry legitimacy. Something must be real, big, and important to warrant an entire movement against it. As far as we were concerned, it was a bunch of rubbish that needed to be thrown out, and nothing has happened to change that opinion. Everything that has happened has only confirmed it many times over.

  • Frank, Oldhead made a comment (6/19/16 7:33 pm–I forgot to note the post, it’s getting late) “Unfortunately I don’t see a discussion of abolishing forced “treatment” anywhere on the public radar right now; even normally progressive people confuse us with Scientology when these issues come up.” I am simply saying the label anti-psychiatry does not help to clear up this confusion–it increases it.

  • Oldhead, they (the jackdaniels) aren’t the problem. It wasn’t people like this who coopted the anti-psychiatry movement. It was people who thought of themselves as part of the movement, and thought, and still think, of themselves as good people, as do most around them, I’m sure.

  • Oldhead, you were referring to “jackdaniels;” I was referring to the comment by “knowledgeispower.” If all the people who believe they are good and doing good work were against the Murphy Bill, and anything like it, and supported things like Soteria House and Open Dialogue, we would not have the Murphy Bill, and we would have many Soteria Houses, and Open Dialogue would be spreading rapidly throughout the U.S.

  • Oldhead, This is why I posted my comment about “good” people right below your comment about the Murphy Bill sailing through committee last week (Dr. Gotzsche’s post 6/18/16 1:25 pm). What you are calling fascist legislation is being supported by people who definitely see themselves as good people. On my comment I listed some of these good people, this person is telling you about more good people. The problem is NOT the disturbed and disturbing people, but those who see themselves as good people who are helping(?) them. I began that comment with, “Bad things happen in this world, and they can only get worse when the traumatized people the bad things happened to are met with more bad things being done to them by “good” people…”

  • It seems redundant and unnecessary to refer to the movement as anti-psychiatry if it is made clear what the movement is about. That way you separate completely from people who think the field of psychiatry has something to do with health ( and they have other places to go obviously). For example, “mental health” treatment becomes psychiatric treatment, or psychiatric methods of control. Psychiatry has nothing to do with health; it is about oppression from beginning to end. The only time health should come up is when discussing how the drugs psychiatrists use to control behavior and silence people have adverse effects on your health. The name of the conference Frank mentioned is perfect actually– International Conference on Human Rights and Psychiatric Oppression. It is important to be clear the movement is about human rights and freedom from oppression while simultaneously associating oppressive practices like mind and thought control, intelligence manipulation (Fromm), imprisonment, and enslavement (taking away ALL rights and freedoms and treating the person like an object), with the field of psychiatry. This is not being anti-psychiatry, which is an unclear and narrow concept, but anti-abuse and anti-oppression–a cause everyone can relate to.

  • If we don’t face the fact that our entire culture/society is based on an antiquated patriarchal ideology that never for a moment gave up slavery, therefore must maintain a police state to oversee its slave state, there is simply no way out of the godawful mess we have gotten ourselves into. All the talking, writing, blogging, speechmaking, organizing, and protesting in the world is not going to make one bit of difference if we don’t face facts, and continue instead to believe in a world where we can imagine we are free only if we are white and can toe the line.

  • I looked at the history of the movement link–that was a nightmare. The way they use “Mental Health System” is very deceptive. It gives the impression it is a very broad field with a lot of choices when there are none. It is a psychiatric system only with all resources supporting psychiatric drugging and methods of control (a replacement for the word treatment because using quotation marks around this word doesn’t make any difference for me). And are they serious about the “radical militant group” label? They seem like the radical militant group to me because they want to take away everyone’s rights and freedoms by forcing only the psychiatric option onto the entire populace. Also, people telling me at this point that drugs worked for them or someone they know is completely meaningless. If we had real, meaningful, easily accessible choices and someone said this to me, it might be worth considering, but not as things stand. And charging people with being anti-psychiatry doesn’t make sense to me either–I’m anti-abuse, period. The way they use the word recovery is deceptive as well–I really have no idea what they mean. Since these people have gone and set up this, whatever you want to call it, and anyone interested in that sort of thing can go there now, it seems like you could get back to the original idea without distraction from people who want to support only the psychiatric model.

  • Frank, in your comment on bio-psychiatry you’re making my point in a way (quotation marks sometimes don’t help make things clearer for me). The psychiatric system comes up with all sorts of bogus terminology and reasoning, the DSM being a prime example. Basically, they are destroying your health with drugs they are using to control your behavior and silence you. I simply think of their drugs as causing the (side) effects that are stated on the endless lists of (side) effects that come with the purchase of the drug. They state that the drugs cause what they are calling (side) effects, but are in reality illnesses.

  • Doctors, hospital staff, social workers, insurance administrators, anyone working in the psychiatric system, do expect to get paid for their work, but they want something else as well. They want to be seen as good people. The definition of the word good includes words, and ideas, like morally excellent, righteousness, beneficial, embodying the virtues of honesty, truth, and honor, etc. I have dealt with many of these people over the years and know for certain they want to be seen in a good light, as good people–even if they are drugging children for classroom behavior issues. The parents and teachers who go along with, and want, this drugging also wish to be seen as good people. Much of the drugging and involuntary treatments are done to prevent things from coming out that would tarnish the good reputations and image they work so hard to create. When I look at their actions I cannot think of them as good people even if, or perhaps especially if, they are family members.

  • Frank, the name of the conference you mentioned, International Conference on Human Rights and Psychiatric Oppression, sounds great. So does a patients’ liberation movement. I just can’t go along with putting mental before it for several reasons, the main one being I can’t separate mental from physical health. There is just health, or we are talking about something else, like distress, or trauma, or extreme anger and fear, all of which can affect our overall health in many ways. The themes of human rights, liberation, freedom from oppression, all go along with the concept of mind freedom that Mind Freedom International espouses. The goal is freedom, by no means limited to people caught up in a psychiatric system that is all about preserving and propagating mind control, imprisonment, and enslavement.

  • Earlier I said I was very interested in a patients’ liberation movement, leaving out the word mental you had placed before it. I think allopathic medicine is a crock, mainly because doctors practicing it are convinced it will only work–people will use it on a large scale–only if nothing else is available. That is how we end up with no choices when dealing with distressed, traumatized individuals. But we are not the only ones in this predicament. We need liberation from this no-choice-allopathic-mentality that has a viselike grip on our health services.

  • What is generally referred to as the mental health system, is about something more than maintaining a patient population. It is also about control. The curriculum planners of our schools work overtime to make sure every minute of almost every day in a child’s life is controlled by the school environment. Those students that do not go along with this and rebel are sent to what we euphemistically call a mental health professional or service, and they proceed to control the children’s minds with drugs and/or psychological manipulation. There are several things going on here, and they need to be talked about openly and clearly.

  • Setting words off with quotation marks, apostrophes, and asterisks doesn’t work for me. I don’t even know what I’m using; I’m calling quotation marks apostrophes. Even when done for the sake of brevity, it only adds to the confusion. Same goes for euphemisms and using general terms when specific words are needed in order to be as clear as possible. For example, the term mental health doesn’t work for me at all, no matter how many people use it. What they are calling mental health is about control, period. When someone loses control over themselves, for whatever reason, others step in to control them. On the other hand, I have no problem with the term chemical imbalance if drug-induced is added to the front of it, because the drugs do definitely cause drug-induced chemical imbalances in the brain and body leading to very real mental and physical illnesses. Every time the doctors told me my son had a chemical imbalance in his brain, I could not argue with them because they had already administered the drugs, therefore he did have a chemical imbalance, they just neglected to say it was drug-induced. Looking back I can never remember a time when they said his behavior was CAUSED by a chemical imbalance–very clever. They infer whatever, then let people assume the rest. Same with the genetics. They always asked leading questions about the medical histories of other members of the family, but never actually SAID his behavior was genetically based. These people, call them doctors if you must, are only interested in obfuscation.

  • Frank, I’m very interested in a small patient’s liberation movement. That works. In such a movement it would be possible to get clearer terminology–for example, “mental AND physical illness” would be used only when someone is on drugs and receiving treatment, as they do actually make you mentally and physically ill. Also, mental “health” is a complete misnomer, because the treatments and drugs in this field have nothing to do with health, wellness, and healing, and that concept goes with the biomedical model anyway. With the treatments and drugs we are talking about mental, or mind, control, imprisonment, enslavement, straitjackets, torture, abuse, and so on. We are talking about controlling and further abusing distressed, traumatized people–not giving them any genuine help.

  • “There is a reason for the complex, cumbersome protections of the criminal justice system.” The criminal justice system protects the government only. The government builds and runs the state hospitals where the torture you speak of takes place. It also pays the doctors and staff to carry out the torture, as well as the pharmaceutical companies and insurance that aid and abet said torture. It also supports the universities where people are trained how to practice that torture. The government’s refusal to support any kind of help that is non-coercive and healing is what prevents the desperately needed services of Soteria House and Open Dialogue from happening. It is the government’s refusal to provide help with getting off drugs that can make the mental imprisonment they cause a life sentence, in effect torturing people for their entire lives. The government and its criminal justice system are all about control through imprisonment–mental and physical. We are not talking about mental “health,” we are talking about mental imprisonment and mass incarceration.

  • “As Thomas Szasz originally taught, involuntary psychiatric treatment is unconstitutional and an assault on basic human rights.” It is an assault on basic human rights, but it is not unconstitutional–the 13th Amendment never abolished slavery.
    “Yet these approaches remain outside the psychiatric establishment because it is so easy to lock people up who ‘do not respond to treatment.'” It is so easy because the 13th Amendment makes it so easy.
    “Today in America, while long-term psychiatric incarcerations have gone down, civil commitment of people in the community is escalating.” Just another way of adding to the mass incarceration already going on, as allowed by the 13th Amendment.
    “People in authority…need the restraint of Constitutional protections…” “Civil commitment bypasses these protections…” The Constitution doesn’t protect anyone from anything, including slavery.
    “As cumbersome as the criminal justice system can be, we are better off as a society if we rely on it, rather than coercive psychiatry, to protect us from violence.” When that justice is based on the supreme law of the land that allows slavery, it is not going to protect anyone from anything.
    “Abolishing involuntary treatment is easily justified under the Bill of Rights…” Too easily–that is why it is allowed in the Constitution, which trumps the Bill of Rights.
    “…including sections that pertain to due process, protection from cruel and unusual punishments, and the protection of freedom of speech.” The 13th Amendment gives the authorities the right to strip you of all your rights and freedoms and treat you like a piece of the State’s property. That was the point of putting slavery under the control of Congress.
    “To superimpose upon them the will of professionals devoted to psychiatric theories and practices that do more harm than good is neither human or kind; it is simply oppressive.” Slavery is a very specific form of oppression. It lessens the value of a person’s life, making him a fraction of a human, therefore easy to prey upon.
    Long story short–we need to abolish slavery.

  • You’re calling this a movement, which means something should be moving, like public opinion, legislation, etc. I haven’t seen any movement so far except in a reverse direction. There is plenty of information out there, so why all the public ignorance and apathy? Now I agree they are nurtured by corporate media and government policies, but the courts and court appointed attorneys are very much a part of the government as well as being heavily influenced by the corporate world. So the “movement” is either going backwards or in circles.

  • I am aware, and have been aware for some time, that it is possible to “recover” and that people have successfully “recovered.” But why is there still no choice except medication, hospitalization, and involuntary “treatment?” Why are Soteria Houses almost nonexistent when there should be many? Why is there no easily accessible Open Dialogue? And why is the Murphy Bill sailing along unimpeded? Books like this give the impression that progress is being, or has been, made, but I haven’t seen it in “real life”– at all.

  • Highly educated people with advanced degrees, the experts we rely on to do our thinking for us, are capable of producing the worst and most foul-smelling bullshit on the face of the earth. Their words and actions are truly a powerful condemnation of an educational system that gives NO, ZERO, value to compassion and humanity except as some sort of charade. CHARADE: AN ABSURD PRETENSE INTENDED TO CREATE A PLEASANT OR RESPECTABLE APPEARANCE.

  • Criticizing the doctors and psychiatry may be one way of bringing attention to their harmful and ineffectual “treatments,” however, the bigger problem is that they are paid for and supported by the state using taxpayer money, and people generally agree with what they are doing or don’t care. More than anything else, the public wants to maintain order and the status quo, and it threatens everyone else when you allow disturbed and disturbing people to express themselves rather than suppressing and silencing them. We, and our “everyday lives,” are the problem, but we can’t face ourselves–and don’t want to.

  • The general public is not concerned with the happiness of a troubled and/or disruptive person. Generally people are concerned with maintaining order and the status quo in the most efficient, cost-effective way possible. This definitely takes priority over what appears to be a few malcontents expressing dissatisfaction with mental health services. The public thinks suppression is the answer while the ones being suppressed know, from experience, it only makes things worse. There needs to be more focus on the fact that the “treatments” and drugs have nothing whatsoever to do with health, wellness, and healing. Instead of mental “health” we need to call it what it is–mental imprisonment.

  • Ragnarok, It is interesting you should bring up 9-11 in the discussion about who is good or evil according to their actions. It reminds me of what happens so often now when one is attempting to examine and criticize our collective behavior. The person trying to do this can suddenly find him or herself being accused of supporting terrorists and terrorism. Really, we need to question our confidentiality laws presumably made to protect the victim but actually protecting perpetrators, then concealing the abusive actions of our so-called caregivers. The specific actions of those in the medical field “hurting, oppressing, or killing for fun or for profit” need to be fully exposed to make it clear exactly who is a terrorist and supporting terrorism when talking about issues of abuse.

  • Bad things happen in this world, and they can only get worse when the traumatized people the bad things happened to are met with more bad things being done to them by “good” people (doctors definitely see themselves as good people) backed up by more “good” people (tax payers supporting the abuse definitely see themselves as good people). Somehow all these “good” people need to be shown the great harm, pain, and suffering they cause with their “treatments” and drugs when they further abuse people needing love, compassion, and support at a time of crisis in their lives. The “good” people need to be shown that as long as they support these “treatments” they most definitely are not “good” people but bad, even evil (having knowledge without love) people and should be portrayed and thought of as such.

  • The Murphy Bill is a clear indication that what Bruce Levine calls the “Rehumanizing Resistance” is losing ground–rapidly. This Resistance is making the same mistake Martin Luther King’s Civil Rights Movement did. Both narrow what should be a human rights issue concerning everyone down to a specific group like a particular race, or people labeled mentally ill. The isolating effect of this narrowing of the issue is magnified by the mental health industry’s use of violent acts to advertise their practice and products. At every opportunity they attribute the violence to the person having been off their meds, or never having been properly diagnosed and put on them in the first place. This puts fear into people’s minds and they don’t want to think about or hear other points of view.

  • We’ve been taught from the beginning to have unquestioning respect for people with university degrees. These people have become, or replaced, the voice of God. An idea or thought is valid only if some expert with a degree sanctions it. Those of us without degrees are just chattering–we are not competent enough to do our own thinking, so those with degrees must do it for us. This has led us to being collectively very foolish which has then led to a lot of tragedy. Graduates with Masters and PhD degrees design the curriculum for our schools here in America. They have told us the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolished slavery, and we have foolishly believed them. It did no such thing–slavery was NEVER abolished, and the 13th Amendment allows the State to LEGALLY enslave anyone at anytime. Since the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, the Congress, courts, and executive branch of the government are all sworn to preserve, protect, and defend it, meaning the entire government and everyone working for it are preserving, protecting, and defending slavery. This affects everyone because we can all be caught up in this slavery net through so-called criminality or by being “a threat to ourselves and/or others.” On top of it all we are taught to have unquestioning respect for the people in charge of enslaving and exploiting their fellow Americans.

  • In the 13th Amendment to the Constitution Congress successfully hid the institution of slavery behind the idea of criminality which no one wants to be associated with or talk or think about. People suffering mental health crises get pulled into that category with the “5150” charge. The 13th Amendment never ended slavery, it just labeled the enslaved differently. Instead of calling them slaves, it uses the label criminal (“except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted”), and in the case of the 5150 people, the label mentally ill with all the DSM labels thrown in for good measure. Our schools encourage students to be the best they can be, then the cream of this crop, the winners, want to associate only with others in the same category. They want nothing to do with losers–those labeled criminal, indigent, and mentally ill. Our best and brightest are the ones who find clever ways to continue the institution of slavery, cover it up, and create endless distractions that will take everyone’s attention away from the fact that America is, and always has been, a slave state, continuing what Frederick Douglass called the “greatest curse, crime, and scandal.”

  • Sera, you spoke of rape and in my experience rape and chattel slavery are synonymous. And yes, there is still chattel slavery in the world, including certain communities in Western countries. It was only recently I discovered that our Constitution still allows the enslavement of people in the name of law and order. This came as a shock as I know how this mentality affects the entire environment, especially children–again from personal experience. It also explained the hell our family has been put through by the mental health industry till today–in this case a lifelong personal experience.

  • Amendment XIII Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, EXCEPT as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
    Last time I checked the meaning of EXCEPT had not changed. Because of Section 1. we have more people enslaved (incarcerated is a euphemism) than before the Civil War. Because of Section 2. we have nightmares like the Murphy Bill. There is no worse crime than slavery, and the biggest criminals in this country, arguably the world, are sitting in Congress, in the White House, and on the Supreme Court. Semantics??? Give me a break!

  • “…ask the hard questions…” Why are we quoting Martin Luther King, Jr., a campaigner for civil rights, when slavery, the most egregious human rights violation that exists, was never abolished, never ended? As a result of the “clever” wording of the 13th Amendment, slavery is still alive and well in America which explains why more African Americans are enslaved (“incarcerated” is a euphemism) today than before the Civil War. And the enormous prisons we keep building to enslave (“incarcerate” is a euphemism) them in are the most polluted and polluting places on earth in every sense of the word pollute (contaminate with harmful or poisonous substances, defile, corrupt, poison, warp, pervert, adulterate, blight, sully, dirty, infect, befoul, and so on and on). The 13th Amendment (U.S. Constitution, supreme law of the land–preserved, protected, and defended by the Congress, Supreme Court, President, and every public servant out there) is also what gives the power to the State and State employees to enslave (“incarcerate” and “hospitalize” are euphemisms) people in psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric wards throughout the country where they can do whatever they like to them just as if they were their property, because, according to the 13th Amendment, they are, in fact, the State’s property, as are all the prisoners in the prisons. How can any “cause” be more important than what is causing all the problems we are trying to address and solve?
    “Could anything be more futile than dealing with the effects but not the cause?” (p.158 “Surviving in the Streets” by Ace Backwords).

  • What does the color of anyone’s skin have to do with what I am talking about? And what does history have to do with it? There is currently slavery the world over that has nothing to do with skin color. It has to do with economic status, or class, or caste, or belonging to a religious minority, or any number of other things that allow people to devalue, use, and abuse someone “beneath” them. And what does racism have to do with it? If we could get rid of racism tomorrow we would still have slavery as it is allowed in the Constitution and backed by the Supreme Court. The State could still do whatever it liked with you in State institutions like prisons and psychiatric wards. After the Civil War slavery was simply moved from one side of the room to the other, then everyone changed the subject. It became all about racism and the Civil Rights Movement. The trouble is, slavery never ended, and that is why we are still talking about every kind of human rights abuse and violation, helpless to stop it, and receiving no help from the government or the courts.

  • Sera, are you serious? Are the people making comments about how the subject of slavery is unrelated to rape serious? When, in the entire history of the world, were the two unrelated? When someone commits rape they are treating you like property, an object. Where did the rapist get the idea it was even possible to treat someone like property, like an object they could do with as they like? From slavery. Do you really believe rape is an apolitical subject–that it has nothing to do with the power of the state or politics? Rape is an extremely powerful political tool. It says, “I own you.” And slavery says, “I own you.” And these two are unrelated? If you talk of rape, you should expect the subject of slavery to come up. If you don’t want to hear of slavery, why speak of rape? People do one to have the other. They are intimately connected, they are bedfellows, they go hand in hand, one begets the other, they are inseparable. Rape is about enslavement, and enslavement is about rape. One of the primary motivations for enslaving people is having the freedom to rape at will. Hijacked? Really? Of all the blog posts, this is the last one I would expect to get this reaction to raising the subject of slavery. And why does “comparison” keep coming up? I said I was NOT making a comparison.

  • I have read so many books, articles, blogs, etc. in which the authors are bemoaning the “power” of what Bruce Levine is referring to as First-Order Psychiatry and Big Pharma. You would think they might want to know where that power is coming from (the supreme law of the land every public servant is sworn to preserve, protect and defend). Guess not. Thanks for your encouragement.

  • I suppose my first comment regarding slavery seemed off-topic, but I am talking about causes here. We are a slave State, and a slave State is an oppressive State which leads to “environmental failure” (“Environmental Failure–Oppression is the Only Cause of Psychopathology” by David H. Jacobs) Your post seemed like an excellent description of one type of “environmental failure” such oppression leads to. A slave State does depend upon the constant denigration of its populace to keep everyone “in their place” and under control, which is why we are plagued with an epidemic of bullying and sexual abuse. I’m sorry if I’m not being clear, but it seems self-evident to me.

  • I have been puzzled by the comments saying I am making a comparison or analogy between slavery and psychiatric abuse when I have done nothing of the sort. And no one on Michelle Alexander’s Facebook page has objected to what I am saying, and they are not reticent about their opinions. I can only think that what is being objected to is any association with criminals or criminality. There is no worse crime than slavery because it opens the door to every other human rights abuse and violation. The fact the State is doing it in no way lessens its negative impact on society. David H. Jacobs wrote an interesting and informative paper titled, “Environmental Failure–Oppression is the Only Cause of Psychopathology.” Slavery is the most powerful tool of oppression, and after the Civil War it was put in the hands of Congress via the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

  • Re “cognitive shortcut” This kind of reasoning is why we still have slavery. When you suddenly lose all your rights and freedoms, for any reason, and another person, group, or the State can LAWFULLY (backed by the U.S. Constitution, Congress, and the Supreme Court) do whatever they like with you, just as if you were a piece of their property, you have legalized, institutionalized chattel slavery. By any other name…

  • Slavery never ended in America. The 13th Amendment simply put it under the jurisdiction of Congress, so we are literally, legally a slave State. Enslavement requires the constant denigration of people to “keep them in their place” by those in control who want to use them for economic gain and/or sexual gratification. As long as we collectively think this is necessary and acceptable slavery will continue.

  • How about starting a campaign in which anytime anyone who is protesting drug promotion, forced drugging, ECT, incarceration–the abuse the psychiatric profession gets away with in the name of “treatment,” writes anything regarding their objections anywhere at all, they write p$ychiatry and p$ychiatrist. The idea would be to associate the field with greed instead of “care.”

  • Neither Harriet Beecher Stowe’s book nor the Civil War led to the abolition of slavery. The 13th Amendment simply moved slavery from some people owning other people to the state owning everyone, which is why any time you run into trouble with the “authorities” all of your rights and freedoms suddenly evaporate and the state can legally do whatever it likes with you. State employees are protected by the supreme law of the land–the U.S. Constitution.

  • The purpose of focusing on what in “everyday life” is causing the “symptoms” would be, first and foremost, to find helpful, holistic responses to stuff that happens in our chaotic systems. If we know the perfectly understandable reason behind someone’s anxiety, or depression, or mania, or “psychotic” thinking, or dissociation, then we can react with compassion and understanding instead of fear and loathing. It is interesting you used the analogy of neglecting kids who have broken bones. In my son’s first encounter with psychiatry, he was admitted to hospital with what could be described as the equivalent of a severely broken leg. Their “treatment” basically consisted of breaking his other leg, then telling us, ok, this kid is completely incapacitated and in extreme pain and the only thing that will help him is for him to take these heavy-duty medications that will numb the pain–but he has to keep taking them. If there had been SOME attempt to understand why he was having difficulty in the first place, perhaps his distress could have been alleviated in a caring, helpful, and healing way. As it was, he was much more than “neglected” as well as further traumatized after already suffering incredibly traumatic experiences.

  • Why are we gathered around people with “symptoms” trying to figure out how they can get over them and “go on with everyday life?” Why aren’t we focused on finding out what is in our “everyday life” that is causing these “symptoms” and all the unhelpful and unnatural reactions to them such as incarceration, drugging, ECT, etc.?

  • madmom, I have read about several places that were established to provide the safe, supportive, and loving environment these people need, like Mosher’s Soteria House. However, each time they lost funding and were shut down even though they were successful in helping people recover from trauma who had the same symptoms you describe. Unfortunately, the biomedical model appears easier, faster, and cheaper, although it has been proven to be none of these. It comes down to politics and control and the fact that our laws (backed by the 13th Amendment) allow our society to dispose of unwanted people by allowing the state to enslave them. This option should never have been available, and it certainly shouldn’t be allowed now.

  • I have witnessed coercive, forced mental health “care” in the case of my mother who had a very traumatic childhood, then in the case of one of my sons who was the driver in an ATV accident in which his father was killed. I began asking how the mental health system can legally get away with consistently doing these forced interventions. Why is the law always on the State’s side, never the patient’s? From all sides I received the answer that they have the power to do it, but no one could tell me the source of their power. Finally I realized the psychiatrist/patient relationship is just like the slaveowner/slave relationship–they can do what they like to you without question. Then I reread the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and found the source of the state’s power in any situation where one becomes involved with the “authorities.” It literally IS the slaveowner/slave relationship. Legalized slavery never ended in America. Keeping the institution of slavery is how the status quo is maintained.

  • I was not making a comparison or analogy. I am saying it IS slavery according to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution and court cases and legislation based on it. If you run afoul of the State and get put through one of its courts, including the courts that commit people to psychiatric wards, the State owns you–literally–and can do what it likes with you. That is slavery and is stated quite plainly in the Amendment our State-run schools tell us “abolished” slavery. It did no such thing.

  • Hello David. I have questioned for years what gives the “authorities” the right to impose their will upon people in addition to revoking all their rights every time the State becomes involved in an issue. A lot of reading and research led me to rereading the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. As soon as I did that I realized slavery was never abolished. It just moved slavery from some people owning other people to the State owning everyone. The State became the slaveholder. Before becoming president the winner of the election, whoever that may be, must take the Oath of Office and swear to preserve, protect, and defend slavery–the job of every public servant, courtesy of the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the highest law in the land.

  • Frank, I just left a reply on your comment regarding the slave owner/slave relationship between psychiatrists and their patients. It is important to realize that these people are backed up in their actions by the supreme law of the land–the U.S. Constitution. The 13th Amendment never abolished slavery–it made the State the slaveholder. Section 2 of this Amendment explains the rest.

  • Thank you for your article. Similar questions plagued me until I finally realized that the relationship between a psychiatric patient and doctor is just like the relationship between a slave and his/her owner. I then reread the 13th Amendment and finally realized what is going on. That amendment simply moved slavery from some people owning other people to the state owning everyone. It expanded slavery rather than abolishing it. I have made several comments regarding this on Michelle Alexander’s Facebook page. She is the author of “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness.” I am also writing about it on my blog notaboutislam.com.