Showing 40 of 40 comments.
Sera, brilliant as always. Your questions to the bot cracked me up.
Why, he asked, is there no where he can go? I was recently at Penn Station in NY. I came across one man, sleeping in a sink. And I thought the same thing. A few moments later, exiting the WC, I saw another man, probably homeless, sitting leaning against the wall. He was approached by 2 young individuals wearing t shirts with the words AMTRAK HOMELESS OUTREACH PROGRAM printed on it. And they spoke with the man and asked if he needed a place to stay. And I thought, what a great idea. Offer them a helping hand, a place to sleep, a place to go. One trip to the ER or one hospitalization could pay for how many days of housing? Its a start.
Another great response by SD.
Throughout history, in each era, there has always been a group that suffers the most discrimination: heritic, witch, slave, Japanese, communist, Jew, black. It is now the person with a DSM4/5 code.
I wish there was a word that could describe this type of treatment. It is like racism but it’s not based on skin color. And it is not a brief encounter, like sit on the back of the bus. The mistreatment begins with the sharing of a “diagnostic code” usually by someone who is a government employee (teacher, etc) with another government employee with a gun. The guy with the gun usually has a companion with him, who also has a gun, and the guys with guns escalate things.
What comes next are “orders” from the guys with guns, or restraint and transport to the location of the next team.
The cop duo then performs a handoff to other government employees (jail or hospital/jail) with a wink and a nod. The new team then assumes the benevolent public servant persona.
The new team then decides what is best for the new admit, who, of course, lacks insight. What is best is usually exclusion, imprisonment, restraint and maybe an injection of antipsychotics.
Most of this is done without any input from a doctor. But if a doctor was brought into the mix, his role is to create a psych record to justify whatever mistreatment his team chooses to impose.
On occasion, there may be an outsider newbie on the team who hasn’t been indoctrinated into the system. They may be the only advocate the labelee has.
Most incidents of racism last a few minutes. This scenario is like racism that lasts hours or days or weeks. And it’s infectious. I wish there was a word for it. It’s not just discrimination. Its really more like state sponsored stalking.
It has been my observation that the more grounded a person is in mathematics, the less belief they have in the drug model of modern psychiatry. There are some who rely on the drug efficacy as advertised by the drug makers in tv ads. Others, more skeptical, go to the journals and read the studies. Then there are some that not only read the study, but examine the statistics and claims with a critical eye, and then report on it. These mathematicians deserve great respect.
I would wager that 100% of the psychiatrists who would diagnose him as “mentally ill” are democrats. And that those who would not diagnose him are republicans. Just as a prosecutor can make a ham sandwich look guilty, a psychiatrist can interpret any psychiatric data in such a way to fulfill whatever outcome he seeks.
Have you heard of the new mmpifcad? Question 1 for cats: 1. I have had a very traumatic experience with a dog. One meow=yes, two meows=no.
Question 532 for dogs: when I see a cat, I want to chase it. One bark=yes, two barks=no. Question 435 for dogs: when I dream, I often dream I am chasing a cat. One bark=yes, two barks=no. The questions are loaded into a computer that uses a proprietary algorithm to determine what disorder your cat or dog may have. Highly technical but secret. The results are correlated with the DSM1FCAD.
Main Entry: outing
Part of Speech: noun
Definition: politically motivated exposure of another’s secrets
Synonyms: announcement, declaration, demystification, disclosure, proclamation, revealing, tossing, uncloseting, unmasking
What the author speaks of is, in essence, a classic witch hunt. The person with a DSM4/5 code is the witch. The employers and coworkers are the witch hunters. The objective of the witch hunter is to identify the witch and to eliminate them. Although there are other environments where the witch hunters do their hunting, it is in the work environment where the most severe injuries are inflicted.
To answer a recent question posed by a commenter, I will give a glaring illustration.
*******”It only has to do with my inability to be employed because of the repeated and calculated disclosures of my personal medical information by those who had something to gain by those disclosures.” How did you know this info was disclosed to potential employers? What did you sign that includes this in a background check? ******
In my case, a federal government agency created a document that named me by name, and disclosed the words “post traumatic stress symptoms” implying I had PTSD. This document, typed on federal letterhead was then mailed to my employer, two states where I held a professional license, and 4 hospitals I worked at.
Guess what happened? I was prosecuted like a criminal in two states. The document disclosing “ptsd” was cited as my accuser. The document, was introduced as evidence in a court of law. I was put out of business because someone wrote ptsd in a sheet of paper. This is all it took to ruin my career.
Some people find this hard to believe but I have a trial transcript that proves it. This is the power of a label. I am a witch and I was burned at the stake.
When I reported this to the EEOC what did they do? Nothing. When I filed suit in federal court under the ADA, what did the court do? They dismissed my case in a motion to dismiss.
So I was put out of business not because I have PTSD, but because some government secretary wrote the phrase on a piece of paper.
I would like to comment on this comment:
” I don’t really think the EEOC is at fault, anyway. The problem revolves around who is allowed to access the legal system. You have to be able to (1) find and (2) hire (ie, pay for) an attorney to represent you in a court of law. No matter how egregiously a law has been violated, if you can’t pay for legal representation, you have no chance for redress. ”
This is true. If you cannot “find” a lawyer, you can’t invoke the law that was designed to protect you.
Now suppose that a black man was fired from his job because his new supervisor was a racist. He is now unemployed. He seeks a lawyer who tells him to pony up 25,000$ for a “retainer.” The man says I don’t have the money. The lawyer says, well, sorry, I can’t help you then. But good luck.
So is this ok? To make “justice” only available to the rich black man clearly defeats the purpose of the law.
This is where the department of justice should step in, to assist the victim of racism who cannot afford a lawyer. The agencies are funded for this. They have the resources to take on these cases.
The same goes for the EEOC. If they have been notified of a case where a man becomes unemployed because of discrimination based on disability, they have a duty and an obligation to represent this man in court. For free.
Once the employer realizes the EEOC is on the case, I bet the man will be reinstated in short order. If the employer faced a financial penalty for wrongful termination based on disability, I think they would be inclined to follow the law.
And this is why the EEOC is largely at fault. If they are denying legal representation to people who need their help, then why do they exist?
73 comments thus far. Each comment describes a form of blackballing derived from DSM4/5 codes. The blackballing is usually in employment, a major life activity as defined in the ADA. Each adverse employment action is thus illegal under federal law. Nobody should suffer adverse employment action based on DSM4 codes.
What has happened here is the APA has created, in essence, a book of crimes. These crimes are being used to justify a form of harassment manifested primarily by rendering a person unemployable.
The APA should not have the power to create a book of law. They are not a legislative body.
The APA should not have the power to create an employment handbook that is used in hiring and firing decisions. Yet this is how it is used when you think about it.
The stories of people who feel compelled to go underground is really quite similar to what happened in the McCarthy era.
The stories are also not unlike the runaway slaves who escaped via the Underground Railroad.
It is really disturbing that in 2017 that human beings feel compelled to go underground like this. Why does the APA get to do this? Who are they? Their book is nothing more than a collection of fake made up disorders. Why are they being given power over our lives?
The APA is now serving the same role as the House Committee on Unamerican Activities. Employers endeavor to find out who is on the list. Although the blacklist may be an abstract concept, if you are identified as a “consumer” then consider yourself outed.
Consider the soldier who returns from war. He applies for job after job and is not offered any. He senses he is being discriminated against but cannot figure out why. Suppose the unemployment rate of soldiers was 50%. Is that ok? Or should it be investigated?
The simple fact that people feel compelled to go underground suggests a very serious problem. The 73 comments illustrate the magnitude of this problem. The ADA obviously did nothing to solve this problem. The law is there but it isn’t being enforced. The EEOC has a duty to enforce the law but they don’t. If they can get the wheelchair ramp built, then they can get jobs reinstated. They can clear the obstacles for the soldiers. But the EEOC has been sitting on the sidelines allowing all these things to go on. Which makes me believe the EEOC is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Maybe it’s time to hold congressional hearings regarding how people are being blacklisted by the APA, losing jobs, compelled to go underground, and how the EEOC is not doing the job they were funded to do.
Wouldn’t it be effective to tell Congress about the DSM4 code in the medical record underlined in red ink? Wouldn’t you love to tell them what the lawyer said when he spoke these words: “who is the court going to believe, a well respected psychiatrist or a mentally ill person like you?”
There must be some way to fight back because this isn’t right. We are human beings, not discardable garbage.
I wanted to comment on this comment:
“. The lawyers said we know he broke the law, we know you have evidence the most that will result in his case is a misdemeanor in an unwinnable case. It is unwinnable because “who do you think they’d believe, the prominent doctor that comes from a prominent family in this area or the mentally ill woman.: ”
It is responses like this from “lawyers” that irk me to no end. A lawyer should never, ever say something like this. What the lawyer is doing here is telling the victim of discrimination “nobody is going to believe you because you’re “mentally ill”” and implying that “people who are mentally ill” (or more accurately burdened with a DSM4 code) are unworthy of consideration.
Imagine if a lawyer told Rosa Parks “nobody is going to believe you because you’re black.” Would that be ok?
If a lawyer ever says something like this to you, write that comment down on a sheet of paper, allow the lawyer to verify he said that, then report him to the bar. A comment like that that the case is “unwinnable” because “you’re mentally ill” is a violation of the code of ethics. Such a reaction from a lawyer should result in an investigation and at minimum, a reprimand. A lawyer who makes such a comment is discriminating based on disability. He can’t tell a client “nobody is going to believe you because you’re mentally ill.” He needs to treat you the same way he treats any other client.
What the author describes is a new form of racism. The “system” has devolved into a two class society. Us vs. them. A first class citizen and a persona non gratis. It’s not based on skin color. It’s based upon psychiatric labels and DSM4/5 codes.
You do not even need to have a “disorder.” All it takes is for a person in power to believe it. Under the ADA it is called “regarded as.”
There is a person who commented about her encounter with the doctor where she sensed something was up based on how she was treated. It raised her antennae enough to ask to see her chart. On the chart was a DSM4 code underlined in red ink. Three times.
And when she saw that red ink it confirmed what she detected when her antenna went up. She was being discriminated against. And she knew it. She could tell by the tone of voice. The words. The facial expression. She knew that look. The disregard. The condescension.
And when you think about it, the look the doctor gave the patient that day was a look of contempt. For those of us similarly situated, we all know the look. We know whats coming next. The words of dismissal. The words of contempt. The sarcastic uppity comments. We all know that moment. When you know you are about to be pigeonholed into a category based on a DSM4 code. You may as well have the code tattooed on your forehead underlined 3 times in red ink. That would save time from having to read our medical records.
Imagine if a black man was talked to like that by a white doctor. And then imagine the man asked to see his medical record and the doctor had underlined or circled the word “black” or “African American” in the record.
Hi lighting race as grounds to treat someone like dirt is racism. To highlight a DSM4 code in a medical record and then to treat them in a condescending manner is the same thing. It is disparate treatment based on disability. And under the law, its a violation of civil rights.
Under the ada, the author cites numerous violations of the law that are serious enough as to be actionable via lawsuits. To be identified as a “consumer” is actually an invasion of medical privacy. And it is this outing as a consumer that is causing discrimination in the workplace. And the discrimination is not inconsequential. It is serious because it has affected her employment. It caused her to leave jobs either because she was compelled to quit a hostile work environment, or she was let go as an overt act of discrimination.
These are civil rights violations. And we need to start standing up against them. The EEOC needs to start doing their job. They are all over the case when there is no wheelchair ramp to get into a restaurant. There were marches when Rosa parks was told to sit on the back of the bus. Yet the author of this article is relegated to status of second class citizen who must take a minimum wage job and hide the fact she was once a “consumer.” Rosa parks was denied a bus ride. The author has been denied a good paying job where she can use her education. One injury is orders of magnitude more significant.
And yet the EEOC has dropped the ball. Its time they divert some attention from wheelchair ramps and acknowledge the elephant in the room. Its employment. Its health care. Its discrimination. And the victims need help. They need legal representation and they need to be able to work in jobs they want without being harassed and pigeonholed. If Rosa Parks can sit on the front of the bus, we should also be allowed to work in jobs we train for. And if we are being forced to hide and take minimum wage jobs, then something is not right.
I can relate to this. After making the mistake of marrying a “psychologist” I became the target of a smear campaign, just as her first ex husband was also target. In my case, a DSM4 label was generated, inserted into a “Data bank” and then distributed, widely, by US mail. Notwithstanding the fact each publication was a felony under section 1177 of HIPAA, the law was ignored.
Now guess what happened once the DSM4 code was published?
The way that I was treated after this was horrifying. And the knee jerk reaction was universal. So I learned how a black man felt in 1929 Alabama. I learned how a Jew felt in 1939 Nazi Germany. I was tossed into a garbage can and became a piece of garbage.
And the really remarkable thing is nobody cares. The EEOC, who is supposed to protect us, does nothing. There is no place to go to enforce anti discrimination laws. The courts are also joke. You can file lawsuits that get dismissed on a motion to dismiss. The only way you have a chance is if the court assigns you a lawyer with the following qualifications:
1. He must work for free
2. He must be familiar with the ADA
3. He must be capable and experienced at successfully arguing cases before the us Supreme Court.
4. He must not be condescending, patronizing, for example telling you “all we need to do is send you to Dr x, he will do some tests, he will give you a clean bill of health and we can put him on the witness stand.” In other words, he needs to treat you like a human being who does not require “tests”
5. He needs to be skeptical of the dsm4 and psychiatry
6. He needs to be your advocate.
Regarding representing yourself in court, it won’t work because everyone in the courtroom will look down their nose at you and they will make up their minds before you even speak.
But good luck finding a lawyer who meets the 6 criteria above.
Once they put you out of business, you become unemployable. That is, unless you can find some way to lie about what they did to you.
The movie Trumbo captures what it’s like to be blacklisted. Although his was for “communism” the story is the same. Trumbo could work under an assumed name. In modern times, that is not impossible.
The EEOC should take these complaints seriously, but they don’t.
Is it possible that all of the people who are falling into the category of “mentally ill” are simply being diagnosed with fake diseases that do not actually exist using unreliable tests created by the people who profit off of these diseases?
And if the diseases are fake, then the treatment is not only useless, it is disabling.
The man cited in the article who has been on every antipsychotic known to man, isn’t it possible that the diagnosis is simply wrong, and that all the symptoms he has are drug induced?
If nothing is working for “people like him” why not set up a program to taper him off his drugs. Get him housing. Give him a job where he has something to do, for example helping to maintain the facility that is providing him housing.
I bet the results may be surprising.
I think all of the people have a right to be given a drug free option and that coercing someone to take drugs is a form of abuse and discrimination. If the drugs “aren’t working” instead of giving a new drug, why not stop them altogether? There really needs to be a detox option.
Anyone working in these drug first facilities should be required to read Robert Whittaker’s book.
Very insightful analysis. I think the author of this article, and perhaps any other reader of this site who understands the points she is trying to make, could formulate an outline for a better system.
Here is mine:
1. A nonjudgmental place to go for “help” that is not medication based, and not funded by the pharmecuitical industry. A real support system.
2. Housing first, if it is lacking.
3. A job. A real job that pays decent money and has benefits and gives a person a sense of value.
4. Perhaps some type if incentive for employers to hire people in the program. Or subsidised if need be.
5. Access to a holistic style health program to taper people off of meds.
6. Once a person has housing and is employed, it is much easier to get your next job that pays better.
I think this would be preferable to the lock em up, hogtie “them,” label “them” for life and drug “them” for life system we have now.
Also, the EEOC should be taking on cases of discrimination and take them seriously. (I speak from experience here). Their current policy is to ignore those who are discriminated against based upon DSM4/5 labels. They are more concerned with building wheelchair ramps. In the grand scheme of things, the injury inflicted on a person who cannot get a job based on an “advertised” DSM4 code is much greater than the injury inflicted on a person in a wheelchair who cannot get into a restaurant. (An advertised DSM4 code is one that is delivered via US mail from a federal blacklist that must be “querried” whenever a person applies for a job-again speaking from experience-the EEOC just gave me the run around when a formal complaint was filed-imagine having fake medical records delivered via US mail each time you applied for a job, and having them delivered from a federal agency that is under control of the agency in charge of medical privacy-to ignore such a flagrant violation of the law seems impossible but thats what the EEOC did-nothing)
It would be really helpful to have a law firm that was dedicated to cases like this. And ready to take them on. Staffed by at least 5 lawyers and 5 paralegals. With easy access to “experts.” Willing to travel. Funded with donations or federal funds so that those who are in jail dont need to come up with exorbitant retainers or go bankrupt defending themselves. Access to law clerks. Its really a human rights issue. Considering the billions these drugs bring in, billions that help fund pro pharmacy legal teams, there needs to be a level playing field in the courts. We are talking legalized poisoning resulting in death. If a philanthropist can donate 10 billion to vaccine research, 5 million to fund such a legal team is not unreasonable. Without such a resource, where does an innocent person go for help? An involuntary intoxication defense must be raised when it is reasonable to raise it, and if the public defenders don’t understand this, there must be another option.
Have you tried:
I wonder if her daughter could set up a visit to see Dr. Peter Breggin. I think he may have some interest in this case if he is not already aware of it. It may be worth a try.
This sounds like an obvious case of involuntary intoxication. For a lawyer not to raise this defense at trial is incomprehensible. However, many lawyers dont understand the issue. There is no reason to imprison this woman.
After reading this post, i came accross this article. The picture, which didnt come thru, shows a police officer “taking down” the person, and applying handcuffs. The “trigger word” I see is “mental health call.” In other words, the cops enter the scene prepared to deal with a “mental” person. Although the skin color may be white, it looks alot like racism. Also note how the name is freely disclosed with no concern for privacy:
Two Hinesburg police officers will face no criminal charges for conduct a town resident described as “excessive force,” Chittenden County Deputy State’s Attorney Bram Kranichfeld said.
Shown in this police body-cam video, Hineburg Police Officer Cameron Coltharp holds down Lori Carron. The two officers, Cameron Coltharp and Jeremy Hulshof, were sued by Lori Ann Carron in June after they responded to her home for a mental health call one month earlier. Carron alleges the two officers caused her “serious physical, emotional and psychological injuries,” according to the complaint filed in U.S. District Court.
The criminal investigation focused mostly on Coltharp, who Carron says “spun her around and threw her to the floor” even though what had been called in as a domestic assault situation had calmed when police arrived, the complaint states. According to the complaint, Hulshof “failed to intervene” and stop Coltharp from harming Carron.
Both officers have denied wrongdoing in separate answers to the lawsuit, both saying they “acted in good faith and with probable cause and/or reasonable suspicion.”
Kranichfeld said his office considers the matter closed “barring new information.” He declined to give further detail about the decision.
Agree with the author 100%. When psychiatry can be used as a weapon by people of authority, it will be used as a weapon. Like a whip, of sorts. Listen up boy. We control you. You are defective. We know whats best for you. We will test you. We will diagnose you. We will label you. And we will tell you what you need. We know whats best for you because you lack insight. But even more than a tool of racism, it is a tool of oppression that can be applied anywhere, to anyone who may find himself alone, facing “the authorities.” Resistance is met with punishment. Psychiatry justifies the punishment. I speak from experience.
This is another excellent article. I was going to comment on the doctors who took the author off of the 5 drugs cold turkey as the only good doctors after a long stream of bad ones. Then I saw the comment to Rick indicating it was probably just blind luck without any real compassion. What is so bothersome is that so many doctors completely missed a dangerous side effect that could have resulted in death. Perhaps missing such side effects in the pre Internet era would be easy as the side effects were easy to sweep under the table. But now, patients who have been harmed by these drugs have a forum to get their message out. The doctors should be examining these alternate sources of information. Much of what the doctors know in prescribing is what is fed to them by the drug marketers. They control the package inserts and pdr. To hear this story of what harm these drugs can do from a skilled journalist is very moving. The writer’s look back at her fathers suicide is also very profound. I think she figured out what really happened to him. It was the antidepressant and whatever else that induced his state of mind. The drug killed him. These drugs harm people and the doctors are not paying attention.
Some people have suggested that doctors be prosecuted for prescribing these and other dangerous drugs. Although this may be hard to believe, the doctors may not be aware of the danger. This is because the doctor is fed the corporate/drug company promotional material before prescribing the drug. This always downplays the risk and up plays the benefits. There isn’t anyone feeding the doctor the negative info about the drug. Even though the PDR material may mention something like “suicidal thoughts” unless he sees a patient with such a reaction, it may not be readily apparent this is a real risk. The PDR is written by the drug maker, not the FDA. The FDA is also being presented with the drug company promo material. Unless there is a competing entity arguing the negative aspects of the drug, the well funded corporation will usually persuade the FDA it’s benefits outweigh the risk. It’s a problem inherent in the for profit drug industry. There is no profit incentive in un marketing a drug.
Benzos have been prescribed for “panic attacks.” What seems counterintuitive is they can cause panic attacks, either by a direct side effect, or upon withdrawal. The drug can also cause a more extreme version of a panic attack that I call a terror attack. This can last for several days as the drug unlocks from receptors. Add in the sleep deprivation these drugs cause and the withdrawal reaction can mimic delerium tremens from alcohol withdrawal. It is not surprising That Iv Valium and Librium have been used to treat DT’s. It’s like alcohol in a pill. Sure it may calm you down at first, but there is a price to pay. For those who come accross an old Newsweek article “Halcion, nightmare or wonder drug?” it’s an interesting read.
I took Halcion for 1 week. The side effects did not begin until day 6. It was horrible and terrifying. Worst experience of my life. It took me several days to feel normal again and weeks before all the side effects stopped.
Great article Katinka. Thanks for sharing this. What is amazing is that the symptoms of hallucinations began within hours of the first dose. Of course the doctors who locked her up never considered “drug side effect,” as usual. To truely understand the nightmare these drugs create, experiencing it first hand is eye opening. You can read of the side effects. But living it gives true insight. And it is scary, like seeing Satan.
Great article Amy! There is this disturbing feeling a lot of us in the medical profession have about the current state of health care. Is it all about money? Are we just pawns in a system? It’s a modern day variation on the story “The Emperors New Clothes.” This article sums it up very well.
One more thing. If politicians are trying to figure out how to create a no fly list for guns, instead of constructing a list out of diagnostic codes, why not construct a list based upon the drugs they take? For example, if people on Prozac are more inclined to shoot people, then don’t sell a gun to a person on Prozac. Or, better yet, take Prozac off the market. But if they stop Prozac, their rights should be restored. Don’t punish the person for the side effect of a drug.
The term mental illness is really nothing more than a slur, similar to a racial slur. It is a term that is used to label a person as a lesser being, an inferior human.
With 374 diagnostic codes to choose from, every person in the US is “mentally ill.” The only thing that stands between a diagnosis and no diagnosis is a visit to a psychiatrist or psychologist. If you walk through the door, you will, most assuredly, be diagnosed with something.
If you commit a mass murder, it is convenient to attach a label of “mentally ill” onto the killer. But a psychopathic killer should not be lumped into the same category as a kid with “ADHD” or a woman with “post partum depression.”
The label works best for the self righteous politician who thinks it can be used as a solution to gun control.
If they pass legislation to keep guns out of “the wrong hands”, and if “mentally ill people” are those who have “the wrong hands” then politicians, police, judges have 374 new ways to take away guns. This will also create a direct pipeline between psychologists, psychiatrists and a police data bank. Thus on any given day, as each person exits a visit to his therapist, his medical record is being shared with and published by a police data bank. Once listed, you are listed forever with zero chance of being delisted. I see a problem with this.
Great article. Great commentary. To all those involved in this escape, this is no less important than the liberation of the Jews at Aushwitz. Or Andy’s escape from Shawshank. This is a heroic act of civil disobedience.
Let’s assume everyone who commits a mass murder is by definition, mentally ill. Then all we need to do is identify who “the mentally ill” are before they commit a mass murder and put them on a list or database. These people will not be able to buy guns or any other device used in mass murder. Beginning at age 16, everyone should be forced to take an MMPI once a year to see if they are safe. Those who fail can be locked away to protect the public. Then mass murder will stop. The psychiTrist and his DSM5 will protect us.
In America, when the founding fathers drafted the declaration of Independance and US Constitution, and later, the bill of rights, they made a point that all men were created equal. The equal protection clause was in the Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791 and the 14th Amendment applied it to all states around 1865. At that time, there was no DSM4-5. The founding fathers did not exclude people from “all men” based upon some book that was not published by the legislature. Yet here in America, like Australia, prosecutors, judges and psychiatrists ignore the equal protection clause and routinely strip people of rights based upon DSM4/5 codes. I submit that all such deprivations of rights are in violation of the constitution, and need to be challenged all the way to the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, there are few lawyers who will take these cases. I believe this is in part due to the fact that 93% of lawyers have little training in science. People without scientific and mathematic aptitude have difficulty seeing the scientific flaws in psychiatry. Diagnoses are arbitrary, thus the deprivation of rights is also arbitrary. But most judges, lawyers and prosecutors don’t care. They have the collective mentality of the prison guards in the Stanford prison experiment. Punishment and punitive measures are doled out like candy with little concern of harm.
There was a case in the US about a dentist, Charles Sell. Dr. Sell was put in federal prison for some strange reason and the prosecutor sent a psychiatrist in to render a diagnosis. Once he was diagnosed, the prosecutor said that Sell needed to be drugged to make him “competent.” Sell refused the drugs. The prosecutor said he could not put him on trial until he became “competent.” When Sell was interviewed, he was perfectly normal and intelligent. But the prosecutor kept insisting he be drugged.
After rotting in jail for years without a trial, the case finally went to the US Supreme Court. Guess what happened?
Once “identified” the “patient” becomes the victim of torture and abuse by a tag team of psychiatrists and prosecutors and judges. The prosecutors and judges always blindly support the junk science thrown at them by the psychiatrist and approve their “plans” which are arbitrary and punitive. The “patient” is treated much like the American slave was treated before the Civil War. Instead of whips and lashing, it is shocking and drugging. It is all intended to make the “patient” comply and be subservient. Once you are owned by the state, there is no legal means of escape because “there are no cures.”