Sunday, November 28, 2021

Comments by Peter J. Gordon

Showing 5 of 5 comments.

  • Chrys was a special person. We were friends and regularly wrote to one another. I always felt safe in sharing my thoughts and feelings with Chrys.

    In many ways our friendship was unusual as I was an NHS psychiatrist [I retired a few years ago]. What united us was a shared determination to have approaches to mental wellbeing that did not need to be primarily based on the ‘medical model’.

    Chrys and I were able to be good friends whilst not always agreeing.

    A few weeks before she died I sent Chrys a card to say how special our friendship was and how wonderful it was to have shared so many interests, such as gardening, music and the wonderful and simple enjoyment of exploring the world round about us.

    Chrys was, in her heart and in her actions, a community minded individual. In my opinion few in Scotland have had her spirit or guts. She really did so much to ‘level the playing field’ [to use her expression] between those in positions of power and those who aren’t [the majority of us].

    Like a Comet she has passed by too quickly – though I reckon that the world will long be able to see her blazing trail in the sky!

    Several years ago I put this post together about Chrys, based on her wonderful creative output, including her knitting. I combined the images with words that I thought represented her most determined and honest approach to life.

    https://holeousia.com/being/sapere-aude/chrys-muirhead/

    Peter Gordon, Bridge of Allan.

  • Dear Peter,
    Thank you for writing such a clear exposition and vitally important account of scientific fraud. The scale of harm resulting from this fraud like this is now being revealed as lives, like mine, are ruined by drugs like Paroxetine.

    Thank you for writing this and for showing that scientific narrative is as important as any other form of evidence.

    I am about to retire as an NHS psychiatrist who has worked in Scotland for over 25 years. I have petitioned the Scottish Parliament to introduce Sunshine legislation:

    https://www.parliament.scot/GettingInvolved/Petitions/sunshineact

    Outside of Medicine I make short films. Over 6 years ago I made this film about Charles Nemeroff:

    https://vimeo.com/68299094

    Peter, might it be possible to make a short film based on this, your Mad in America report? I would understand if this is not possibel. You can contact me at:

    [email protected]

    kind wishes,
    Dr Peter J Gordon
    Bridge of Allan,
    Scotland

  • This is an archive of some of the contributions made to social media by the author of “The Medical Model in Mental Health”:

    https://holeousia.com/2019/08/17/good-debate-is-respectful-and-constructive/

    This archive – which appears to present a pattern of language – has been shared for one reason alone: to encourage respectful and constructive communications between schools of thought.

    Dr Peter J Gordon, NHS Psychiatrist

  • I have read Dr Huda’s book and given a review, which can be read in full here: https://holeousia.com/2019/08/17/an-explanation/

    The author confirms in his introduction that this text book began with a specific starting point: to demonstrate that the approach taken to diagnosis, classification and therapeutic interventions in Psychiatry is no different to that taken in General Medicine. I would not fully disagree about this, as the Medical Model is the prevailing approach to mental health in the UK. However it is my view that any approach to Psychiatry, to be truly scientific, needs not to exclude consideration of the following:

    • the harms and benefits of any single Model
    • nominative and neurogenetic determinism and reductionism
    • social determinants of health and wellbeing
    • stigma, including iatrogenic stigma
    • learning from lived experience
    • where there are gaps in the evidence base (for example the limited evidence to support long term prescribing of psychotropic medications)
    • “Realistic Psychiatry” (also known as “Too much medicine” and in America “Saving Normal”)
    • biases introduced into biomedical research and medical education (for example the role of commercial vested interests)

    The author has argued on social media that my brief initial review was a “tacit admission” that his “argument is strong”. My difficulty as a reviewer is that I cannot consider and comment on what has not been included.

    The author of this text book has robustly argued that language, and how it is used, does not matter. I stand by my view that language is the basis of communications between human beings whether personally or professionally.

    I have written this longer explanation of my thoughts on this text book as I share the view of the philosopher Mary Midgley who died recently in her hundredth year. Mary Midgley often used metaphors in her writings and one of these was to talk about the windows that we each look through. In terms of our mental well-being, which can never be disembodied or separated from the life we live, we learn better when we share our window views. My blog hole ousia has no simple answers or over-arching framework but seeks to encourage shared learning. I am hopeful that the author of this book might write a second volume which considers how we might achieve this.

  • Dear Akiko,
    What a very thoughtful and wise perspective you offer on the Interim Report of the Mental Health Act. I share your every concern. I am not at all sure how this review came to be labelled as “Independent”!

    I should say I work in NHS Scotland and Scotland has its own Mental health legislation. I have been a psychiatrist for more than 20 years and I am coming now to the end of my career.

    Thank you for writing this Akiko.

    aye Peter
    Bridge of Allan