Monday, February 18, 2019

Comments by Kld3019

Showing 6 of 6 comments.

  • Many people go into the field of social services with the intention to help individuals and families overcome trauma, oppression, and other adversities. They are compassionate people who want a career and life that facilitates healing and systemic change. Many of these MSW programs are geared heavily towards education around social justice. The shocking reality for a lot of people once they graduate from these programs and start working in the field is the discovery that the mental health system is actually an institution or manifestation of oppression. They learn that it is a textbook example of structural violence. I’ve seen professionals go into denial over this, in part because it is a very real trauma for them to be living in a culture where this is the reality, and that they have in a sense been tricked into contributing to this. A field where social justice concepts and ideas such as “trauma informed care” have been coopted, and mixed with this mentalism–this pseudoscientific propaganda, such as bogus, victim blaming, profit motivated DSM “diagnoses” and the subsequent psychiatric psychoactive drug “treatments”. Professionals in this field have essentially been force-fed the misinformation, thus becoming oppressors themselves—the very thing they unequivically oppose.

    To me, what you are describing in your article are the symptoms of this bigger picture phenomenon.

    I would encourage anyone who works in the system to use it as an opportunity to work as a change agent or just quit because both you and your clients deserve better and it is a shame that your compassion and good intentions have been taken advantage of:

    As a psychiatric survivor, I can tell you first hand that what I experienced was extremely traumatic, violent, and haunts me to this day. I know I am only beginning to scratch the surface, but here is an extremely illuminating article for anyone ready to dive deep and start educating themselves on this painful reality:

  • Thank you for this important and powerful article. This CEO’s actions are unconscionable. This abuse of power is criminal–at the level of attempted mass murder. If you take a leadership position at an institution with the mission to promote informed health care decision-making through scientific research and then work in direct opposition of that very mission by systematically blocking psychiatric drug and healthcare research, which could lead to the saving of countless lives, you are deliberately NOT saving those lives. Is it the figurative definition of irony that the chosen attack on you was character assassination while this person is egregiously failing to uphold the organization’s fundamental purpose, their responsibilities as a CEO (and I would argue as a human being)? That it is you who is instead punished for doing the right thing?

    I am so sorry that you, your colleagues, and the organization you cofounded were subjected to this mismanagement and horrific attack. Thank you so much for your important work and tireless dedication to integrity. I really admire your courage for standing up to this injustice. If you felt that having another petition put out to call on this person to step down, or something to that effect would help, I would support you and sign it.

    Wishing you the best on your continued work with the Institute for Scientific Freedom and all future endeavors.

  • Thank you Rachel! Your comments are always so insightful and I couldn’t have said it better myself. You have contributed to society more than most people do in their lifetime with the sharing of your important thoughts. What you are describing is such an egregious form of gas lighting, victim blaming, oppression and violence. I do not have the words to express how barbaric and evil that is.

    I know I really zoomed in there on the nuances of this situation with academic psychiatry’s politically and economically motivated attempt to attack objective science, but I want to make sure that I am 100% clear that I am not letting the field of Psychology off the hook for the pseudoscience and harm it has perpetuated as well. Thanks again!

  • Academic psychiatry has essentially co-opted the phrase “The war on women”, in a disingenuous politically motivated, fear-mongering attempt to attack the authors and content of this scientific review, and stay relevant while playing the victim, which is absolutely disgusting. If anything, Psychiatry is the war on the human mind. It is preposterous and horrendous that academic psychiatry, a supposedly legitimate field, would allege the authors, or anyone for that matter is somehow “starting a war” for conducting objective scientific research and publishing the findings. (In this case on antidepressant withdrawal.) It is even more baffling that the other strategy employed in this “scientific critique” boils down to mischaracterizing the findings and methods of the study itself.

    How are the responses of “You are pill shaming!” and “Many patients are helped by these pills!” appropriate or effective rebuttals to objective scientific reviews by anyone, ESPECIALLY in the fields of academia? Even if there are some flaws within the study, they are clearly irrelevant and do not invalidate the reality of antidepressant withdrawal, or the study as a whole, as you’ve already stated. I mean frankly, this is common sense. Of course antidepressant withdrawal would last more than two weeks. This is a potent psychotropic pharmaceutical drug. How is this even up for debate? I am stunned.

    If I were to conduct a scientific review on the existence of climate change, and BP’s chosen “scientific critique” was titled “The War on Warm Weather”, which was simply a misconstruing and twisting of climate change science, and the finishing touch was to claim that objective science “shames people who drive cars”, wouldn’t you question the validity of that critique? Also much like climate change, the field of Psychiatry is contributing to a public health crisis of pandemic proportion and it is beyond irresponsible to deny these objective truths to say the least.

  • After reading this I thought about lighting a candle on behalf of anyone who has experienced anything remotely resembling this but realized if non existent incidents involving candles can be used as a vehicle to violate human rights, I can only imagine what the consequences of my thought might be. In my defense however, my thought included watching 17 1/2 candle lighting safety YouTube tutorials and my dad was there to supervise the entire process but at this point I’m just incriminating myself. All satire of the mental health system aside, thank you for writing this. Very beautifully written. If the thought police ask tell them I just lit a candle on behalf of all psychiatric survivors without the supervision of my father.

  • Thank you for your article. I am new to this website and educating myself on the psychiatric survivor movement. I have been learning so much from writings like yours and the comments section as well. I very much wish that alternative options were more accessible to those choosing to seek support and I pray that psychiatric abuse will end. That being said, I hope this is the appropriate place to post this but there is a petition on for funding of Peer respite here: It is on MIA’s website at the bottom in case anyone missed it and felt called to sign it. Again I am new to this site and I hope it’s appropriate to call further attention to this petition but if not I apologize in advance. Thanks again to you for your article and to the commenters. There is so much insight here and I find it very inspirational. <3