Wednesday, August 17, 2022

Comments by Torpid

Showing 4 of 4 comments.

  • The only problem is that some people get support, while others get electroshock, and you can find reports of children as young as 3 being put on neuroleptics. I have been put on them in adolescence, and they ruined me. Psychiatrists sometimes diagnose people as autistic after they have been impaired with psychiatric drugs, and it’s typically used to disempower already disenfranchised people.

    It’s even worse for abused children; the label just becomes another weapon in the hands of the abuser. It works for some people, corporations (especially tech companies, like Microsoft and Red Hat) are very vocal about hiring neurodiverse people, but like others here have pointed out, it mostly leads to children being put on psychotropics.

    “As children age, a variety of behavioral, therapeutic, academic, and often psychopharmacological interventions may be necessary. .. Mental health clinicians can be helpful in supporting discussions of long-term planning, legal guardianship, and reasonable expectations for an individual’s work and day-to-day living plans. .. [M]any individuals with ASD benefit from drug treatment to address a subset of their presenting symptoms or associated psychiatric problems. Risperidone and aripiprazole are atypical antipsychotics that have demonstrated efficacy and are FDA approved for reducing irritability, challenging behaviors, and repetitive behaviors in children with ASD. .. Stimulants can be effective for children with ASD and comorbid ADHD or attention problems. .. Newer drugs are in development. The GABA agonist arbaclofen targets challenging behavioral and social withdrawal, and intranasal oxytocin targets social communication deficits.”

    The neurodiversity movement could/should be as active in opposing this as they are in promoting compassion, but in this case they are silent. “There’s just nothing we need to therapy regarding autism or medicate, because most of the issues we face aren’t because we’re autistic.” Those in unfavorable social positions and children have no choice in the matter.

  • Another tragedy in a place where tragedy is already abundant. I have been an MiA reader for a few years now; I have been reading Julie’s articles and comments here and also remember her appearing recently on Dr. Peter Breggin’s podcast:

    And despite never having written anything myself, I have always appreciated and admired Julie’s work, and her honesty. She seems like someone who has seen a lot of abuse and who has herself been deprived of much. It is very sad that is should end this way, and now.

    It is terrible what is being done to people in this system. So many wonderful people, gone… My sympathies and thoughts go to everyone affected by this loss.

  • Thank you very much for your response. I was worried that my comment might have been bit too aggressive.

    “But getting a spouse or child labeled mentally ill and incapacitated with drugs is so easy to do in our society.”

    Except that it’s not only easy, but also praised. Human societies are violent. Noise and violence prevail everywhere, and psychiatry is just one manifestation of that — it exists in order to protect the peaceful public against the “violent mentally ill.”

    I don’t live in the United States but in Eastern Europe. There’s no such organization as NAMI here, and yet people still seem to have unlimited control over their relatives. Psychiatrists provide a service, for which they are paid. And when dealing with psychiatrists, it doesn’t matter what one says in one’s own defense — psychiatrists will lie about everything and everyone will believe them:

    “We had one commenter here saying she would never let her beloved daughter read MIA. She censored her reading material. She further stated she didn’t care if her daughter suffered and died prematurely.”

    It can be assumed that she has already died; psychological death, which is the common result of all psychiatric interventions, is just as literal as physical one. The individual is no longer who they once were — that person is forever gone.

    Doctor Breggin quotes Freeman in the article I linked to:

    “[A 20-year-old youth] said that he could understand the thoughts of the poets, even the most obscure, whereas other people had no appreciation of them and very little understanding. He would like to write poetry himself — but had not set pencil to paper. [Following lobotomy, he] was able to discuss more coherently his present attitude and future prospects, but likelihood of a good occupational adjustment seemed rather remote because of his inertia and because of his resentfulness toward his father’s domineering attitude. However, the fantasy life to which he had been so addicted seemed to be smashed and he was no longer interested in poetry or science.”

    The contempt is clearly visible and yet it’s not his, but the society’s that he serves. The only truly important thing is universally despised. The opposite view is a rarity: “The more one has in himself, the less he needs from the outside and the less others can be to him.” It is obvious that contemporary psychiatrists value everything that the lobotomists valued. Psychosurgeons still believe that it is proper to make their victims shallower if it only causes them to be more productive or “social.” And people admire everything that psychiatrists do. What is the cause of such absurdity as this?:

    People being “drugged” before they are even born.

    “Thank God my mom was not a “NAMI mommy” and actually wanted me to lead an independent, happy life.”

    An independent life might not be a happy one, but it is often meaningful. Not that the dependent life is inherently meaningless. Not everyone can afford to be independent. It’s not really about psychiatry or anti-psychiatry, or dependence and independence at this point. You wrote, “And before “Doctor” Freeman there were parents and husbands eager to lock up their family members in madhouses. Ensuring that they would never get over the episode and–if not already crazy–would soon become that way.” So “psychiatry” is older than psychiatry. There were always people who were willing to impose themselves on others, and they were always admired. This is not about power, either. If it was, then there would be more outrage about all of this. Think about parents who place their five-year-old children on amphetamines or similar chemicals. It’s not about control, it’s a simple question of values. Psychiatry is just a means by which dead people make others as wretched as they themselves already are.

    In the end, only one question exists in psychiatry:

    “A friend of mine left NAMI in disappointment after psychiatry killed her sister with lethal “side effects.” NAMI didn’t care since she died with her rights OFF.”

    How can we defend ourselves against these people?

  • “Day after day, I took phone calls from family members calling their children or loved one’s crazy, telling me that their family member needs to be locked up, that we need more state hospitals and more involuntary commitments.”

    This is awfully pervasive, and the driving force behind such noble initiatives as the Murphy Bill:

    “Leslie Carpenter hopes Iowa families like hers, who have loved ones with severe mental illness, will no longer have to wait for a life-threatening crisis before authorities order treatment. Carpenter, whose adult son has been repeatedly hospitalized for schizoaffective disorder, helped lead a successful effort this spring to change Iowa’s mental health commitment law. The change is designed to bring prompt, court-ordered treatment to people such as Carpenter’s son, who goes off his medication and falls back into dangerous delusions after he’s released from the hospital. “If somebody had a heart attack, we wouldn’t wait until 99 percent of their heart was dead — we would get them care at the beginning of the problem, not at the end of the problem,” Carpenter said. “If somebody is deteriorating with their mental health, it’s terrifying to sit there and hope you’re going to catch them at just the right moment before they hurt themselves, or before they even, God forbid, hurt somebody else.””

    “People with common mental health issues, such as moderate depression or anxiety, would not face commitment. Instead, the law change is aimed at people like the Carpenters’ son, whose illness has caused him to be terrified of water, bed linens and believe food was poison. He doesn’t stay in treatment long enough for his brain to heal to the point that he can understand he is mentally ill, they said. His brain fools him into believing the medications that help him are actually poison, Leslie Carpenter said.”

    “The young man loses touch with reality, becomes a danger, and is locked up, his parents said. Then he gets out, stops cooperating with treatment and plunges back into psychosis.”

    Proponents are described as opponents:

    “Phil Steffensmeier, a mental health advocate from Iowa City … who was voluntarily hospitalized five times for treatment of his bipolar disorder when he was in his 20s, has mixed feelings about the change to Iowa’s metal health commitment laws. “There’s such a delicate boundary to walk, and I’m not sure we know yet how to walk it,” he said. Steffensmeier, 37, was voluntarily hospitalized five times for treatment of his bipolar disorder when he was in his teens and 20s. He has never faced an involuntary commitment, but he understands such orders can be necessary. “It is definitely not something to be taken lightly,” he said. “At the same time, I can’t look around at my fellow sufferers and say nobody needs that help.” Steffensmeier is an activist with the National Alliance on Mental Illness, which supports the law change. He regularly speaks in public about the need for improvements to Iowa’s tattered mental health system.”

    Adults at their parents’ mercy — that’s the reality of people. According to the article, “The [earlier] law was used to involuntarily commit Iowans more than 5,200 times last year.” This means more than 14 people every single day in Iowa alone, and that’s before the Murphy Bill. Parents who forcibly drug, electroshock or surgically mutilate their children are described as hapless individuals at the mercy of the “insane person’s” whims, but the “insane person”, deprived of their mind by the “treatment” imposed on them, can do nothing. And who is responsible for all forced lobotomies, besides psychiatrists? Who is responsible for this:

    It is known that Walter Freeman was thanked personally by parents whose children he has lobotomized.