Showing 6 of 6 comments.
The title should be safe for whom. Whom is used in the object position and following a preposition.
Thank you, Walter. A quote from the study concerning psychiatrist’s attitudes toward the medication free program in Norway: “Psychiatrists considered medication-free treatment as an unscientific option for a stigmatized patient group; they believed that the advent of such a program is due to proposals from some dissatisfied users and their supporters and not from the majority of patients; in spite of active psychotic symptoms and lack of insight, patients had a crucial impact on choice of treatment and accordingly on adherence to medication; and psychiatrists reported that they in spite of governmental instructions utilized professionalism against unscientific ideology.”
It’s quite ironic to hear the mother of unscientific medicine, also known as psychiatry, refer to medication-free programs as “unscientific ideology.”
I will continue to pray for those still suffering and implore anyone in need of treatment to seek options grounded in recovery principles.
As a survivor of psychiatric intervention and former student of abnormal psychology, I’m not phased by the study published in Psychiatric Services or Mueser’s commentary. Psychiatry (and it’s little sister psychology) are pseudoscientific disciplines at their core. They rely on subjective analyses that cannot and will never be verifiable.
This observation recently hit home for me. After five years of sobriety and nearly four years off psychiatric medication, my parents and I felt that it was time to terminate their legal guardianship (established during my first psychotic episode). In order to do so, I had to meet with a social worker through our local probate court. This was my first interaction with a mental health professional that works for the state since my recovery. During our meeting, I discussed some of my concerns regarding the damaging effects of antipsychotic medication (which should really be referred to as neruotoxins, but I spared her that terminology). I thought we had a good conversation and left our meeting feeling optimistic. However, I later learned that she described me as severely anxious and paranoid, a term often associated with delusional and irrational behavior, in her report. This obviously couldn’t be further from the truth, but fortunately, it did not stop the judge from terminating my guardianship. However, it served to reinforce my conviction that the mental health professions are a joke and how grateful I am to no longer use their services.
Therefore, my recommendation is to take this latest study with a grain of salt. Continue fighting the good fight and all will be well. In the end, the worldview promoted by MIA will prevail. Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.
Thank you, Dr. Breggin, for the incredible work you do.
Patients need to see the light and hopefully abandon it. A new profession that incorporates elements of a Ph.D. degree in psychology coupled with limited training in psychopharmacology needs to be created in order to fill the void in care that will inevitably result. Psychiatrists don’t use 99% of what they studied in medical school. Specializing in psychiatry is a complete waste of a perfectly good medical degree.
I don’t know where you were hospitalized, but I just want to point out to other members here that most states require a court hearing before medication can be administered involuntarily. In other words, in the vast majority of 5150 holds that last 72 hours and don’t involve going before a judge you can refuse medication. Even if you’ve been petitioned involuntary for psychosis and are about to have a hearing, you can still refuse medication up until and before your court date.