Wednesday, June 26, 2019

Comments by peter

Showing 8 of 8 comments.

  • As I read fast and scan things, I cannot claim that words by words I agree with you. But for those parts that I got, and it is a big part, I know your account true.

    It is a parasite but could be stronger than the host, the victim.

    In occasions it kills the person or it commands to the victim to kill other people and meanwhile the victim might lose his life obeying the command.

    If not it fully cripple and enslave the host into that stupid constant performance. There are many examples but the famous one is say John Nash who had such a powerful ‘brain’ and lived dysfunction for best decades of his life.

    Surprisingly, mainstream psychiatry is not interested to study such a fascinating creature.

    The humble idea that I can suggest is that this parasite is universal and its performance is not related to the biography of the person. It could be that it become created due to the biography of victim, such as the host being himself victim of harsh abuse and trauma, but then the parasite has a similar performance. This proposition is somehow needs clarification which is beyond the scope of a comment.

    Briefly host should not accept that he has done something wrong that has been inflicted with such unproportioned punishment.

  • Critical Psychiatry Network (CPN) in UK, now extending to an international scope as the International Critical Psychiatry Network has done a great job in enlightening the circumstances of psychiatry profession in modern world. What they and similar organizations need is attracting the attention of lawyers with similar ideas regarding mentally ill to join to them. Even CPN themselves fell in legal trouble in promoting their proposed paradigm (In a case very similar to Galileo). The problem arises from the UN declaration of human rights and European guidelines on human rights. It deprives mentally ill of enjoying equal rights with other people once and even before being labelled as such. Recent legislations in Britain made it easier to put restrictions on anybody labelled for his madness, and the law extended the power of detention from a psychiatrist to actually whoever that could be around as part of the psychiatry institution. The new law has elongated the intervals of assessments from months to years and to open ended. They can put harmless people under guardianship without their consent and without being informed or without informing their next of kin. Law uses or abuses a vague term as “when it is regarded just for well being of the patient even though has not done harm to self or others.” It is not known how that well being can be gauged and when that will be achieved. Only lawyers can handle such situations and push the case for emancipation of mentally ills. No scientific debate would penetrate into the ears of judges. In US, judges say it is the idea of Scientology. In Europe they say it is the idea of a bunch of belated radical Internet forums. Critical Psychiatry Network needs lawyers to join to them.

  • Still, I am not sure about the future. In my comment I referred to Iron Law of Oligarchy. That law asserts that sooner or later any association concludes to a division between oligarchs who rule and plebs who remain silent and ruled. I am not that much pessimist, yet, as I still believe that MIA is a very decent attractive work. I am in the UK and have some basic grasp of publication and web. I could be a hand. Regretfully, I have seen many works have started but not maintained. It is difficult for me to promote radicalisation before I witness that “they actually are standing on feet and toasting with them.” I came here through email subscription I receive from Jim Gottstein. Google group is linear in format and obsolete in attraction and is not readable. It is part of the history. I have tested it. Running a website is cheap and I can handle it. But we should try to join the branches to one mighty flood, instead of further division. Perhaps mainstream psychiatry has been cornered that shows interest and is knocking at the door of MIA. The best is to be patient for a while and watch the trend.

  • Sir,
    I can’t be more agreeing with what you said. Few years ago I was looking for sites with similar content. Most were in a disorganised state, not inviting, not maintained, not having a touch of a professional hand involved. It is natural that for people in situations like me they could add to my hopelessness, helplessness and a feeling that “these people, like me, never will get a way out of the misery of suppression by mainstream coercive psychiatry, repeating few paragraphs from some pioneer works such as R. D. Laing, and Thomas Szasz with news always two three years old. Most of the time there was no way of contact and if there was you never would receive a response. A good idea is that to search for such sites and invite them to join their efforts to this place and actively participate and share their experiences with this site and mutually take news and views from this place to theirs.

    It has been a bad experience on the Internet that good sites with similar “structure” gradually fall in the process of “Iron Law of Oligarchy.” If you pass a certain level of attractiveness and daily visits, forces of darkness start to attack to engage you in self defeating policies and procedures through the vandalism, sock puppets and trolls. Please keep on the idea you termed as “eye-level.” I always have a pet phrase I advertise: “School is for teaching children not for employing teachers.” Mainstream coercive psychiatry believes psychiatry is for their employment and passing the years towards retirement not for treating people. Hence, keep on the good work you are doing. History has reserved countless empty places at its pinnacles waiting to be filled.

  • Ma’am,

    Weathervane of the coercing traditional, pharma psychiatrists, such as Dr Lieberman shows direction towards governments money being spent on colossal electronics/computer projects like mapping brains, study large molecules, using ultra miniaturised devices inside human body. Hence, they are gradually moving the back yard earning booths to that side. Cheer Dr Lieberman as he is preparing to follow the example of his former ally, Dr Thomas Insel, NIMH director (Source: http://criticalpsychiatry.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/abandoning-diagnostic-criteria-for.html). Part of preparation is to call himself “mad” and to talk about “stigma;” as if announcing an interim comradeship with the “anti-psychiatry,” courageously using that taboo word. As an electronics physicist, I admire the post by Dr Phil Thomas, Why Neuroscience Cannot Explain Madness, in “Mad in America” refuting such an illusion ahead of that becoming the new income door of coercive traditional psychiatry. Lol, in the tempest he has to throw the multi-billion dollar DSM-5 into the surmounting waves.

  • Sir,

    An enlightening article and a great next move for Critical Psychiatry Network (CPN) reaching out of Britain, New Zealand and Australia. I’d prefer reading this post in two parts. I am waiting to see more posts and wish you best.

    peter