November 16, 2016 at 8:49 pm #84371
This is the most up-to-date version of our talking points against Murphy and “Assisted Outpatient Treatment”. There’s absolutely room for improvement and by no means are these to be considered written in stone; they are intended to provide food for thought coupled with accurate information. Additionally, each of the main points still needs elaboration and documentation, so I hope we have time to get back to that. (These points primarily cover the issues in the “original” Murphy bill in the House, HR 4626, now awaiting a Senate vote; they do not speak to the issues presented by the Senate “Murphy” bill, S2680.) I’m posting them again so people don’t have to wade through the entire original discussion to find them. We need to pay careful attention the progress of the Murphy bills and if/when they are scheduled for a vote. Hopefully reading these will prompt some renewed discussion and action now that Congress has returned from break.
ANTI-A.O.T./ANTI-H.R. 4626 (MURPHY) TALKING POINTS
“… from a marketing perspective, it may be necessary to capitalize on the fear of violence to get the law passed.” — D.J. Jaffee
1. “Assisted Outpatient Treatment” as described in HR 4626 is in essence a program of massive forced drugging which, though presented as being in the best interest of the “mentally ill,” is strongly supported by the pharmaceutical industry, which takes in billions of dollars for drugs with no proven scientific or medical justification; which cause untold physical damage and intractable dependency issues in many of those to whom they are prescribed; and which have been linked to many incidents of suicidal and homicidal violence. Pharmaceutical profits can be expected to rise substantially should HR 4626 become law, a fact which should be recognized when evaluating corporate support for the bill.
2. Proponents of AOT claim that recent mass shootings and acts of “senseless” violence have been carried out by people with “untreated mental illness.” This is frivolous speculation at best. And contrary to Representative Murphy’s promotional materials, several of the perpetrators of mass killings he listed as responsible for their horrific crimes as a result of being “untreated” were indeed in the “care” of doctors, and had at some point been prescribed psychiatric drugs as part of that “treatment.”
3. There is convincing evidence that many common psychiatric drugs, far from preventing violence, actually induce violent thoughts and acts in many people. The increasing frequency of these acts seems to correlate with the increasing use of such drugs, which are portrayed as “medicines” despite the lack of objective medical or scientific evidence that they correct a demonstrable pathology. For example, mass killers Eric Harris (Columbine) and James Holmes (Aurora) had been prescribed Zoloft (or a version of such). Many other high profile mass murderers have been prescribed drugs with mechanisms of action the manufacturers can’t explain, and with a list of known “side” effects including hallucinations, anger, suicidal thoughts, violence and suicide — reactions which led to their receiving black-box warnings.
4. Studies have demonstrated for decades that those labeled “mentally ill” have a lower incidence of violent behavior than the public at large. Even many of those on the “front lines” who support some psychiatric measures intended to prevent violent behavior agree that involuntary “treatment” (usually consisting of drugging) is counterproductive. So-called “assisted outpatient treatment” programs constitute costly, irrational and ultimately futile attempts to make our country safer.
5. After the Japanese military shocked the American public with the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an order requiring the banishment of Americans of Japanese descent to substandard “housing” camps on barren inland terrain. For up to three years, innocent people had little privacy, comfort, or autonomy, because of fears that among them were spies and conspirators. The “Murphy” bill if enacted would represent a similar program of scapegoating innocent people to pander to public hysteria and make people feel “safe” from a non-existent threat.
6. The use of physical force to transport, incarcerate, strip-search, restrain and inject powerful and unpredictable drugs into nonviolent children and adults who have committed no crime far exceeds what can be legally done to violent felons. Such treatment is routine in psychiatric wards, and constitutes a violation of the most basic human and Constitutional rights. The U.N. has emphatically weighed in as opposed in principle to involuntary psychiatric intervention as a violation of human rights and dignity.November 29, 2016 at 1:21 am #85223
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.