Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

"Psychiatry now admits It's Been Wrong in Big Ways - But Can It Change?"

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by SilverbladeTE, Mar 5, 2014.

  1. http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/...-its-been-wrong-in-big-ways-but-can-it-change

    very good article

    snippet form start


    personally though I think it would take the Ten Plagues of Egypt to turn the minds/hearts of folk like Wessely, who're so deeply involved, caused so much harm etc
     
    Ren and Roy S like this.
  2. Martial

    Martial Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,342
    Likes:
    1,178
    Ventura, CA
    I hope so that is one seriously fucked up system they have as of now... I was put on super high dose anti convulsants and anti depressents for panic attacks for over five years.. I cured myself using simple CBT and recovered from the anxiety issues in just a few short months..

    The most frustrating drugs are the psychotropics that can completely disable people alongside dealing with their mental health challenges, at least with long term use...
     
    *GG* likes this.
  3. WillowJ

    WillowJ คภภเє ɠรค๓թєl

    Messages:
    3,763
    Likes:
    4,842
    WA, USA
    the problem with that is he is still criticizing the "disease model" of mental health which is only true to a partial extent (some normal things like grief are being classified as mental illnesses, and some secondary things are being classified as discrete mental illnesses when they are really the effects of other diseases which would normally be classified as organic... plus there is the whole problem of coopting actual medical diseases and pretending they are emotional or behavioural in origin when there is no evidence for that and may actually be evidence for medical involvement).

    I think the problem with diagnostics, lack of effective drugs, etc., is that they have been looking primarily (or even almost exclusively) at the wrong things for so long.

    If they're looking at stuff as emotional problems with the primary physical change being neurotransmittors (which are notoriously difficult to measure) so they end up categorizing based on symptoms but it turns out all of these assumptions are wrong and their symptom-based classificaiton systems have failed, it's hardly surprising that they didn't succeed in finding the right pathology or useful classification, because they were looking in all the wrong places.

    When they've been looking at it all wrong, they nullified their working assumptions like emotional illness, neurotransmittor problems, and the disease labels. It's perhaps not possible to nullify the medical model because it's probably not possible to prove a behavioural or emotional model.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2014
    rosie26, Bob and Valentijn like this.
  4. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,392
    Likes:
    34,698
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    In research its fairly clear the right research question is very important. If something does not belong in the mental health paradigm, but psychs are doing most of the research, then the wrong questions will continually be asked, and there will be a distinct lack of progress.
     
    rosie26, peggy-sue, WillowJ and 2 others like this.
  5. akrasia

    akrasia Senior Member

    Messages:
    213
    Likes:
    463
    Last week, there was an obituary for Sherwin Nuland, author of How We Die. He was one of the pioneers in the U.S. who challenged both the practice of keeping patients in ignorance of their deaths, "fighting" to the last, even when the odds were all but hopeless, and the horribly oppressive idea of the "good death." The book was a graphic description of just what happens when you die.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/u...dignified-death-dies-at-83.html?emc=eta1&_r=0

    Before he was an author, he was a professor of surgery at Yale. Following the death of his father, with whom he had a complicated and troubled relationship, he succumbed to depression.

    By his early 40s, his depression had become so severe that he was institutionalized for more than a year. Senior psychiatrists recommended a lobotomy, but they were overruled by the young resident psychiatrist who had been assigned to his case, who insisted on electroshock therapy.


    As a professor of surgery at Yale, his psychiatric care was overseen by the elite of the psychiatric establishment, who even in the early 70's, were prepared to do a lobotomy on him, basically signaling that they had given up on his care. And they were prepared to do it on one of their own.

    Status, intelligence, accomplishment, even social class, wouldn't help you, not that it should of course.

    This illustrates something important I think, that once you enter the realm of the psychiatric, you lose the right to claim rights, and your advocates are likely to be intimidated and easily manipulated by authority. It was another psychiatrist who saved him from the operation not his family.

    One of several reasons why psychiatry is so weak is its inability to allow knowledge of its own history and its mistakes and cruelties to inform its current practices. In the ongoing CBT wars do you ever hear them admit that the discipline, in its various expressions has ever been horribly wrong? Often, if not joyfully effusive, it represents itself as being the best option in terms of efficacy. Of course, because it colludes with and champions the status quo its claim on critical thinking is very weak.

    As a side note, one of the ways Wessley et al. have taken possession of the field is through a very selective, and often mistaken, view of the history of psychiatry. His rendition has been a self serving recitation, a creation of a lineage of mental suffering that leads inevitably, you guessed it, to him and his associates. A story for another day


    Psychiatry is not alone here, of course, there are other disciplines which share the same problem. But it stops it from acknowledging its will to power and the frequent collapse of the ideas of cure, management, and control into each other.

    This is from wikipedia's entry on lobotomy:

    I fully realize that this operation will have little effect on her mental condition but am willing to have it done in the hope that she will be more comfortable and easier to care for.

    Comments added to the consent form for a lobotomy operation on "Helaine Strauss",[n 19] "a patient at an elite private hospital".[126]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy

    The various models of the brain and its relation to emotional life adduced to justify lobotomy eventually were found to be false and ceased to be recommended practice anywhere.

    Interestingly the Soviet Union were among the first to ban it, concluding that the procedure was "contrary to the principles of humanity" and "through lobotomy an insane person is changed into an idiot."

    Sadly, we all know the uses the Soviets made of psychiatry just a few decades later.

    Another interesting tidbit from the wikipedia article is that Scandinavian hospitals lobotomized 2.5 times as many people per capita as hospitals in the U.S.

    The entire article is well worth a read.
     
    SilverbladeTE likes this.
  6. Gijs

    Gijs Senior Member

    Messages:
    640
    Likes:
    1,289

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page