Psychiatry should be banned

[writergal]

To me the subjective emotive thinking medicated discounted and ignored unimportant poster you have not been able to provide rock solid proof that psychiatry does more harm than good.....you have provided links and articles that were informative and interesting that show benefits of alternative therapies which I already utilize....its funny that you should use scientolgy in your post as being about as credible as psychiatry and yet you believe basically the same thing as scientologists believe Scientology and Psychiatry - Why Scientology Is Against Psychiatric Treatment but you discount them as being credible this is basically what scientologists are taught to steer clear of and your posts mirror the scientology beliefs.........

In short, Scientologists believe psychiatric treatments do much more harm than good, which is why they warn Scientologists and non-Scientologists alike to steer clear of them. As one official website states: "At best, psychiatry suppresses life’s problems; at worst, it causes severe damage, irreversible setbacks in a person’s life and even death." (Scientology Catechism - Why Is Scientology Opposed to Psychiatric Abuses?)

 

Criticism of The Psychiatric Profession

 

The Church of Scientology is highly critical of the entire psychiatric profession. It considers psychiatrists and related professionals to be peddling pseudo-science for profit to such an extreme that they have labeled psychiatric practices as violations of basic human rights. To combat psychiatry, the Church formed the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (or CCHR) in 1969. Psychiatric medical professionals are also accused of treating humans as soulless beings, no different from animals, an idea quite anathema to Scientology.

Finally, Scientologists view psychiatry as a tool used in brainwashing, murder and other heinous acts. They blame the profession for the development of Hitler, Stalin, the 9/11 terrorists, the Columbine killers, and others guilty of committing some of the most heinous acts in modern history.

 

Non-Scientology Objections to Psychiatry

 

Scientologists are not the only people to severely criticize psychiatry. The CCHR has non-Scientology members, and there are organizations independent of the Church of Scientology also dedicated to combating the practice of psychiatry in whole or in part. Objections include:

• Failing to meet the definition of a hard science, which ergo places psychiatry into the category of pseudo-science
  
• People being treated against their will
  
• Definitions of disorders being too vague to produce non-arbitrary diagnoses.
  
• Overly brutal forms of treatment (including ECT and lobotomy)
  
• Overly controlling and demeaning forms of treatment
  
• The profession too often being used to marginalize those who do not fit the social status quo, misdiagnosing their outlooks or behaviors as an illness
  
• Treatments generally causing more harm than good
  
• Psychiatrists’ overly-close relationship with pharmaceutical and insurance companies
  

Non-Scientologist objectors, however, generally do not view psychiatry as a conspiracy theory, nor do they blame the profession for modern world tragedies like the Church of Scientology does.

 

 

You say that scientology is not credible but yet everything you have said in your posts is what they believe to be absolute truth.....so what again is not credible about scientology...what is it that you find ludicrous about scientology....for you personally..... because it sounds exactly the same as what you believe as far as psychiatry goes.......or do you pick and choose what to believe...keep this one from that and take that idea from there.....according to how it might prove your point......you have proven that a lot of the views that you hold are exactly the same as scientology which you deem to be not credible or as credible as psychiatry......that speaks for itself.....you have proven that scientology holds exactly the same views as yourself.....and that particular cult would you call it? will back you up and welcome you with open arms........and spy on you and censor all your posts as well...tell you how to act what to say......who to be friends with .....tell me now the scientology is not credible but correct when it comes to psychiatry......when you class them together in credibility as having no value.......enlighten me......

 

alternative therapy is important, beneficial and can aid recovery in the mentally ill but psychiatry is also beneficial to some where alternative leaves off and more research is required for psychiatry to have more success

 

So, are you asking me if I'm a Scientologist? J/k I'm not.

 

The fact that Scientology doesn't like psychiatry is completely off-topic to the reasons I've listed as to why I think psychiatry should be banned.

[writergal]

1) I am not wrong...I just do not agree with your stance. There is a difference.

 

If you disagree with me fine, but you are wrong to call my reasons off-topic. They aren't off topic. You just disagree with them. There's a difference.

 

2) You have done well with your argument...I don't feel the need to argue. As I said in a previous post here .....I was enjoying the conversation but disagreed with it.

 

Why not? I'm open to valid opinions and am an open minded person. But I'm also a very logical person. If you can't back up a reason without evidence, I'm hard to convince, hard to sway to your side. Does that make sense?

 

3) What you see as valid...I see as nothing more than a "cause" that many of us have. For me the valid is the fact that I have seen with my own eyes over a good part of my life time the difference in psychiatric (PsyD) attention and those who couldn't afford the opportunity. Those people would include ME. My life is livable again. I am here for my children, my family and my friends and really don't give a rat's butt who believes what I "should have", "could have" or "ought to do". What my doctor and I do to manage my physical and mental health works for me.

 

I'm very happy that psychiatry has helped you. I am. My intention with my reasoning is not to invalidate anyone's positive, personal experiences with psychiatry at all. I was merely trying to present the other side's POV of it. That is all.

 

4) Others who have come here with opposing opinions and why mental health professionals have worked for them have basically been dismissed as ....oh, I don't know....off topic and deflecting.

 

Again, my intention isn't to dismiss people's personal experiences with psychiatry. I was hoping people would go further and counter argue the points I've raised. Some posters have, some haven't.

 

5) Maybe the links shouldn't be provided if you don't want them read and discussed.

 

But I do want the links to be discussed. Just not everyone who has responded has bothered to read the links, as they don't refer to them in their responses to me. I provided the links for that sole purpose - to engage people in a discussion about them. I'm open to debating those and have tried to do that here.

 

6) My response of "because it is helps people" is more than good enough for those of us that have been helped.

 

To each his/her own then.

 

Thank you for the discussion.

 

No hard feelings then, I hope? Psychiatry is a very personal, very hot-button topic. So I am grateful for everyone's contribution to the discussion as I've learned something from everyone's posts.

[xxoo]

I won't go point-by-point through your objections, but want to address this one:

 

Psychiatrists create DSM-IV teams to manufacture mental disorders and conditions which are class and culturally based moral judgments aka a way to control social order of society against people who think or act 'differently' than the status quo. It's a form of social control, punishment. Not treatment. .

 

That minimizes the suffering of people seeking psychiatric care. People want help, relief from their depression, anxiety, obsessive thoughts, compulsive behaviors, psychotic thoughts, etc. Psychiatric drugs are not the only option, but they are one option that is effective for many people--especially in conjunction with CBT (combined therapy working better than either alone according to many studies).

 

Yes, there is a line where I, too, wonder when we are medicalizing normal fears, normal childhood energy, normal quirks, etc. Gray areas exist. But clearly unnecessary suffering also exists, and psychiatry can be invaluable for those people.

[writergal]

Helping people is exactly why psychiatry remains important, despite its shortcomings and limitations.

 

No one is denying the shortcomings and limitations, although we seem to strongly disagree on the degree of shortcomings and limitations.

 

This is true. We do strongly disagree on the shortcomings and limitations of psychiatry. I wish I could bend a little and agree that psychiatry is helpful, and I've really tried to loosen up my strident views, but I can't because of what I've read, and the negative personal experiences that I've had with psychiatry which I posted about in previous posts here. I think my perspective would be more flexible if I'd had a good experience or no experience with psychiatry. And then when I experienced Integrative Medicine as an alternative approach, that validated for me that psychiatry isn't a field of help that I trust any longer.

 

I do respect you and others who've had positive experiences with psychiatry. My intention isn't to invalidate your personal experience with it, but to address the shortcomings and limitations that I believe make it a harmful industry.

[writergal]

I won't go point-by-point through your objections, but want to address this one:

 

 

 

That minimizes the suffering of people seeking psychiatric care. People want help, relief from their depression, anxiety, obsessive thoughts, compulsive behaviors, psychotic thoughts, etc. Psychiatric drugs are not the only option, but they are one option that is effective for many people--especially in conjunction with CBT (combined therapy working better than either alone according to many studies).

 

Yes, there is a line where I, too, wonder when we are medicalizing normal fears, normal childhood energy, normal quirks, etc. Gray areas exist. But clearly unnecessary suffering also exists, and psychiatry can be invaluable for those people.

 

As I tried to explain in a previous post a few minutes ago, my intention with my anti-psychiatry arguments here is not to minimize the positive experiences people who've posted here have had.

 

My intent was to draw attention to the major short comings and limitations within psychiatry as an industry to argue why it should be banned or at least, government regulated.

 

And that is the biggest problem I have with psychiatry, by far. Who are THEY to dictate what behavior is abnormal or normal? They are human beings with biased opinions. It is not up to them to decide if my reaction to my father's death 20 years ago required psychiatric attention. My poor mother fell into that trap and has failed to wean herself off the antidepressants a psychiatrist put her on after my father's death, which impacted her life more negatively than my father's death has.

[todreaminblue]

So, are you asking me if I'm a Scientologist? J/k I'm not.

 

The fact that Scientology doesn't like psychiatry is completely off-topic to the reasons I've listed as to why I think psychiatry should be banned.

 

 

 

No it isnt off topic it is right on topic.......You stated in a previous post that you believe scientology to be about as credible as psychiatry.....yet the reasons you have listed are all in their reasons why they dont believe in psychiatry......

Dont deflect with that off topic crap....answer my question straight....like a psychiatrist would answer my question with honesty and respect and to the best of his ability.......at least humor me

why are you credible in your reasons against psychiatry concerning directly "pyschiatry does more harm than good" when scientology according to you........ is not a credible resource to utilize according to you..... in fact rivals psychiatry which you believe has no credibility? So please shed some light......why you have such a hypocritcal viewpoint......deb

[writergal]

No it isnt off topic it is right on topic.......You stated in a previous post that you believe scientology to be about as credible as psychiatry.....yet the reasons you have listed are all in their reasons why they dont believe in psychiatry......

Dont deflect with that off topic crap....answer my question straight....like a psychiatrist would answer my question with honesty and respect and to the best of his ability.......at least humor me

why are you credible in your reasons against psychiatry concerning directly "pyschiatry does more harm than good" when scientology according to you........ is not a credible resource to utilize according to you..... in fact rivals psychiatry which you believe has no credibility? So please shed some light......why you have such a hypocritcal viewpoint......deb

 

I already explained why.

[todreaminblue]

I already explained why.

 

 

No you didn't answer my question you gave a politicians answer....which is nothing to make your words any clearer to me......

[denise_xo]

Don't stray from the argument, which is about psychiatrists and ethical treatment of patients. We're not talking about other sciences and professions so to bring those in to the argument is just a deflective tactic.

 

IMO, it's quite on topic. One of your arguments appears to be that because there is evidence of misconduct among psychiatrists, the whole discipline of psychiatry is a sham. That argument doesn't hold on. There is unethical behaviour conducted in ALL professions. The fact that you have a couple of teachers sexually abusing children in a few cases, doesn't mean that we throw the baby out with the bath water and claim that we should abolish the entire teaching profession.

[denise_xo]

You're wrong, actually. All of the reasons I've argued are completely related to the topic of why I think psychiatry should be banned. You have yet to provide a valid counter argument to the OP's question. "Because it helps people" isn't good enough.

'Because it helps people' is certainly good enough for further discussion. If thousands of people experience a positive effect from psychiatric drugs, that's certainly an argument that needs to be recognised and addressed.

 

 

Psychiatrists create DSM-IV teams to manufacture mental disorders and conditions which are class and culturally based moral judgments aka a way to control social order of society against people who think or act 'differently' than the status quo. It's a form of social control, punishment. Not treatment.

 

Using the DSM manual which is un-scientific and stigmatizes patients.

 

Yes and no. You can take a Foucaultian view and push it to the extreme and say that it's those officially labelled 'insane' who are the only ones that are sane. However, I think reality is much more nuanced than that. As human beings, we are entirely dependent on categories and categorical systems to operate together. Therefore, it's entirely natural that each culture/society creates its own systems to make sense of what is 'accepted' and 'unacceptable' behaviour. However, categorical systems are not by definition oppressive. They can also be liberating. The devil is here in the details of how the categories are enacted. Whether our official diagnostic systems are oppressive or not is therefore an empirical question, not an a priori conclusion.

 

Yes, a lot of the categories are 'inexact' to say the least, but this is also the case for a lot of work that doctors do, as well as other professions such as teaching and welfare work. In all kinds of work where you a) deal with issues that are affected by social and cultural dynamics, and b) are operating at the edge of the knowledge available to us, a lot of work will be performed based on qualified guess work and hypotheses.

 

Abuse of power, mistreating patients against their will.

 

So do a lot of doctors, teachers, welfare workers, and psychologists.

 

Compromising medical and ethical integrity because of ties to pharmaceutical companies and health insurance companies.

 

Again, I don't see how this is specific only to psychiatry. The problem here is the general way you have chosen to organise the constellation of health care provision/ health care insurance/ pharmaceutical companies in the US. This is a culturally specific issue that can not be equated to psychiatry as a discipline. A lot of countries have done this differently.

 

As I said above, I do think we are witnessing trends of over medicalising previously normal behaviour as well as a very high consumption of ADs, but the cases behind that are much more complex that just 'Big Pharma', although that is one aspect of it.