Posted by med_empowered on October 16, 2005, at 6:02:17
In reply to Could that be because... » 64bowtie, posted by Racer on October 15, 2005, at 21:24:47
I think the poster raises an important point--historically, medications have often been used to control "symptoms" (and people) instead of empowering them. Look at Thorazine and the other early neuroleptics. Not only were they used on those with schizophrenia, they were also used: in "hostile" elderly people (very popular in old folk's homes...minimized staff costs), in prisons (both on the mentally ill and the generally aggressive), in juvenile facilities, and in foster homes. In fact, some states in the US have recently been found to have over 50% of their foster children on at least 1 psychotropic drug. Think about it. 50% of the kids are mentally ill? Even when you take into account the "disturbed" pasts some of these kids might have, when you have over 1/2 of them on some sort of psychotropic, and many of them on several, there are serious problems. Apparently, a number of them are on un-tested, possibly dangerous combos--like 2+ stimulants together, highly sedating "super combos" (depakote+klonopin+zyprexa..that kinda thing). Sooooo, the point is, I guess, that medication is really like any other drug--they're not really inherently good or bad; the usefulness of their effects really depends on context. Some drugs (like Thorazine) seem pretty much designed to control people, and should be abandoned now that we have better medications. Some drugs (such as Valium) have the potential to help EMPOWER people, but can also be mis-used to trap people in an existence of stifled emotions, dulled cognition, and chemical dependency. So..its a mixed-bag. Personally, I think with some major "tweaks" in the current system, things could be much better. My "tweaks" would include: the end of forced hospitalization, the end of forced medication, the end of use of "depot" injections, increased penalties for shrinks who over-prescribe and/or expose their patients to unnecessary risk, increased emphasis on truly **informed consent** for all drugs--in my ideal vision, docs would have to have forms signed for most drugs given to patients, and these forms would have to include data regarding side effects and alternative medications and/or non-drug treatments. In addition, I'd like to see a form where doctors could be rated by their patients. ((In the university setting, at least in the US, a large part of what determines of professor's pay, rank, and tenure status is the student evaluation; why should psychiatrist's be exempt from scrutiny based on the experiences of the very people they are supposed to treat?)) So...I guess I'm saying that yes, drugs can be used for behavior control, and sometimes its very frightening to read "testimonials" for certain drugs, especially when those being treated are children and/or disabled...I recently read one where the mother of a bipolar child was amazed at how "compliant" and "cooperative" Abilify had made her child. In the entire testimonial, I didn't see one single reference to how the kid felt--it was all about how compliant and "friendly" he had become, and how much easier it was for everyone to get along with him. Creepy..very, very creepy. Still, the potential exists for pretty much all drugs to empower the patient to live a more productive, fulfilling life...the important things would be drug selection and dose calibration, informed consent of the patient, and a decision on just who's goals--the docs or the patient's--are going to be at the center of the treatment plan.
poster:med_empowered
thread:567099
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20051010/msgs/567517.html