![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 32. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 17:09:42
I've read the book. Been to the website? They do make valid points, but....I'm kinda getting bored w/ anti-psychiatry.
I dunno. What do y'all think?
Posted by Phillipa on April 9, 2016, at 18:02:28
In reply to Mad in America, posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 17:09:42
Never read the book? Phillipa
Posted by baseball55 on April 9, 2016, at 19:09:32
In reply to Re: Mad in America » Christ_empowered, posted by Phillipa on April 9, 2016, at 18:02:28
> Never read the book? Phillipa
Yeah, CE. What's the general argument of the book?
Posted by Hello321 on April 9, 2016, at 19:57:30
In reply to Mad in America, posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 17:09:42
> I've read the book. Been to the website? They do make valid points, but....I'm kinda getting bored w/ anti-psychiatry.
>
> I dunno. What do y'all think?Most people stop taking you seriously if you mention something that the FDA or any other authorities don't agree with. Ive learned my lesson to not bring up some of the most severe effects ive exprienced from psychiatric meds when talking to a psychiatrist. I have a friend who went to a short term inpatient facility, and was prescribed Prozac there. It was his first antidepressant, and when he let the Psychiatrist know that it was causing him to see things, she literally laughed it off and told him Prozac can't cause such an effect. Yet this side effect is listed on the list of side effects for Prozac.
I don't deny that some people are helped by these medications. But too many people who suffer after turning to psychiatry for help are having their suffering ignored.
And what the heck is the difference between the "withdrawal syndrome" that some experience for years when attempting to stop these meds, and addiction?
Posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 20:21:19
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Hello321 on April 9, 2016, at 19:57:30
"Mad in America" is a book about the (mis)treatment of the mad among us in the US. Its been forever since I've read it, but it draws on some old psychiatric literature (which can be terrifying, at least the stuff they use in the book) and goes from moral treatment (quakers, 19th century) to brain damage as treatment (shock, lobotomy, etc.) to the modern day...
...in which, it appears, not a whole lot has changed. There's some analysis of the studies used to get the atypicals approved and widely prescribed, there's some patient stories, etc.
The book itself is good...well-written. I mean, it is somewhat slanted. Lobotomies, for instance...not the best procedure, definitely overused, but there were, now and then, some good outcomes. Of course, for the bad outcomes...what to do? The brain tissue has been destroyed, right? Right.
I did learn a lot. Shock="annihilation therapy," at least back in the day. That's honest..blunt, even. I did find it interesting how the anti-psychiatry movement made the shrinks more...clever, I suppose, in their use of language. The term neuroleptic is now rarely used, even in the literature. EST (ElectroSHOCKTherapy) of the Max Fink era has given way to ECT (ElectroCONVULSIVETherapy) of our current era...and ECT apparently doesn't fry the brain, or at least...that's not why it works. Fink was pretty blunt back in the day...brain damage was part of treatment.
The website is interesting, but just as hardcore, drug-oriented shrinks have their dogma and group think, so too do hardcore anti-psychiatry people. I feel more able to post here about the pros and cons of psychiatry (from my perspective, for my own life) than I do there...
I'm done now. :-)
Posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 20:28:48
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Hello321 on April 9, 2016, at 19:57:30
Yeah, true that. The "experts" know everything. I've had "experts" put straight up lies in my records, and then call me a liar when I told the truth...because they know everything.
I think most of the psych meds are probably given to people who could do without them. Of course, a lot of the prescribing is from general practitioners and family docs, so...criticism of over-use of the drugs should also involve criticism of a culture in which social problems that manifest themselves in individuals ("the personal is political") are dealt with by the medical establishment...and, apparently, any MD will do.
I had TD and the "other" TD--tardive dementia-from heavy-handed use of an "atypical" when I first started having serious problems in my late teens. By some miracle (hey, call me crazy and/or a "Bible-thumper;" there's really no explanation), I now have my raw intelligence back and 0 tics and twitches and such...I am, however, currently in need of "treatment."
Anyway...I found that a) nobody cares b) its always the person/"patient"'s fault and c) nobody believes in such (as you pointed out) until the drug is off patent.
Ugh. Its rough. My personal solution has been heavy use of Orthomolecular. If the OM people are correct, the real problem isn't necessarily psych meds per se...its overdosing people on heavy meds and not using vitamins, minerals, etc. along with the drug(s) to enhance treatment respose, protect the brain and overall health, and hopefully...bring about recovery.
Posted by Chris O on April 10, 2016, at 2:03:33
In reply to Mad in America, posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 17:09:42
I don't mean this in a judgmental way, but "bored" is kind of a vague, unclear term to me. Do you mean you feel unconvinced, irritated, or some other emotion by "anti-psychiatry?" Do you feel that people like Robert Whitaker "make some valid points," but his/their case is overstated, and that psychiatry is not all bad, and can be helpful in some (many) cases? If you mean the later, I concur, on my better (less anxious + depressed) days. On my more anxious and depressed days, I often lash out at psychiatry, because in many ways, it seems to re-wound me with the same sense of co-dependance I suffered from my family of origin. I view it as a co-conspirator to keep my true self weak and ashamed, even if this is not its admitted goal. I don't know. I go back and forth with this. In the end, I know that like all of us, psychiatry is limited by its/our time and place, and that psychiatrists and psychiatry are not the grand definition of normalcy any more than they were 50 or 100 years ago, anymore than any authority figure has been in the history of the human race. That's my two cents for the minute.
Chris
Posted by Christ_empowered on April 10, 2016, at 3:03:19
In reply to Re: Mad in America » Christ_empowered, posted by Chris O on April 10, 2016, at 2:03:33
I'd say...I'm unsure of how I think/feel about psychiatry. My thoughts change from time to time. When I was flat broke, my experience was of elites (the shrinks) and the peons (counselors) doing their best to "keep me in line."Now that I have my "genteel" (other peoples' words, not mine) family behind me, my experience is different. So, social class is a big deal...I think that's particularly true when you're "severely mentally ill," and therefore (more) dependent on your people. Their social status can be a huge issue.
Having said that...I dunno. Low status people seem to get one psychiatry, middle class people another, and the more affluent classes...quite another.
Plus, they deal in stigma. Reduce the stigma of mental illness? Hardly!!! My experience has been that they use stigma to control people. label people, disempower people. "oh, he has schizophrenia." Cruel compassion, just like szasz wrote about.
I'm a Christian. I'm more than a little..disturbed...by how many 21st century churches are encouraged to send the more troubled souls to the pros. Then again, the various modes of "Christian" counseling are often harsh and punitive to the core. But...ministers are called to shepherd a flock. Problem is...community and family bonds have disintegrated, and a lot of times...well, I guess even the role of spiritual mentor and leader is now in the hands of "the helping professions."
Psychiatry clearly has a punitive, authoritarian element. Maybe that's all it is, at its core. I dunno. I've experienced psychiatry as a stigmatized low status person and now as the "mentally ill" offspring of a relatively high status, "genteel" family. I think there's a control element in both, but in the second scenario...well, there's more dialogue, less punishment, more emphasis on "recovery."
I appreciate the anti-psychiatry and critical psychiatry people for their insights and such, I really do. I just don't yet have a firm opinion on Mental Health, Inc. I'm leaning more towards medicalization of deviance as the explanation for psychiatry's existence and power, but...I haven't settled for one position just yet.
Posted by J Kelly on April 10, 2016, at 8:22:54
In reply to Mad in America, posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 17:09:42
> I've read the book. Been to the website? They do make valid points, but....I'm kinda getting bored w/ anti-psychiatry.
>
> I dunno. What do y'all think?Pick your poison. Psychiatry gives me the option of choosing between two evils. Crippling anxiety and depression or crippling side effects. I don't accept either at this point so onwards goes the journey.
Jade
Posted by Lamdage22 on April 10, 2016, at 10:17:41
In reply to Re: Mad in America » Christ_empowered, posted by J Kelly on April 10, 2016, at 8:22:54
If you have the right doctor, Psychiatry is fine.
Posted by J Kelly on April 10, 2016, at 10:30:16
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Lamdage22 on April 10, 2016, at 10:17:41
> If you have the right doctor, Psychiatry is fine.
I guess this is true but I have yet to find the "right" doctor.
Jade
Posted by Lamdage22 on April 10, 2016, at 12:07:30
In reply to Re: Mad in America » Lamdage22, posted by J Kelly on April 10, 2016, at 10:30:16
> > If you have the right doctor, Psychiatry is fine.
>
> I guess this is true but I have yet to find the "right" doctor.
>
> JadeYou can use reviews on the internet to find him or her.
Posted by Hello321 on April 10, 2016, at 12:08:42
In reply to Re: Mad in America » Lamdage22, posted by J Kelly on April 10, 2016, at 10:30:16
The psychiatrists at government funded clinics tend to be the "wrong doctors", in my experience. Since last year, I've been going to a clinic that has less gov involvement, and the doctors there treat you more like a human. Though the short stay inpatient place I mentioned in my last post is completely funded by government, but it's still a nice place over all, even considering my friends experience. But outpatient government funded psychiatrists are the worst.
Posted by SLS on April 10, 2016, at 13:19:15
In reply to Mad in America, posted by Christ_empowered on April 9, 2016, at 17:09:42
Should psychiatry be abandoned as a field of medicine?
If so, what would the appropriate treatment milieu look like?
If not, how should psychiatry be changed?
- Scott
Posted by baseball55 on April 10, 2016, at 19:17:27
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Hello321 on April 10, 2016, at 12:08:42
> The psychiatrists at government funded clinics tend to be the "wrong doctors", in my experience. Since last year, I've been going to a clinic that has less gov involvement, and the doctors there treat you more like a human. Though the short stay inpatient place I mentioned in my last post is completely funded by government, but it's still a nice place over all, even considering my friends experience. But outpatient government funded psychiatrists are the worst.
Are you in the US? Save for the VA, I'm not aware of any government funded psychiatrists. Maybe city or town financed. I suppose some state hospitals still are open, but very few.
Posted by Hello321 on April 10, 2016, at 19:46:00
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by baseball55 on April 10, 2016, at 19:17:27
Maybe these clinics I'm thinking of aren't exactly gov funded. But basically the gov sets up deals with certain community mental health treatment centers to help low income people see a psychiatrist. If you're low income and wish to get psychiatric treatment, the government, at least in my state, directs you to these clinics for help. And it is fully paid for by the government. I've been to a few different psychiatrists that are covered under this program, and each one's treatment of their patients was severely lacking. Now that I have SSDI, I'm glad I was able to get the heck from those places.
Posted by Chris O on April 11, 2016, at 0:18:28
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Hello321 on April 10, 2016, at 19:46:00
Been to the mental health clinic in San Diego. Horrifying. First, got a huge bill (something like $800) because I had a job at the time and was honest enough to report my income (it wasn't much, either). Second, the entire experience had a very draconian, authoritarian approach, as in "We know everything, you know nothing, and you will do what we say., or you can leave" It was, frankly, a joke. And I was intimidated because I am an anxious person, so I basically taken on their shaming, noxious crap. I agree with you, I'd advise anyone to stay the heck away from those places. Not pleasant, not helpful, at least for me.
Chris
Posted by Chris O on April 11, 2016, at 0:42:58
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Christ_empowered on April 10, 2016, at 3:03:19
I agree with much of what you say, but do not have time to respond right now. Someday, I will come back and dialogue about this. It's remarkable how the needier I am, the sh*tt**r, the more desperate I feel, the worse that psychiatrists and psychologists often treat me. I go for help and I get re-wounded by their...inability to help me stand up for myself more, the only reason I am there to begin with. I'm not there to become more dependent, more codependent. F that.
It's interesting that you bring up your Christianity because I believe that psychiatry and psychology (and most western "sciences," "soft" and "hard") are deeply rooted in secularized Judeo-Christian beliefs, specifically, secularized Apocalyptic notions of "progress"--the idea that we are all moving toward some grand end, a secular philosophical version of Christ's return (in which we learn all the secrets of the universe and become eternally enlightened). The British philosopher John Gray writes poignantly about this. What is "normal" in western culture (after St. Augustine) except a dim vision of Protestant Christian values? That is where most Europeans and European-Americans get their core beliefs, not from Confucianism (East Asia), Confucianism + Buddhism (South + Southeast Asia), Hinduism (India), Islam (Middle East, Southeast Asia, North Africa). "Medicalizing" "deviance" is (purportedly) the ultimate secular punch in the face to Protestant Christianity, (by taking what was previously explained as "evil," "sinful," and "scientizing" it). Ironically, when secular western culture scientistizes "sin," it then becomes the rigid Puritanical Protestant it is supposedly standing up to (by "outcasting"--via draconian treatments--"patients"), thus showing that secular western culture (as is all rebellion) is nothing more than false "escape," no escape at all, really. So, I'd be happy if someone would save me from this snake eating itself syndrome, too. But I'm babbling and overwhelmed with tasks I can't complete. Sorry. Keep up the journey.
Chris
Posted by Zyprexa on April 11, 2016, at 6:20:45
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Hello321 on April 9, 2016, at 19:57:30
> > I've read the book. Been to the website? They do make valid points, but....I'm kinda getting bored w/ anti-psychiatry.
> >
> > I dunno. What do y'all think?
>
> Most people stop taking you seriously if you mention something that the FDA or any other authorities don't agree with. Ive learned my lesson to not bring up some of the most severe effects ive exprienced from psychiatric meds when talking to a psychiatrist. I have a friend who went to a short term inpatient facility, and was prescribed Prozac there. It was his first antidepressant, and when he let the Psychiatrist know that it was causing him to see things, she literally laughed it off and told him Prozac can't cause such an effect. Yet this side effect is listed on the list of side effects for Prozac.
>
> I don't deny that some people are helped by these medications. But too many people who suffer after turning to psychiatry for help are having their suffering ignored.
>
> And what the heck is the difference between the "withdrawal syndrome" that some experience for years when attempting to stop these meds, and addiction?
>What I think is the withdraw syndrome, is, you need the med now to live life as you are on the med. In other words, I could not eat or sleep at all before taking zyprexa the first time. When i stop the zyprexa the same thing happens all over again. My brain starts thinking like it was before the zyprexa. All my symptoms come back.
Your not addicted, because you don't try to take more and more. You might be mentaly addicted because you need it to function. I've stoped zyprexa for months at a time just to realize I'm not getting better and decide I should go back on it. Not because I'm craving the drug.
I feel great some times when I go off zyprexa. Other times I feel like uter crap. Its not something I want to take. I'm just dependant on it. Everything falls apart when I don't take it. The way my life was before taking it.
I guess the withdraw is, not feeling right.
Posted by SLS on April 11, 2016, at 6:50:02
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Zyprexa on April 11, 2016, at 6:20:45
Very well said, Zyprexa.
The only thing that I would call attention to is that "mentally addicted" is probably better said as "physiologically dependent"
- Scott--------------------------------------
> Your not addicted, because you don't try to take more and more. You might be mentaly addicted because you need it to function. I've stoped zyprexa for months at a time just to realize I'm not getting better and decide I should go back on it. Not because I'm craving the drug.
>
> I feel great some times when I go off zyprexa. Other times I feel like uter crap. Its not something I want to take. I'm just dependant on it. Everything falls apart when I don't take it. The way my life was before taking it.
>
> I guess the withdraw is, not feeling right.
Posted by Hello321 on April 11, 2016, at 10:29:58
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Zyprexa on April 11, 2016, at 6:20:45
> > > I've read the book. Been to the website? They do make valid points, but....I'm kinda getting bored w/ anti-psychiatry.
> > >
> > > I dunno. What do y'all think?
> >
> > Most people stop taking you seriously if you mention something that the FDA or any other authorities don't agree with. Ive learned my lesson to not bring up some of the most severe effects ive exprienced from psychiatric meds when talking to a psychiatrist. I have a friend who went to a short term inpatient facility, and was prescribed Prozac there. It was his first antidepressant, and when he let the Psychiatrist know that it was causing him to see things, she literally laughed it off and told him Proa
> > And what the heck is the difference between the "withdrawal syndrome" that some experience for years when attempting to stop these meds, and addiction?
> >
>
> What I think is the withdraw syndrome, is, you need the med now to live
> Your not addicted, because you don't try to take more and more. You might be mentaly addicted because you need it to function. I've stoped zyprexa for months at a time just to realize I'm not getting better and decide I should go back on it. Not because I'm craving the drug.
>
> I feel great some times when I go off zyprexa. Other times I feel like uter crap. Its not something I want to take. I'm just dependant on it. Everything falls apart when I don't take it. The way my life was before taking it.
>
> I guess the withdraw is, not feeling right.I am talking about people like the woman in this video who is describing her experience when she tried to stop taking cymbalta.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=srWMvRcHEfs
She's having severe issues that she didn't have before starting cymbalta. She tried to taper off cymbalta, but once she got off it completely, things got terrible for her. Could it not be that cymbalta made her brain adjust to cymbalta in a way that made it unable to function very well without?
People get addicted to nicotine in cigarettes. We recognize that the nicotine has altered their brain in a way that makes them feel that it's near impossible to function without nicotine in their system. Their experience sounds quite like the woman in this video when she tried to stop cymbalta. Also, addiction doesn't require one to have to continuously increase their dose. Smokers don't have to smoke more and more and more. They just get their nicotine to feed their nicotine addicted brain, and then the withdrawals stop.
Posted by Tabitha on April 11, 2016, at 15:18:00
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Christ_empowered on April 10, 2016, at 3:03:19
When I hear the anti-psychiatry argument that the concept of mental illness is just an attempt to medicalize deviance, I get a bit enraged. It's not like the mentally ill are just kooky noncomformists wearing eccentric clothes and talking to daisies. There's real suffering involved, and great loss of human potential of the sufferers. The anti-psychiatry folks never seem to address that at all.
I really appreciate your point that there's a stark class divide in the quality of mental health treatment. My experience is that if you're lower class or using a high volume provider (such as HMO doc), the goal is just to get you calmed down with medication with little care about the side effects and resulting quality of life.
I once had a counselor go to bat for me with a pdoc who had put me on a high dose of tricyclic AD well after SSRI's were available. The counselor told me tricyclics were what they used on people at the county hospital, the implication being that high-functioning people should be getting the newer meds with reduced side effects. Despite how unfair that is, I was fortunate to get that advice.
Things improved once I quit seeing HMO type pdocs and switched to full price private practice docs. Then they assume you're a person who needs to function at the best level you can, so they will keep tweaking your meds to correct for side effects.
Posted by Chris O on April 11, 2016, at 17:48:07
In reply to Re: Mad in America » Christ_empowered, posted by Tabitha on April 11, 2016, at 15:18:00
Hi, Tabitha,
"Then they assume you're a person who needs to function at the best level you can, so they will keep tweaking your meds to correct for side effects."
I think in sharing you make some poignant points about psychiatry, especially about how it bases its treatment of individuals on their assumed "success" or "failure" in the economic market. And this validates one of the reasons I question the ethical and true empathic validity of psychiatry itself: Psychiatry is essentially a secular religion with our supposedly "free" neoliberal market being the end-all/be-all basis of its morality. So, the more money you have, the more "normal," you are assumed to be; the less money you have, the more "deviant" you are assumed to be, the more of a "loser" "criminal" "outcast" you are assumed to be. Now, that certainly sucks. But since we no longer have any kind of over-arching broad religious value system in American culture, this (the vaguely Calvinist market) is what has replaced it.
And in terms of anti-psychiatry talking about mental illness in terms of "deviance," I think some of the people in that movement are framing "deviance" in a positive light, as a challenge to the Calvinist neoliberal "free" market as the end-all be-all of morality, as a way of saying that the market is defining people's legitimate suffering at its hands as "deviance," and trying to medicalize them into silence. I think Christ Empowered may share some of my opinions on this issue. What do you think?
Sincerely,
Chris
Posted by Christ_empowered on April 11, 2016, at 18:35:18
In reply to Re: Mad in America, posted by Hello321 on April 11, 2016, at 10:29:58
here's been my experience...
I started w/ a university shrink (free for students). I was not considered "college material" in my late teens (my family was working class, intellectual bohemian until HS, so I apparently had "working class loser" written all over me), so I was given relatively high dose Klonopin, as an emotionally trouble teenager. I was given all kinds of meds, actually...I even developed mild-to-moderate facial TD, plus some stiff gait...nobody cared.
Later, I was given high dose (60mgs/day) Adderall. My private practice shrink would hand me a couple prescriptions at a time, post-dated, and get me out of her office. I was then hospitalized at a private, for profit place...they doped me to the gills and decided to "punish" me for having all those wonderful, controlled-substance prescriptions...which I only had because docs did not care what happened to me.
Then, I ended up in a somewhat prestigious hospital affiliated w/ a medical school. Involuntary shock the very night I was admitted. I was started on depakote+haldol, but then my parents (now uber-respectable, white collar middle class) came down to collect me, so it was risperidone and depakote.
Now, my people take care of me. I'm officially diagnosed as Bipolar I of some persuasion by a community health clinic. My people are on the more "genteel" end of the middle class (I guess...social class structure in America is kinda hard to pin down sometimes), and they do take good care of me (LOL). My former "treatment providers" have problems with me...apparently, they now consider me "Schizophrenic," because I started as a working class loser.
--sigh-- My personal experiences have led me to believe that social class--which is a mix of prestige and $$$--has a huge impact on quality of care. When I was in the 1st hospital, the counselor who was so cruel to me would fawn over one woman, who was "Schizophrenic," but came from an established, wealthy family and was married to a rich dude. The minorities on my ward were disregarded...she'd now and then drop hints that they might end up in the state hospital if they didn't improve within 30 days.
The community mental health clinic schedules me for 30 minute session w/ the shrink every 12 weeks. For a while there, I was getting 30 minute sessions w/ my former doc (she moved) every 4 weeks, plus counseling every 2 weeks. Probably common w/ private practice, not so common in public health (at least not here).
Am I "special" ? No. I'm white, male, more functional, and my people are solidly behind me, and they're established, white collar, well educated professionals who have recently entered the more "comfortable" class. Hence, I am "Bipolar I," not schizo-something. I get to have input into what I take (or don't take). I even get low dose, PRN neurontin (not a big deal in private practice, but apparently not often Rx'd here).
So...there you have it. Am I "really" Bipolar I? I mean, on my lil cocktail, I am lucid, have social skills, still have mood swings, and I have gone back to school and resumed writing in my spare time. Bipolar I? Maybe. If I were a poor minority w/ these symptoms, I'd be getting injected with some kinda neuroleptic, possibly by court order.
I don't know what to make of it. I do receive quality care, this place is based on the "recovery model," so its not the 50s, but...$$$ and status play a role in treatment.
Sorry to ramble. Just trying to make a point.
Posted by Tabitha on April 12, 2016, at 15:38:06
In reply to Re: Mad in America » Tabitha, posted by Chris O on April 11, 2016, at 17:48:07
> Hi, Tabitha,
>
> "Then they assume you're a person who needs to function at the best level you can, so they will keep tweaking your meds to correct for side effects."
>
> I think in sharing you make some poignant points about psychiatry, especially about how it bases its treatment of individuals on their assumed "success" or "failure" in the economic market. And this validates one of the reasons I question the ethical and true empathic validity of psychiatry itself: Psychiatry is essentially a secular religion with our supposedly "free" neoliberal market being the end-all/be-all basis of its morality. So, the more money you have, the more "normal," you are assumed to be; the less money you have, the more "deviant" you are assumed to be, the more of a "loser" "criminal" "outcast" you are assumed to be. Now, that certainly sucks. But since we no longer have any kind of over-arching broad religious value system in American culture, this (the vaguely Calvinist market) is what has replaced it.
>
> And in terms of anti-psychiatry talking about mental illness in terms of "deviance," I think some of the people in that movement are framing "deviance" in a positive light, as a challenge to the Calvinist neoliberal "free" market as the end-all be-all of morality, as a way of saying that the market is defining people's legitimate suffering at its hands as "deviance," and trying to medicalize them into silence. I think Christ Empowered may share some of my opinions on this issue. What do you think?
>Thanks for your comment :-)
So I think you're saying that it's possible a person might be labelled mentally ill and subjected to treatment when what's really happening is that they don't want to participate in the traditional economy for moral reasons, and are suffering as a result. In that case, it makes sense they would experience psychiatric intervention as a coercive force trying to push them into line with society's values. I have heard a similar argument from feminism, saying that women used to be committed simply for not fitting the socially mandated role of compliant housewife.
I guess I would separate the two things. Being a non-conformist is difficult and can create suffering, and mental conditions like anxiety, mania, depression, psychosis, etc are also difficult and create suffering. However, I don't believe mental illness is just non-conformity that is being punished. Plenty of people that do conform to social and economic norms also suffer from mental illness.
Similarly, I can see that psychiatry could be used to punish non-conformity, but I don't believe that's its main intent. That view is just a bit too conspiratorial for me, and seems to require ignoring the real suffering that gets relieved (imperfectly) with treatment.
But I am a person with a horror of falling into poverty, because I have seen the suffering that creates. So while I would not argue that economic conformity is morally superior, I do think it makes life a lot easier given the way society currently operates (i.e. lack of safety net). Thus, I think pushing someone into economic participation can be well-intentioned even when it feels unwelcome.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.