My rant about suicide, unhappiness, and government policy

People kill themselves because they are unhappy. People don’t kill themselves because they are “ill”.

I’m not saying that having a terminal illness might not serve as an excuse for a person to commit suicide; I’m just saying that such an excuse is not the reason for the act.

Unhappiness may be listed as a “mental illness” in biological psychiatry’s gospel, the DSM, but unhappiness is not a “mental illness”. The DSM, with all it’s pathologizing of every emotional state imaginable, for all practical purposes, is a very dispensable, as opposed to indispensable, manual.

The poor outcomes that come of psychiatric drugging indicate that although we may be feeding people to the drug companies’ profit margins, this drugging has not increased their zest for life, their happiness, or their contentment levels one iota. If anything, it has done the reverse.

The “pursuit of happiness” is a term our forefathers wrote into that document declaring our nation’s independence from the British Empire. This “pursuit of happiness” becomes more and more elusive with time when practical guarantees for the possibility of attaining that happiness are not in place.

The suicide rate climbs because the numbers of unhappy and discontented people climbs. Both these currents of increase point to fundamental failures, misguidance, and lapses of judgment at work in the policies and decisions our government officials have arrived at.

Obviously, if social discontent and unhappiness are increasing, and if our politicians are behind this increase, something is amiss.

Suicide is more popular than homicide. This situation relinquishes the need for any idle chatter about survival instinct, or “mental illness”, for that matter. These people offing themselves are not the only lemming-like personalities involved in contemporary trends. We’re killing our natural environment, and we’re expanding our wastelands at an ever quickening pace. Now tell me that makes sense!

Social insecurity has been increasing for decades. Pensions, employee benefits, and even jobs have been dissolving like smoke on the breeze.

Reaganomics has given way to Barackonomics, both of which equal a growing population of people without adequate housing. Curious, when you consider that the earlier homeless population boom was called the Great American Depression.

Community doesn’t matter anymore when we have TV. Rich celebrities can do all our living for us, and keep us entertained throughout. I like to call the entertainment industry the opium of the impoverished.

Casinos are more popular than ever. In casinos, I’m including state lotteries and the stock market.

Welcome to America! Although we don’t provide guns at the door, I can see that the time may be rapidly approaching when we may do so.

Advertisements

6 Responses

  1. Coercive psychiatry and politics operate on similar lines of reasoning.

    Here in Australia our current Prime Minister said just before the election that just barely got her into office that there would be no carbon tax if she became Prime Minister. Now just a few months later she’s pushing for just that.

    She says that her promise is in the past and that historians can debate and so forth. So she thinks that she can lie because she thinks that she knows better than most people and that what she is doing is for the best.

    She seems to be an otherwise pleasant woman but she knows dick about physics. Many members of the public, taxi drivers and so forth would have a better understanding of physics than she has. Or else understand that there are many things that are not and will probably never be understood.

    So politicians and shrinks and religious nutters (anyone who is religious) think it’s OK to lie if at the same time they can pretend that they are having warm fuzzy benevolent feelings for mankind. In other words they need to feel that they possess a superior understanding. Something that eludes the riff raff.

    What tosh!

    • There wouldn’t be any coercive psychiatry without politics. Coercion is crime anywhere else except in the realm of criminal justice and mental health law. Coercive treatment doesn’t exist without assault or the threat of assault.

      It is politics that upholds coercive treatment practices. I remember attending a taskforce meeting where the chair of the taskforce suggested that it would be crazy to suggest that coercive treatments were not absolutely necessary. There was nothing unpolitical about this chair person’s overbearing attitude. Read any bio-medical model psychiatric/religious tract on “mental illness”, and you can see where this chair gets his unreason. The fact is that if a private citizen abducts another private citizen, it’s a crime; if the state, through a psychiatrist, abducts a citizen, it’s “treatment”.

      There is nothng “medical” about confinement. In no other branch of what purports to be a branch of medicine are people kept against their will and wishes. Confinement is about punishment, and it has little or nothing to do with any legitimate medical practice. Now just why the thought police lock people up, you tell me? It isn’t because any law has been broken. No, the criminal justice system deals with law breakers.

      It is this blurred zone between the criminality and medicine that is so problematic as it represents a loophole in our constitutionally granted and guaranteed human rights. This is one place, in the USA and in Australia, too, where human rights, citizenship rights, and civil liberties are violated on a regular basis.

  2. So regarding suicide, what I’m getting at is that after the fact, the pollies can say that if they had locked a person up and drugged them that the suicide would not have occurred.

    In a way they can seem to be kind of correct. If I was to assault a person by bashing them in the street it might be that if the person had been contemplating suicide that they might delay the act due to the inconveniences occurred by the bashing. I could then say that I had saved their life. If they later recover from the bashing and kill themselves I can say that they were resistant to treatment.

    • Well, people don’t kill themselves because they are victims of coercive treatment, people kill themselves because they think they want to die. This isn’t to say that coercive treatment (mistreatment or torture under any other name) doesn’t compell some people to commit suicide.

      I imagine that if you were bashing a person in the street, it would depend on whether the person was suicidal or not to begin with. If the person wasn’t suicidal, the person wouldn’t be likely to off him or herself even after recovering from your bashing.

      The “mental illness” market advances on the backs of suicides. Everytime there is an inordinant amount of suicide in an area, people get upset, and call in mental health screening. This mental health screening is supposed to find the “mental ill” people before they off themselves. These mental health screenings have very high false positive rates. The end result of screening for mental health is that the “mental illness” rate, and eventually the suicide rates, both go up. It’s only logical. You’re going to be finding more “mental illness” if you’re actively looking for it than you will if you are not looking for it. I imagine the same thing could be said about witches.

      If you want to lower the suicide rate you deal with the reasons people might have for taking their lives. There is no reason in the “mental illness” excuse. People must be killing themselves because of their bad genes. Yeah, sure, whatever. Why don’t we just say “good riddance” then?

  3. Regarding the last paragraph of your post:

    Gun manufacturers are intelligent people. They know how to build a practical and easily usable device that can deliver a missile of a particular size, mass and hardness at a particular velocity.

    Would the politicians suggest that these people have a mental illness?

    • Every soldier in a wartime situation fits the legal definition for insanity. He or she is a danger to others and/or him or her self. War is crazy, and there is not much good that can be said for it.

      I’ve seen the gun lobby at work in Richmond. I’ve also seen their opponents, the same people who are trying to get everybody who has ever been in the nut house listed on a database of people deemed unfit to own a gun.

      We’re in a remember when situation when it comes to our 2nd amendment rights. We’re also talking about one group of people who have become the convenient scapegoats of political expendiency.

      I don’t think we’ve come very far from the time when the NAZIs in Germany began their mass murders by exterminating people in mental institutions. If they’re going to scapegoat anybody, first it’s the psychiatrically labeled, and then it’s some racial and ethnic group or other. We’re also among the last people that the government would defend or empower. “Caring”, in a nanny state bureaucracy, is not caring in reality.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: