We Need To Punish Psychiatrists With Head-In-The-Sand Syndrome

Head-in-the-sand syndrome is a “mental disorder” that has reached pandemic proportions among members of the psychiatric profession. Psychiatric drugs are known to cause a metabolic syndrome associated with a number of potentially lethal ill health conditions. Rather than accepting this fact, and dealing with it, the majority of psychiatrists have tended to minimize their own role in the development of these physical maladies. They have started to devise a number of disingenuous schemes and strategies for concealing their role in this injury altogether.

1. Blaming lifestyle factors (smoking, diet, etc.)
2. Blaming the impugned “mental disorder”
3. Turning a blind eye to the effects of the drugs they dole out

There is a sleight of hand at work here. While they are blaming “mental illness” and lifestyle factors on the rising mortality rate, they continue to over-diagnose and over-drug patients in their charge. Often this over-diagnosing and over-drugging involves the attaching of multiple psychiatric labels to individual patients, and then the maintaining of those individuals on a different drugs for each psychiatric label. These drug cocktails are notorious for being ineffective therapeutically, and for causing a great deal of physical damage to the person so sedated over the long term.

Damaging people through drug abuse is not the kind of behavior we want to see in our health care providers. Injuring people in treatment in this manner is at least as irresponsible as playing hooky from school is for the average adolescent, if not very much more severe. Doctors need to be held accountable. Continuing to allow them to lie, and to get away with murder, is not holding them accountable for the damage that they are causing, and that they have caused. As long as no one is held accountable, the blame is projected onto other causes, and the professional walks away with a smug sense of his or her own self-importance.

This sense self importance is achieved at the expense of the health and welfare of a great many people. Should remorse and regret be demanded of them by the general public, you would see remorse and regret. If the only way to retrieve a conscience for psychiatry is to prosecute a number of psychiatrists, then we need to get down to the business of prosecuting a few psychiatrists for their crimes. When we remind psychiatrists of the medical maxim, ‘first do no harm’, we don’t want them to get the conflicting message that they are beyond the law.

The law doesn’t exist for people with head-in-the-sand syndrome. The law doesn’t exist for them not because there is no law; the law doesn’t exist for them because they don’t think the law should be applied equally to them in the same way that it is applied to everybody else. Head-in-the-sand blindness can go on forever if it is not immediately caught and corrected. We need to help these arrogant erring doctors recover the social conscience that they have collectively lost. I submit that it is time we revealed to them the extent of the crimes that they are so intent on keeping the general public in the dark about.

Placebos Grow More Effective In The Treatment Of Schizophrenia

Dig it! According to a recent study, as reported on Fox News, sugar pills are more effective in the treatment of schizophrenia today than they were 10 years ago, Schizophrenia patients increasingly responding to placebos in trials.

Studies of schizophrenia drugs are increasingly finding lesser effects because more patients are responding to drug-free placebos used for comparison, according to a new United States government study.

I guess this is good news for placebo makers.

What’s more, recent clinical trials of second-generation antipsychotics — which emerged 20 years ago and now dominate the market — have been finding smaller treatment effects compared with trials from the early 1990s.

According to the article Food and Drug Administration researchers reviewed 32 clinical trials submitted to the agency between 1991 and 2008 to come up with their figures.

The researchers found North American trials done in more recent years turned up smaller treatment effects than older studies.

Dr. Thomas P. Laughren, one of the researchers, claimed that this was not because the drugs were any less effective, instead it was because patients given placebos started showing better responses. I guess this is proof positive that over the past 10 years placebos have been getting more powerful.

Another theory has it that the patients being treated today are less “sick”.

The patients responses on the drugs remained constant over time. Given the drug, there was a 13 point reduction of symptoms over a 4 to 8 week period. With the placebo this response changed over the years from 2 points between 1991 and 1998 to an average of 7 points between 1999 and 2008.

While the drugs showed a great statistical advantage over the placebo in the short term, it is our hope that these improved results could lead to more prolonged studies. If the clinical trials went on for quite a bit longer than 4 to 8 weeks, one school of thought has it that the placebo effect would eventually gain a distinct edge over the drug effect.

Any sporting person out there want to wager a bet over the outcome of this challenge? It is quite possible that the neuroleptic drug is a more of a sprinter beside the placebo which in the end could prove to be more of a marathon runner.

Excessive Use Of The Baker Act On School Children In Miami-Dade County

The Baker Act, officially the Florida Mental Health Act, allows authorities to hold a person for 3 days (72 hours) evaluation if he or she is suspected of having serious mental health issues.

Miami-Dade County police apparently like to use the Baker Act on school children. A recent issue of the Miami Herald story bore the headline, Number of Miami-Dade students ‘Baker Acted’ on the rise.

At least 646 times this year — that’s an average of more than thee times every school day — Miami-Dade school police have handcuffed a student, put him or her in the back of a patrol car and driven to a mental health facility under the rules in Florida’s mental health law, the Baker Act.

This number is almost double what it was 5 years ago.

Nearly 2 students in every 1,000 have been Bakered Act in Miami-Dade this year. In Broward County, the 2nd largest district behind Miami-Dade, this figure is closer to .5 of a student per 1,000. Miami-Dade has Baker Acted 4 x more students than Broward.

This is not about crime. The number of crime incidents at Dade county Schools dropped 24 % from 2007 to 2011. The number of juvenile arrests in the schools has similarly fallen 35 %.

Baker Act numbers are heading in the opposite direction: In 2006-07, there were 427 calls to the police for mental health help, resulting in 322 students shuttled by school cops for exams. This year, there have been 1,042 calls and at least 646 students Baker Acted. So, calls for assistance have increased 144 percent and the Baker Act transports about 100 percent.

Use of the Baker Act is up statewide, but this dismal fact doesn’t excuse the increased use of this law on school children.

Statewide, the number of Baker Act exams — for everyone, not just children — rose 79 percent from 2000 to 2010. In Miami-Dade, the number more than tripled from 1999 to 2009 to about 16,700 exams

Whether this increased use represents over-use or not has not been resolved in the eyes of some experts. Miami-Dade County school officials are currently investigating the matter.

Eradicating ‘Stigma’, The New Sales Pitch For ‘Mental Illness’

It takes some stretching to put it in something resembling transactional analysis terms, but I think will give it a whirl. “I’m not Okay, but now that we have anti-stigma campaigns, it’s Okay not to be Okay.”

I guess I’m old fashioned. I still prefer Okay over not Okay.

Now we’ve got this problem of dissent and the mental health orthodoxy that didn’t exist 2 or 3 decades ago. You get the kind of thinking that runs if you don’t believe what we are saying to be true, you “stigmatize” the “mentally ill”, or more properly put, people with “mental illnesses”.

There is no “stigma” attached to mental health. There is a “stigma” attached to “mental illness”. Is there any “stigma” attached to recovering from a “mental illness”?

“Stigma”, once a brand or a tattoo, now refers to a more metaphoric or symbolic mark of disgrace. We have a problem in that, given this definition; use of the word itself is “stigmatizing”, or prejudicial. You can’t wash off disgrace any more than you can wash off the mark of Cain. When it is a matter of perception, maybe another word would be preferable.

Both words, “stigma” and recovery, are words that some people in the mad peoples movement claim have been co-opted by people who are in opposition to their wishes, aims, and rights. In the case of both words there is much legitimate truth to this accusation.

Recovery is now being used by pharmaceutical companies to sell pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceuticals are one of the reasons why some people in treatment don’t recover. Recovery is now used by mental health professionals who feel most people who have been labeled with “serious mental illness” labels are incapable of recovering. Some of this recovery rhetoric has even degenerated into being applied to custodial care by another name. Custodial care, in some of these cases, has merely been transferred from a hospital setting to a community setting.

The idea is that there are all these “mentally ill” people out there who are not getting treatment they need because of “stigma”. The question here becomes who determines need, and where do we draw the line. The thing that is seldom being pointed out is that there are a lot of people who are being treated by force and against their wishes. Do we need more people in mental health treatment who don’t want to be treated? If so, you or your neighbor could be next. Is it not “stigmatizing” to force treatment on people who don’t want, for whatever reason, to be treated?

I see a big danger in using “stigma” to sell “mental illness”. I think this is precisely what is going on today. The numbers of people being fed, clothed, and sheltered by the taxpayers due to a “mental illness” label is increasing by leaps and bounds. Sooner or later, given the kind of growth that is taking place in the field, this burden is going to become too great for the state to carry. Once that point is reached, it will have become too late not to do something about the problem.

Recovery takes place where people leave the mental health system. They leave the mental health system precisely because they have recovered their mental health. Where people don’t leave the mental health system, the mental health system could be said to be ‘broken’. The idea is to get more people leaving the mental health system, and fewer people entering it. When you get fewer people entering the mental health system, you are being preventative. When you get more people entering the mental health system, you are being causative. I’d say it’s time to take a good long hard and honest look at what we’re doing.

Gambling With People’s Lives

The world of psycho-social rehabilitation isn’t the real world. The person in psycho-social rehabilitation has returned to the make believe, and less significant, world of adolescence and childhood. I have a problem, to cut to the real, with this kind of languishing in the waiting room. I don’t think it makes much sense to spend one’s precious time and entire life in a waiting room. Now I could be wrong, but it seems to my way of thinking that this waiting for nothing in particular to happen represents an incredible waste.

It’s possible that what we’re seeing is the apotheosis of bureaucracy. Bureaucrats like to make everyone wait. There are rules, procedures, and red tape, and when you’re finished with them, you’re a cadaver. The waiting room is where people congregate, and learn the rules, procedures, and red tape. Anywhere else is what the waiting room is designed to postpone. You frequent the waiting room until you’re spirit enough to make an excursion into the real world posthumously.

People wouldn’t frequent the waiting room if they were in their right minds, and therefore, there is propaganda and a professional elite trained to convince people that they are not in their right minds. As long as you are in your wrong mind you must be in the right place. Self-assured people with a lot of confidence wouldn’t fritter away their lives in a waiting room waiting on some kind of appointment they aren’t going to make. Cowed and beaten down defeated people, on the other hand, know that wherever they’re going it isn’t a good place.

When you’ve got people convinced that they will never be in their right minds, you’ve won the ball game. They are the losing team enduring the penalty of defeat. You are the conquering army. You’ve got a salary, a life, and a fief; they haven’t got squat. They put money in your pocket, they put bacon on your table, and they get the kids through college. Somebody has to pay for them, and that somebody is Joe Taxpayer, but the money goes into your pocket. If they ever wake up, hell’s bells, your out on your arse and pounding the pavement.

We have a relationship here similar to that between the beggar for alms and the benefactor of beggars for alms. This is a reminder that ex-bedlam inmates in England used to be provided with licenses to beg. After all, who’s going to provide a job to a loony bird? We have what we call the human condition, and the human condition wouldn’t be the human condition if loony birds could be anything other than loony birds. The ugly duckling tale, well, that’s a fairytale, isn’t it? So long as people are fated, some people are going to come out on the winning end of any proposition, and some on the losing end.

If fate, in this case, sounds like a gamble, you’ve got it! It is not reason that guides the affairs of humanity, given the world that we’ve created for ourselves, it is greed and advantage. We haven’t yet designed a world for all of its inhabitants. We’ve designed a world for its luckiest inhabitants. That, after all, is what you get from any gamble. So long as life is a gamble, in which luck and treachery mean everything, you are going to get a whole population holding the short end of the stick. When we stop gambling, maybe we can find a better purpose for this waiting room than waiting for a perpetual game to end.

Pigeon Feeding ‘Mental Illness’ In Liverpool

The Liverpool City Council issued a report in which pigeon feeding was attributed to “mental illness” according to an article in Today Online, ‘People who feed pigeons are mentally ill’. I think the public outcry over the statement has probably convinced the Liverpool City Council that the statement was a mistake by now.

In a report from Liverpool City Council, the statement said: “Pigeon Feeding – Often undertaken by individuals with mental health needs.”

As a freshly discovered symptom of “mental illness”, I think pigeon feeding has got to be news.

I’ve heard it said that people who lack adequate housing are “mentally ill”, but pigeon feeders? You better watch what you do with that bird seed, and those bread crumbs there, fellow. They can get you into a whole lot of trouble.

The council based the report on a survey taken several years ago, but was unable to provide a copy to back up the claim.

Wouldn’t you know it? There in the park it seems we have here another victim of chronic pigeon feeding disorder. No wonder “mental illness” is said to afflict 1 out of every 5 people in the nation.

A Liverpool council spokesperson said: “The reference in the report relates to a survey carried out by the council about five years ago when it was considering whether to prosecute persistent pigeon feeders.

Ahha! Incorrigible pigeon feeders, no, you’re not innocuous in the slightest, and not only are you bad, but you’re mad as well.

I am Okay. You, on the other hand, are pigeon feeding shrink bait.

This is called the pigeon feeders are “sick”, we did a survey, system of urban planning and renewal.

If any of you other bird brains out there would like to design a stupid survey, maybe we can increase our reported wacko population even further. Increasing that population seems to be on the agenda in all sorts of places these days.

Not to fear, I read pigeon feeding is against the law in San Francisco. Maybe they can pass a law against it in Liverpool, too. Of course, that would make all pigeon feeders criminals.

Allen Frances And The DSM-5

Allen Frances, Duke University psychiatry professor emeritus, isn’t so much a critic of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders as he is a critic of the DSM revision process. Apparently he has a love/hate relationship with the manual itself. He doesn’t object to the DSM, psychiatry’s label bible, so much as he objects to what he sees as a rushed and flawed job that could result in a shoddy product. He objects to a process that he thinks will produce a lower quality product than a more thorough going process would produce.

He himself was one of the architects of the DSM-IV. The DSM-IV was notorious for raising the “mental illness” rate throughout the world. The DSM-5 is expected to smooth out a few more of the wrinkles in the DSM-IV. Although current criticism of the DSM revision process may make the DSM-5 less of an open Pandora’s Box, or contagion zone, than no criticism whatsoever would, the publication of the DSM-5 is expected to raise the rate of mental illness around the world substantially again. Make no mistake about it; what is going on here, with the hoopla surrounding the revision and publication of this manual, is the selling of “mental illness”!

His latest jabs at this process on his Huffington Post blog have been aimed at the price tag. A recent blog post of his bore the title, DSM-5 Costs $25 Million, Putting APA in a Financial Hole. The DSM-5 has cost 5x the amount already that the DSM-IV cost. The APA is in the hole right now because of this price tag.

The American Psychiatric Association just reported a surprisingly large yearly deficit of $350,000. This was caused by reduced publishing profits, poor attendance at its annual meeting, rapidly declining membership, and wasteful spending on DSM-5. APA reserves are now below “the recommended amount for a non-profit (reserves equal to a year’s operating expenses).”

$350,000 in the hole to be exact because of a multi-million dollar revision process owing in part to the objections of critics such as Allen Frances.

APA has already spent an astounding $25 million on DSM-5. I can’t imagine where all that money went. As I recall it, DSM-IV cost about $5 million, and more than half of this came from outside research grants. Even if the DSM-5 product were made of gold instead of lead, $25 million would be wildly out of proportion. The rampant disorganization of DSM-5 must have caused colossal waste. One obvious example is the $3 million spent on the useless DSM-5 field trial, with its irrelevant questions, poorly conceived design, and embarrassing results.

The DSM-5 was due to be published in 2012. Because of the objections of many psychologists and the likes of Allen Frances publication was suspended for a year. The revisers of the DSM-5 are also going out of their way to get input from interested parties. Actually, and to be more precise, the revisers are busy at damage controll by giving the appearance of giving an ear to critics for public relations purposes. The upper echelon of the APA don’t want democracy. Dialogue is not what coming up with “mental disorder” labels is all about. There is, for example, no No Mental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified category in the manual.

If stage one were field testing, stage two is quality control. Stage one a disaster, in his view; he sees quality control as the issue in a more recent post, Follow The Money, on these monetary difficulties lost to the DSM-5 revision process.

APA was faced with 2 choices: 1) go ahead with Stage 2 to clean up the mess; or 2) declare Stage 2 unnecessary and publish a poorly edited, unreliable, and untested DSM-5. APA chose the second option and is rushing toward a forced, premature birth of DSM-5.

Actually, as pointed out above, publication had been suspended earlier, and so this would entail suspending publication yet again. This suspension proposed by Allen Frances also begs the issue of the rising tab and the debt. If the DSM-5 revision has cost $25,000,000 already, continuing to haggle over the minutae and specifics of “mental disorder” labels is not going to bring this tab down.

Since there is no pressing need to publish the DSM-5 quickly, let’s follow the money. The APA budget depends heavily on the huge publishing profits generated by its DSM monopoly. APA needs the money badly. It is losing paying members; other sources of funding are also on a downward trend; and its budget projections require a big May 2013 injection of DSM-5 cash.

Is there a pressing need to publish the DSM-5 at all? Oh, yeah! The money! The patients? Well, they’re going to rot anyway, and so we might as well take advantage of them and their plight. What can they do?

As someone with a history of activism in the psychiatric survivor movement, I have objections to the DSM-I through 5. Our problem stems precisely from the fact that these psychiatrists, with their medical degrees, and their drug company ties, are putting professional interests ahead of their patients’ health. These medical doctors are putting their own standing above the health of their patients to the detriment of their patients’ health. Allen Frances, the retired psychiatry professor, is as guilty as any of them.

Allen Frances is playing a double game. If he has to settle for a shoddy product, to him it’s better than no product at all. This product could be “medicalizing normal”, as he puts it, right and left. This represents a glitch the next edition can potentially clear up. He can immediately start projecting his wishes onto a revision of the DSM-6. He may not be alive then, but his followers can continue to opt for a little more rigor in the revision efforts. I just don’t see how any amount of rigor is going to resolve the basic lack of real science you’ve got in the DSM. There is no real science involved in the selection of “disease” labels by committee.

We don’t really have a potentially bad edition of a good book going on here. We just have another bad edition of a bad book that was a bad idea to start with. The DSM should be scrapped altogether for other approaches that don’t owe so much to biological bias and drug industry profiteering. Lives are on the line, and as long as the current toxic paradigm, supported by the DSM, is in operation, more of those lives are going to be lost. The APA can find other ways to fund its nefarious activities. The DSM is basically fraud, but unfortunately it’s a fraud that it appears is going to continue for some time to come. Again, and emphatically, it should be scrapped entirely!

Child Drugging Increases In Australia

According to the Sydney Morning Herald a psychiatry professor at the University of Adeliade, Jon Jureidini, is raising the issue of the increased use of psychiatric drugs on children in Australia. The article in question bears the heading, Concern at psychiatric drugs used on children.

This article points out that after the addition of black box warning labels to anti-depressant bottles in the USA there was a 58 % drop in the use of those drugs on children in that country.

Yet between 2007 and 2011 in Australia antidepressant prescriptions increased from nearly 22 prescriptions per 1000 children aged below 16 to nearly 27, data provided to the Herald by the Department of Human Services under freedom of information laws shows.

The use of antidepressant drugs on children in Australia is increasing while the use of neuroleptic drugs on children has doubled in little more than 5 years time.

Last year there were about 14 antipsychotic prescriptions for every 1000 children, compared with seven in 2007.

Professor Jureidini points out that this increased usage has occurred despite the fact that the rate of psychosis among children has not increased so significantly. He offers a prescription of his own.

Professor Jureidini said more monitoring of the drugs and their side effects was needed, along with training for GPs on non-pharmacological treatments.

I’d say that the situation of Australian represents an object lesson that doctors and mental health professionals in other countries would do well to learn from.

The NIMH: Using A Scientific Pretext To Fund Harm

Some research studies should be criminal. A good case in point is this study in an article found in Phys.Org, UC San Diego to study accelerated aging in schizophrenia.

Researchers at the Stein Institute for Research on Aging at the University of California, San Diego have received a $4 million grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), part of the National Institutes of Health, to study accelerated biological aging in schizophrenia.

Accelerated biological aging? They’re not really studying accelerated aging, are they? The short answer to this question is no. Poor health is often attributed to the psychiatric label that is actually the result, as is the case here, of the drugs given to treat the label. The researchers attribute this poor health falsely to the label as a method of getting more funding and of better deceiving the general public.

Scientists have long observed that schizophrenia is more than a brain disease, as it also affects a wide range of physical functions and entails more rapid biological aging. A number of studies have suggested that physiological changes seen throughout the body occur at an earlier age in people with schizophrenia. For example, young adults suffering from this mental condition are prone to diseases associated with growing older, such as diabetes and cardiovascular problems.

Suddenly we’re expected to digest the oxymoronic suggestion that there are old young people running around in the mental health system. Actually it is a well known fact that a metabolic condition associated with the use of the atypical neuroleptic drugs developed in the 1990s is the culprit. These drugs have a tendency to cause an excessive weight gain which accompanies the diseases mentioned in the article and results in early mortality. What these researchers will actually be studying is the iatrogenic ill health that doctors are directly responsible for causing. This is the research equivalent of poisoning somebody so that you can observe him or her in the process of dying.

To unravel biological mechanisms underlying faster aging, [principal investigator Dilip V.] Jeste and colleagues will measure and analyze a panel of biomarkers associated with insulin dysregulation, inflammation, oxidative stress, and cell aging. The last study involves measuring the length of telomeres – regions of DNA that protect the ends of chromosomes from deterioration and have been linked to longevity. In addition, researchers will investigate the effects of factors related to chronicity of schizophrenia, such as cumulative effects of medication.

There is an easy way to de-accelerate what these researchers are calling an aging process, and that is simply by reducing the dosage of neuroleptic drug that the research subjects are being given. The “cumulative effects of medication” are where the effects of the drugs have to be accumulated over the long-term in a subject. You could do the same thing with persistent low doses of potassium cyanine. “Chronicity” itself is related to the use of these drugs for what is termed “symptom management”. This “symptom management” takes place basically because the condition is thought to so severe in an individual as to place him or her beyond recovery.

The NIMH should have better places to put its money than into studies that damage people just so that damage can be studied. I can’t begin to express how unethical this sort of practice is. I would imagine that the impetus behind this research might be the development of a drug to de-accelerate the ill health that is brought on by psychiatric treatment that could be added to any drug cocktail a mental health consumer might be put on. This additional drug is proposed in order to rake in kickbacks from the drug industry that would not be there if the patient were detoxified. Detoxification, of course, comes with a reduction of drugs.

Ignore History At Thy Peril

How do you dialogue with psychiatry when psychiatry doesn’t dialogue with you? You don’t. This leaves psychiatrists rehashing things the psychiatric survivor, mental patients’ liberation, movement dealt with many years ago…as if we had not done so. We, in this case, means people who have endured or survived psychiatric treatment, or perhaps mistreatment is the more apt way of putting it.

This psychiatrist, H. Steve Moffic, M.D., makes an effort to come up with a name for discrimination against people who have had psychiatric labels attached to them. The story in Psychiatric Times bears the heading, Psychism: Defining Discrimination of Psychiatry.

I don’t think by today that there can be any question that there is significant discrimination and prejudice directed against those who are deemed to have some sort of significant mental problem. Many times, that has resulted in trying to keep such people out of mainstream society, whether that be hospitalization, not being able to live in certain neighborhoods, and not being hired for work.

Brilliant deduction, Sherlock! We ex-patients have been saying the same thing for years and years on top of years. When did you first reach this astounding conclusion, sir?

From here he adopts the personal pronoun “we”. An editorial we would presume to speak for everybody. As for this “we”, the “we” he would be speaking for is the “we” of people he treats, we, using the editorial we, will call this “we” the benevolent dictatorial “we” instead. Tonto adds, “He speak like him ownum turf, Ke-mo sah-bee.”

Now we may be seeing more and more of that in our field as the antipsychiatry movement of Scientologists seems to be expanding to former patients and their families who felt they were hurt by psychiatry. While some anger and criticism is surely warranted, the vitriol and call for the end of psychiatrists seems to border on hate speech, as described in the recent Psychiatric Times blog of Ronald Pies, MD.

Families that have lost loved ones to psychiatry might feel they have reasons for identifying with the Church of Scientology. Likewise they might feel they have reasons for not identifying with the Church of Biological Psychiatry. This is not an issue for me. The Church of Scientology is no more open and transparent than is the Church of Biological Psychiatry.

Mental health consumers and psychiatric survivors marched on the APA convention in Philadelphia this May. We had to be adamant. We had some psychiatrist come outside who thought we had something to do with Scientology. We didn’t have anything to do with Scientology, and we didn’t want anybody to think we did. Cult, church, or organization–legimate or illegimate–we were in no way connected with Scientology, nor it’s front group, the Citizens Commission on Human Rights. Apparently these guys only read themselves.

Blacks have racism, woman have sexism, Jews have anti-semitism, etc. Why not come up with an “ism” for people who have done time in the mental health system?

Perhaps the lack of such an “ism” indicates a discrimination and prejudice even more intense or ingrained, so much so that there is not even a term to rally around. Such a term could be psychism. This is a term that is so unused that we can easily adopt it as our own. In theosophy, I found it used on rare occasions to refer to spiritual awakening. Spiritual awakening is indeed what we need, isn’t it?

Where has this man been for the last few decades? Language has long been a major concern for people in the psychiatric survivor, mental health consumer, and ex-patient Mad Pride movement. We’ve even started to sit down with the likes of him. People in this movement have come up with the terms mentalism and sanism to describe prejudice and discrimination directed against them for this very reason. These terms are part and parcel of that discrimination of psychiatry we term psychiatric oppression.

We don’t need a psychiatrist to link our struggle to the struggles of African Americans, women, gays, senior citizens, children, disabled people, homeless people and other often disenfranchised and marginalized peoples. We’ve been a part of those same struggles for many years. If this man took any real interest in the history of the people he treated as a group, he would know these things. Apparently it’s a history lesson he desparately needs.