• Top Posts

They’re gonna kill, kill your kids

A news item out of Portsmouth New Hampshire runs, Story of patient without available bed all too common. I’d say the story of patient with available bed all too common as well, but get a load of the example used!

“My son is 22 years old and he has had 11 jobs since the age of 18 because of substance abuse and mental illness. He has been going to the doctor since the age of 4. We literally had to fight the system for eight months to help him get assistance,” one member of the F Group said during a break-out session facilitated by a person with Portsmouth Listens. “In April he went to the state hospital. It was very difficult for me. I can’t imagine a person with mental illness getting through the system.

 Emboldened emphasis added.

 How many fingers?! Four! Isn’t that kind of young to receive a “mental illness” label and all the abuse that goes along with it? Not to mention…drugs? Just two years after the terrible twos, while passing through his fearsome fours, whap, right on  the butt cheek, “illness”.

This brings us to our next point, passing through. A person with a “mental illness” label who doesn’t “get through” the system, isn’t passing through the system. He’s stuck in the system. Perhaps permanently. Staying in the system is not recovery from an alleged “mental illness”, nor is it recovery from intervention and its consequences.

 They said their son was diagnosed with oppositional defiant disorder at 4, but it took until he was 21 to get help.

Their son was disobedient and defiant. Their son was a rebel. Their son was a child. Duh. Therefore, psychiatric label and drugs, and the consequences of labeling and drugging. At 22 years of age, this arguably adult kid, who initially was merely rebellious, as many kids are, especially when they reach their pubescent teens, would be described as a “chronic” head case.

 The article goes onto “describe ODD” seeing it “as a pattern of anger-guided disobedience, hostility, and defiant behavior towards authority figures which goes beyond the bounds of normal childhood behavior” as delineated in the shrink’s bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

 My point, if you want a really, really, really bad child rearing manual, turn to the DSM. All the kids found in this manual are crazy by definition.

 “Thirty-five years ago you couldn’t say the word ‘cancer.’ It was a dirty word. It meant you were going to die. Now you can’t go a day without seeing a fundraiser or a run for cancer,” [Jim] Noucas [co-chair of Portsmouth Listens] told all of the participants at the beginning of the session. “It is time to take mental health out of the shadows and that is why we are here today.”

 Long hush.

 Given the men and women in their spanking white lab coats, I wouldn’t step from the shadows if I were you. Not just yet.

 Perhaps we are turning the world into a carcinogen. Additionally, give me a rhyme for carcinogen. Oh, yeah. Loony bin works. I think the pollutants, both chemical and cognitive, can seem pretty oppressive at times.

Maryland Hopes To Get The Potentially Potentially Violent Into Treatment

The U.S. government has been very successful in its effort to lay the blame for mass violence on pathology rather than individuals. The disturbed individual is no longer an individual. He or she now has a psychiatric label, whether bestowed by a doctor or a newspaper reporter, and thus belongs to a grouping of disturbed people. People with psychiatric labels aren’t their own moral agents goes the ruse.  They are adult children instead requiring full or part time professional supervision.

If violence is a matter of pathology rather than choice, fine and dandy, and this pathology is a matter of biology, alright. The thing to do is to catch violent offenders before they violently offend. When his “disease” made him (we’re talking mostly young males here) do it, after all, we’re looking at “diseases” and not individuals. Individuality is not an option. People either conform to custom and law (regardless of whether that custom and law means wearing a suit and tie or a tee-shirt, jeans and ponytail) or they are “diseased”.

The idea of pre-psychosis, although deferred from categorization as a bona fide “mental disorder” in the DSM-5, is back. The Baltimore Sun reports, New Maryland mental health initiative focuses on identifying and treating psychosis. This headline doesn’t tell you everything. Maryland is beefing up it’s mental health police state system in an effort to catch more pre-psychotic pre-killers.

Founded using a $1.2 million state appropriation approved this year, the Center for Excellence on Early Intervention for Serious Mental Illness has a goal of identifying psychosis in a fresh way: by taking notice in the earliest stages and providing support before symptoms spiral out of control.

I guess they think that by busting pre-psychotics they will be preventing psychotic mass murder in the long term. The problem I see with this plan is that you don’t have a psychotic “until symptoms spiral out of control”, and my understanding is that the majority of pre-psychotics don’t go psychotic, and so, by targeting them for treatment, one could be acting in a causative rather than a preventative fashion.

[University of Maryland child and adolescent psychiatrist, Gloria] Reeves and her colleagues say they’re working to ensure patients can live normal lives by short-circuiting the possibility of a deeper psychosis that could intensify if left untreated.

When a patient is already a patient, hey, what have you got? Shallow psychosis or pre-psychosis? In which case prevention is a matter of preventing deep, “deeper” ,or what is known in the trades as ‘full blown’, psychosis? My point is that maybe sometimes it is better to completely prevent the problem by eliminating the doctor patient relationship in its entirety first. Labeling a person “disordered” is the way you make a mental patient. Once a mental patient has been made, and is being subsidized by the state, unmaking a mental patient, unburdening the state of the financial expense, becomes a major problem in itself.

A growing body of research over the past two decades, however, has shown patients are much more responsive to treatment if they’re diagnosed early, and there are early warning signs that suggest when a person is at risk for developing psychosis.

Patients again. If we have more psychosis, but more treatment compliant psychotics, are we 1. upping the number of over all patients labeled psychotic, or 2. lessening the number of disturbed mass gunman in the nation? My feeling is that we are certainly doing # 1 while it is entirely questionable as to whether we’re getting anywhere with # 2.  Next question, do we really want a larger population of psychotics in the nation?

Before you think that the impetus for this measure is entirely medical, let it be known that the funding for this initiative was voted in by the Maryland General Assembly at the prompting of  Governor Martin O’Malley. Mental health treatment then is the state of Maryland‘s answer to massive acts of violence. Of course, this is providing that they’ve got the right suspects, uh, I mean patients, and that pre-psychosis leads to psychosis which, in turn, leads to massive acts of violence. I don’t even think that is a great theory on paper, but Maryland is not the only state that sees the answer to extreme violence in the nation as a matter of increasing the amount of oppression directed against people with psychiatric labels.

Breaking Up The Shrink Crime Syndicate

My virtue was that I never made a good little “mental patient”. Compliance with a treatment plan, such as adhering to an irritating brain-numbing drug taking regimen, in other words, was never my forte’. When “mental patient’ isn’t your goal in life, it’s hard to become a conscientious “consumer of mental health services”.  “Consumer of mental health services” in today’s parlance translates “chronic mental patient”. The person who refuses to “consume mental health services” isn’t a “mental patient”.

Not being a conscientious “consumer of mental health services”, from the beginning I was looking for an escape clause. Prognosis, you will notice, here would be a matter of living down to expectations. “Mental illness”, after all, is all a matter of applying the odd man, odd woman, out school of philosophy in practice. This means that there are no good prognoses in the mental health field, only calculated curses of a sort. “Mental illness”, then, by definition, is a matter of being launched on a failure track.

I don’t like losing any more than the next person, and so I found this loser track to be somewhat distressing, to say the least, and what’s more, I didn’t think it was the right track for me. What could I do? First you’ve got the diagnostic tag, “mental illness”.  Then you’ve got the role, “mental patient” or “consumer of mental health services”. The tag and the role have been supplemented by the recovery approach to treatment. The recovery approach to mental health treatment sees recovery as a journey without a destination.  In other words, the patient is expected to recover in the sense that he or she is not expected to recover.

Okay. If you don’t want to be a “chronic mental patient”, you’ve got to stop “consuming mental health services”. This was a little easier for me than it has been for some other people. This is because the better part of “mental health services” is something called “medication management”. That’s right. “Mental health treatment” in today’s world is all about treatment with psychiatric drugs. Those drugs are the primary ingredient in the services that “consumers of mental health services” consume. Stop taking psychiatric drugs, and you’ve ultimately slipped the butterfly net. There is nothing left to mental health services but endless talk.

I have to backtrack a little bit here. Outpatient services are a blast in the most ridiculous way. In fact, everything about outpatient services is ridiculous. Take vocational rehabilitation. You’ve got people pretending to be working for no pay. People expected to never hold down a real job do this thing where they go through the motions day after day. They do everything, in fact, but go to the employment agency and fill out a form. This is the difference between a patient and a non-patient. Non-patients are a little less serious about the matter, and they have  managed to become the masters of filling out employment applications.

Given pervasive discrimination, don’t let me bash networking. The clown takes his or her costume off, and he or she still desires something of the human touch. The network is full of imposters, double agents, and swindlers, but to say so would be to hazard a diagnostic label and, frankly, I’ve had enough of that racket. Which brings me to the point. Psychiatry and prescription dope peddling are organized criminal activities as far as I’m concerned. I’ve heard of one instance where the Rico Statute was used against a pharmaceutical company. I hope to see more such realistic moves and appraisals being made in the future.

Light Reflected Off The Expanding Bubble of Mindless Brain Research

A seminar in New York, at Fordham University School of Law of all places, is “symptomatic”, to use the  wrong word, of what’s wrong in brain research today. Somehow  it is believed that by studying the brains of people thought to be abnormal we are going to figure out how the brain works. If we do so, this line of reasoning presumes, we can end massive acts of violence taking place in the world today. You think?

The story in the New York Times is entitled The Day When Neurons Go on Trial.

Neurons are the new superstars in today’s brain research world. We’ve got neurologists, neuro-scientists, neuro-researchers, neuro-psychiatrists, neuro-philosophers, etc, etc. Who knows? Maybe neuro-attorneys are the next wave. The latest trend is neuro, but neuro with a twist, as nothing in the brain, and especially nothing in brain research, seems to proceed in a straight line.

Over and over, they put questions to a guest speaker, Joshua R. Sanes, director of the Center for Brain Science at Harvard, about the implications for society if and when brain science can identify with confidence a propensity for violence, or for lying.

Dr. Sanes answer was he wished he knew.

It is now believed that diseased circuits caused diseased brains, which we experience as psychiatric disorders, Dr. Sanes said. A student, Brittany Taylor, asked what such broken structures would mean if they cause somebody to commit a crime. “Are we going to look at that as a mitigating circumstance, or are we going to have to change our culpability standards completely?” she asked. What if other parts of the brain were involved, or if environmental factors were influencing the neurons? Could someone say with confidence that the neurons made him do it?

Stupid is as stupid does. If diseased brains are brains with diseased circuits, isn’t it a bit disingenuous to say that diseased circuits cause diseased brains? The cause, it would appear, is still X, and X is basically unknown.

Dr. Sanes reply seemed to be expect a lot of useless information. Following this plea of overwhelming informational overload, Dr. Sanes goes onto make a few predictions, the kind of predictions that could earn him a spot on my projected future column, Psychiatrists Say The Darndest Things.

“Fifteen years from now, somebody is going to say it’s the 489th neuron from the back of your ear that made you do it,” along with a mutant gene, Dr. Sanes said. “That’s going to be hard to dismiss.”

I suspect Dr. Sanes could not imagine himself, as a neuro-science-freak, being the person to have such a couple of willfully rebellious neurons. My own prediction is much more modest. I predict that this Decade of the Brain is likely to be as much of a vacuous bubble, a dud, as the last Decade of the Brain. We still have to make that little leap to consider what many neuro-science-types refuse to consider, namely, that maybe obnoxious and aberrant behavior isn’t entirely determined by biology.

Mental patient forswears hospitalization for punishment in prison

If anybody thinks the horrors of forced psychiatric treatment over blown, Las Vegas Channel 13 ABC News has a story about a man who prefers prison. In fact, so chagrined at his treatment was he that he confessed to murder. I imagine if this man had had a little more patience, he would have been released back into society, eventually, no questions  asked.

The heading to the story reads, Man confesses to murder to get out of psychiatric hospital.

On July 9, a detective with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department received a phone call from [Henry] Perez.

Calls to police stations are fairly common.

Perez told the detective that he wanted to confess to a murder that had occurred several years ago on Calcaterra Circle.

Phone confessions of murder, not so much.

Perez also told the detective that he wanted to confess to the murder because jail was better than being in a mental facility.

There, you’ve heard it straight from the horses mouth. If he has any reason for lying, it isn’t because life is a breeze in the mental hospital.

Perez was being held at Rawson-Neal Psychiatric Hospital. This is the same Rawson-Neal Hospital that received a lot of bad press recently for dumping, via bus ticket, discharged patients in the neighboring state of California. Rawson-Neal actually lost its accreditation over patient dumping incidents.

The under story here is that in the psychiatric hospital, where forensic cases are concerned, that is, where somebody pleaded Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity, the lengths of stay are usually longer than if the prisoner went into a jail, or than if a patient were admitted by the commitment hearing. Cruel and unusual punishment has not become the issue it should be where that cruel and unusual punishment is interpreted ‘treatment for diseases of the mind’.

Apparently, somebody has their civil and human rights work cut out for them.

Antipsychiatry and Forced Mental Health Treatment?

I recently read, for the first time, the long out of print Psychiatry and Antipsychiatry authored by David G. Cooper. The question I had, in dipping into this slender volume, it’s only 148 pages long, was could there be any credence to Thomas Szasz’s accusations that some of the leading proponents of so called antipsychiatry were actually, if not favoring forced mental health treatment, soft on forced treatment?

The book bears a copyright for the year 1967, the same year co-hort R. D. Laing came out with The Politics of Experience. Between the two books, Laing’s is the stronger work, and to bear this point out, it is still in print. I had read Laing’s book years and years ago, and I had little desire to return there. However I was curious about this other book which had introduced the world to a strange new word, antipsychiatry.

I had gotten the idea from what I was reading that this idea of antipsychiatry was still relatively rudimentary, and I was surprised to get out of the book, rather than simply a diatribe against psychiatry, more psychiatry. David Cooper simply contrasts what we call biological psychiatry with his own psycho-dynamic brand of psychiatry, dubbed antipsychiatry. The arguments used, if more fully developed, are still around today.

What goes to the point of the question I was posing is the fact that David Cooper’s experiment, Villa 21, took place on an inpatient ward in Shenley psychiatric Hospital. This means that the people, males in the case of Villa 21, were not allowed to come and go as they pleased. They were literally prisoners. Cooper in fact dismissively refers in his book to a 1959 law under which they were held. You can only do so much on a locked ward at an inpatient facility, even if you are a psychiatrist wishing to implement changes.

The term Cooper used for what conventional psychiatry did was “quasi-medical”. This is a big difference between his view and my own. Psychiatry is simply not medicine, as far as I am concerned, despite the educational training of its practitioners and the pretence.  I’ve got another term for what this sort of conventional psychiatry is all about, and that term is quasi-legal. You’ve got a law for locking up innocent people, who have broken no law, on medical pretences. Generally the law exists to protect people from just such a consequence, making mental health law very murky territory indeed.

Much of his critique is subtle. The state is left off the hook, mostly, while he goes after one small unit for the implementation of the state’s will, the family. He begins his book by making violence a central issue, but this violence boils down to an invalidation on the part of parents and siblings of a family member. The state, the school, and the communities role in this depersonalization and invalidation is downplayed. He, as a therapist, is working to resolve issues that come up within this relatively circumscribed context.

I have always thought that R. D. Laing’s experiment at Kingsley Hall would have been much preferable to what I experienced. Such is the kind of an option that I wish I had had when I was imprisoned and forcibly drugged in a psychiatric hospital that I didn’t have. R. D. Laing had earlier worked in a psychiatric ward run by the military to loosen restrictions there. The problem with developing alternatives to conventional psychiatry, a problem that Dr. Szasz, restricting himself to private practice, didn’t have, is that doing so is going to mean a relationship to conventional psychiatry, and perhaps, as such, compromising with principle.

When this compromise is allowed to swerve into hypocrisy, we’ve got a problem. There has been some suggestion that the stance of R. D. Laing in the 80’s was not quite so adamant as the stance of the Laing of the 60s and 70s had been. As Thomas Szasz put it in his Reply to [Tristram] Englehardt in Szasz Under Fire, Edited by Jeffrey A. Schaler:

Even the “antipsychiatrist” Ronald Laing recoiled from denying the reality of mental illness, rejected my opposition to psychiatric coercions, and reasserted his loyalty to psychiatry as medicine.

Of course, it should be said to his credit that this same Ronald Laing may have had reasons for being deceptive as he was fighting a losing battle to save his license to practice towards the end of his life.

I think the case against is probably overstated in Antipsychiatry: Quackery Squared, a book authored by Szasz, that I have no desire to read. All the same, I’d like to see more psychiatrists take a position, as Dr. Szasz did, unreservedly in support of the abolition of forced mental health treatment. Many of the psychiatrists associated with what was termed the antipsychiatry movement didn’t take such a strong and unwavering stand, and for that I would fault them. If their credibility has suffered as a result, it should come as a surprise to no one.

Support For Victims of Psychiatric Torture

June 26 around the world is observed as an International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. One form of torture that is not widely recognized is non-consensual mental health treatment. Both the American Civil Liberties Union and Amnesty International have been slow to recognize the brutal cruelty and abuse of forced psychiatry for what many who have endured forced psychiatry know it to be, torture. The United Nations has been a little more receptive on this issue. On March 3rd of this year the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture issued a statement calling for an immediate ban on all forced psychiatric interventions.

How are forced psychiatric interventions torture? Just do a little bit of critical thinking and independent research on the subject, and you will find out how. People are abducted, imprisoned, thrown into solitary confinement, poisoned, physically restrained, chemically restrained, shocked, induced to have seizures, injured, neglected, etc., etc., all in the name of therapy. Without mental health law serving as a contradiction to criminal law these atrocities would not be taking place. This ill treatment constitutes torture. The aim of this torture is to elicit behavior that the state finds acceptable,  to suppress behavior that the state finds unacceptable, and to get the torture victim to admit to having a “mental illness” regardless of whether the victim has an actual illness or not.

Should the victim of psychiatric forced treatment not confess to having a “mental illness”, he or she is then said to be “sicker” than the victim who does confess to having a “mental illness”, and this denial, and/or alleged “co-morbid condition”, is then seen as grounds for further tortures and a lengthier imprisonment. More recent developments in psychiatric torture include what is termed a ‘treatment mall’. This ‘treatment mall’ is actually a reeducation camp and brainwashing center run by the state “hospital” with the aim of churning out a greater number of victims complicit in their own torture and victimization.

We call on people around the world to come together over this issue of forced psychiatry, and to help us put an end to this crime against humanity, once and for all. We would like to see a mental health system in which all patients were voluntary, and in which no patients were held prisoner against their will and wishes. We would like to see mental health facilities that were not psychiatric prisons, but instead were facilities in which clients were free to come and go as they so please and choose. Non-consensual treatments, both inpatient and outpatient, are assaults on the health and the freedom of the species and, therefore, not to be tolerated.

By standing together in solidarity with our brothers and sisters, fellow human beings, victimized by this practice, we can and will bring it to an end. On this day consider what you might be able to do to help your brothers and sisters tortured by forced psychiatry. Although we have been granted the right to receive psychiatric treatment, unlike in any other branch of what purports to be medicine, we have no legal right to refuse such treatment. This right needs to be acknowledged and enacted into law. By joining with us in this struggle, you can help us liberate people from psychiatric slavery–the mistreatments and tortures that have oppressed so many for so long.

There is a better world waiting for us just around the bend. This better world is a world in which people are not oppressed and mistreated by greedy, arrogant and power-crazed traitors to their species. We will not reach this better world unless we make an effort to do so. We have in many nations of the world ended the practice of chattel slavery.  We need to end the practice of psychiatric slavery as well. When we do so, we will be that much closer to the better world for one and all that we have envisioned. Now that we’ve gone there in our heads, we need to take a first few actual steps in that direction. Offering support for victims of  the torture that coercive psychiatric interventions entail, in their effort to end that torture, is one of the ways in which we may thus progress.

Drug Company Toady Charles Nemeroff Cons British

For shyster shrinks, these must be glorious days indeed. Lying drug company lacky, Charles Nemeroff, after getting booted off Emory University campus for lying about the extent of funds he received from prescription drug cartels, gets hired by the University of Miami, and now is being honored (for his dishonor?) in Great Britain. Conflict of interest, literally corruption, has never had it so good before.

The headline in The Independent, Honoured in Britain, the US psychiatrist who took $1.2m from drug companies, doesn’t quite tell the whole story. It wasn’t that he took well over a million dollars from drug companies. There is a law in the USA requiring US doctors in academia to reveal the amount of money they received from prescription drug companies, and scofflaw Dr. Charles Nemeroff lied about this matter to the tune of 1 million smackers and 2 hundred k.

The good news is that, at least, this decision has generated controversy, and there are people in England who challenge it.

The decision by the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College, in central London, Europe’s largest psychiatric research organization, to invite Professor Charles Nemeroff, an expert in the treatment of depression, has split the psychiatric profession and been attacked by members of the institute itself. Professor Nemeroff, a leading authority on the biological causes of mental illness, is one of the highest profile doctors to have been exposed for concealing large payments from pharmaceutical companies.

His credentials…

He was forced to resign his post at Emory University, Atlanta, in 2008 after an investigation revealed that he had failed to report more than $1.2m of payments from GlaxoSmithKline, despite having signed an undertaking to limit payments to $10,000 a year.

This firing resulted in a subsequent appointment to the University of Miami and a research grant on top of it. What’s it to the University of Miami so long as drug companies are being sued and not institutions of higher education? The crook they took is now being honored as a conquering hero.

In what other field would lawbreaking be considered an advantageous career move? Drug companies are receiving the highest civil suit penalties in history for off-label prescription practices and here, one their pigeons, is being honored for his deceit.

Not everybody is happy with this decision. Some people object to this advancement of the criminal element.

Now a group of UK psychiatrists have written to the Institute of Psychiatry protesting against its decision to invite Professor Nemeroff to give the “inaugural annual lecture for the new Centre for Affective Disorders”, which is due to take place at the institute next Monday.

Knuckle rapping is one thing, promotions, that’s another. This leaves the question open as to which psychiatrist will be the next to turn criminal activities into a strategic career move.

Reflections On The President’s Mental Health Conference From A Grateful Non-attendee

President Barack Obama didn’t have a hare’s chance in hell of enacting legislation to ban assault rifles. He ran his second presidential election campaign on making a scapegoat out of people in the mental health system. Towards the start of his second administration there were three atrocious acts of mass violence perpetrated by lone individuals in this country. All of these atrocities were perpetuated by young male misfits on a failure track. Misfit, in politically correct campaign jingo,  translates “mentally ill”.

The president’s answer to massive acts of violence by maladaptive individuals was to throw a conference on mental health. What do you get out of such a mental health conference? All of these people claiming to be advocates for the “mentally ill” come out of the woodwork asking for more resources, essentially, more money. Theory goes, all these people who need therapy aren’t receiving it, and so we need more money so we can get more people into therapy. If we get enough people into therapy, we will also get a few of those guys with itchy trigger fingers.

Problem. We could end up getting a lot more people into therapy while missing many people who go onto commit massive acts of violence at the same time.  If you’ve read the news, on campus, “mental illness” rates are going up, presumably in response to student killings. Alright. The one gap that we haven’t been able to bridge in this construct is the gulf between mental health problems and violence. There isn’t a tangible link that touches everybody in mental health treatment, and yet everybody in mental health treatment is expected to pay for the gross misdeeds of a very few.

What if beefing up the mental health system doesn’t prevent a few lone and disappointed individuals from going out there and shooting up movie theaters, political rallies, and school houses? What then? Oh, I know. Time for another conference on the nation’s mental health. Seems we missed a few crazies. Okay, so long as crazed isn’t human somehow…Once crazed becomes human it ceases to be a behavior outside of the “norm” of everyday life. We don’t, after all, want a lot of people going around taking their frustrations out on the world with firearms, stress-reduction afternoons spent at the gun range aside.

I’m back to that point I keep making time and time again. “Mental illnesses” don’t kill people any more than guns kill people. People kill people. There is no “mental illness” demon that pulls the trigger in the absence of conscious thought. There is a body behind the weapon. A body at the mercy of a conscious entity. Murder is a crime. “Mental illness” is a confusion of terms used to describe what amount to wide range of problems people experience in their lives. Obviously, if violence is the culprit, somehow we’re investing our time and energies into an entirely wrong direction. Doing so is not dealing with the real issue, and that issue is the amount of violence that we are putting up with in this country.

Some gun fanatics have suggested that issuing more concealed weapon permits might be the answer to mass violence in America. We have even seen legislative initiatives in some states to allow concealed weapons in school rooms and barrooms. Thing is, soon as a concealed weapon carrier uses his or her weapon on a large number of innocent people, he or she becomes, in the eyes of the mass media, disturbed. Sure, “normal” concealed weapon holders might be able to put down a crazed gunman, but what if your concealed weapon holder snapped. I’ve heard these mental health advocates, so-called, say anyone and everyone is susceptible.

I think we need to address the real issue. That issue is violence in America, that issue is not mental health. The president’s attempt to bring ‘mental illness out of the shadows’ is going to send mental health back into the shadows. Mental health treatment is not mental health. It is a business, requiring a large number of people thought “ill”, to prosper. The danger is that by focusing on this business we will end up increasing both the numbers of people labeled “mentally ill” and the numbers of people committing massive  acts of violence. We have a violence obsessed culture, inspired by a violence obsessed entertainment industry, and as such, it is little wonder that we have much violence. Blaming violence on “mental illness” is missing the point. The problem is violence, the problem isn’t “illness”, and the solution isn’t going to come from medical science.

Crazy Is The Coming Psychiatric Police State

If you’ve been watching the news recently you should be able to see it coming. By it, I mean the Psychiatric Police State. The Psychiatric Police State is, partnering with Hollywood, President Obama’s answer to massive acts of violence perpetuated by a few lone gunmen. We’re going to beef up the mental health system in this country, and that’s supposed to prevent individuals from getting frustrated, and taking their frustrations out on crowds of people in a violent manner with gunfire. (Or, not.) If we can catch these gunmen before they start shooting, runs the theory, we can prevent atrocities from occurring. The way to catch lone gunmen before they go to war with the nation is to call them “mentally ill”, and to get them into a mental health treatment program.

Alright. One problem. Most of the people you’re going to be catching, as runs the rule with loony birds, are not going to be lone gunmen. They’re not even going to be threatening violence on people. They’re just going to be people pulled in by the round up of crazies. Crazy, slang for insane, is potentially violent by legal and legislative definition, that is, government proclamation. We got kooks. We got these kooks under lock and key by playing the potential for violence card. It’s all a ruse. By and large, they aren’t violent in the slightest, but they aren’t playing the game. Busted. Now there has got to be a great deal of irony involved in the state using violence to suppress hypothetical threats of violence.  This action isn’t about public safety, really, it’s about looking like you’re doing something about public safety.

There are any number of better things that our government could be doing. It is not really dealing with the causes of violence because it thinks that violence is produced by something called “mental illness”, and that violence is not produced by a man, conscious, with a gun in his hands. Malcontent, given the imperialistic aims of psychiatry, is interpreted as “mental illness”. Any child who rebels, especially if he or she is non-white, is now likely to receive an Oppositional Defiant Disorder label from the school mental health authorities. Just think, if this label had been around in King George’s time, and if he wasn’t such a case himself, maybe he could have had averted independence by having the leaders of the rebellion institutionalized in his own colonial version of Bedlam. ODD is not an adult disorder yet, but then we don’t have a King George any more either.

Failure is becoming increasingly common, especially when the measure for success is having something like 40,000,000,000 smackers. 20 % of the nation owns 90 % of the wealth. Where does that leave everybody else? Potentially, in therapy. The mental health system itself is a diversion from facing the real issues. If you don’t make a hell of a lot of moolah, you must be nuts. Money, money, honey; its the American way! Well, not so much any more when, as I pointed out, 20 % of the nation owns 90 % of the wealth. People are getting poorer and poorer while some big shot is doing his 18 holes, and getting away with murder at the same time. Expanding the mental health system, well, its happening, and with it, our problems are not diminishing, now are they? Yep, it would help if we opted for a solution rather than another problem but, where would we be if we didn’t make mistakes, er, I mean adjustments.

Give up? Okay. Well, I will enlighten you. Succeeding. Succeeding en masse, not just vicariously. Do you honestly think corralling misfits into mental health programs is going to help them succeed.? Look to results, look at outcomes. Nope, I guess not. Our mental health system has an atrocious record. It is a school for failure. In this school for failure, in fact, they have an expression for the training their most dedicated students receive, “learned helplessness”. Learning helplessness, despite the rhetoric, is not helpful. You, too, can learn to be a “burden to society”.  Sooner or later, the tab comes in, and it’s not just a tab rich tea partiers have to foot. The impoverished find themselves all the more impoverished paying for their impoverishment with monies they don’t have. Kind of like the nation, except the rich end of it. The mental health system, big government, is expanding, and the country is getting crazier, quite literally. Sure, it isn’t really a mental health system, it’s a “mental illness” system, and with a “mental illness” system, that’s what you have to expect.