• Top Posts

Future Psychiatry

Make way for the DSM-6 1/2 & 3/4. Some Oxford University mad shrink, a certain Kathleen Taylor, she calls herself a neurologist, thinks that religious fundamentalism and cult group membership could become a disease in the future.

Don’t look now, but religious fundamentalists and those whose ideological beliefs border on the extreme and may be potentially harmful to society could soon be called crazy—in a medical sense.

Remind me to stay way clear of the border of extreme.

Taylor also warned against taking “fundamentalism” to mean radical Islamism.

The story/review, Is religious fundamentalism a mental illness?, is to be found at GMA News Online, ‘the go-to site for Philipinos’.

I’m encouraged by all this potential broadening of commitment criteria in a way.  Just imagine, in the future maybe we could lock up members of the Church of Biological Psychiatry. As is, they do an inordinate amount of injury while everybody just looks the other way.

Kathleen Taylor has written a book, “The Brain Supremacy”, on the dangers of brain technology, but, oh, I don’t know…

“What we perceive from our perspective as our legitimate self-defensive reaction to the psychosis of the enemy, is from the perspective of the same enemy our equally malignant psychotic self-obsession,” it [Digital Journal] added.

Here it comes, here it comes…World War III!

This just goes to show now that, beyond intoxicating substances, behaviors have been found to be addictive, the bag is open, and anything can crawl in. Should psychiatry be your career choice, I hope we can find a cure before it’s too late, and the bombs start falling all around us.

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.

The Current Crop Of Whoppers On Capitol Hill

The vote on a bill to restrict the Second Amendment rights of people in America is described as still “too close to call”. The story, as reported in FloridaToday.com, goes under the heading, Background check plan needs GOP.

Words, words, words–it all becomes a blur, especially when so many of those words are just plain lies.

The plan would “strengthen the background check system without in any way infringing on Second Amendment rights,” Maine Sen. Susan Collins said in a statement explaining her support for the measure. But she added that “it is impossible to predict at this point” what will be in a final bill.

Excuse me, Senator Collins. If you are going to enter the names of people, many of whom are citizens, who AREN’T criminals, into a criminal background check system, for the express reason of denying them their Second Amendment rights, you CANNOT do so without infringing on Second Amendment rights.

Do I need to repeat myself!?

These background check measures that may be pushed through congress are unconstitutional so long as we have a bill of rights, but this is hardly the first time we’ve had unconstitutional laws on the books. If I remember correctly there was once this remedy to the mixing of the races called Jim Crow for the longest kind of time in the southern states of the USA.

The measure requires background checks for people buying guns at gun shows and online. Background checks currently apply only to transactions handled by the country’s 55,000 licensed gun dealers. Private transactions, such as a sale of a gun between family members, would still be exempt.

Thus, family members will still be able to sell arms to ex-felons, illegal aliens, spousal abusers, mental patients, and other errant human beings, and all is hunky dory. It is just licensed gun dealers who won’t be able to make such sales.

[Senator Joe] Manchin urged lawmakers to read the 49-page proposal. He said it should dispel any misconceptions about infringing on the constitutional right to bear arms.

I’m sorry. It will take more than a 49-page booklet to convince me that legislation enacted expressly for the purpose of infringing on the constitutional right of American citizens to bear arms is not legislation infringing on the constitutional right of American citizens to bear arms. When you diminish the citizenship of a segment of the population by subtracting this right or that, usually we have to call this subtracting, or restriction if you will, an infringement.

This attack on civil liberties and civil rights is plowing ahead full stream. It has been in effect, through unevenly enforced, since the insanity defense was used to condemn and excuse John Hinkley for shooting President Reagan. Blast the insanity defense! Incarceration should be about punishment, and not about therapeutic rehabilitation, regardless of the criminal’s mental state at the time of the commission of the crime. “Mental illness”, that ‘will o’the wisp’ of consensus reality, should not be an used to excuse people from punishment for criminal activities and, likewise, ill health should not be used as an excuse to imprison people.

Civil Rights Under Seige

If you thought former President George W. Bush, who wanted to screen every man, woman, and child of us for “mental illness” was bad, President Barack O’bama has climbed onto the same band wagon. President Obama essentially wants to turn our entire public education system into a mental health police state.

According to a report in the Bangor Daily News on the subject, White House wants $235 million for mental health programs.

President Barack Obama’s budget proposal will include $235 million in funding for new mental health programs focused on initiatives to help schools detect early warning signs and train thousands of new mental health professionals, an administration official said.

Alright that sounds benign enough, but just keep reading.

The new budget plan will propose $130 million for programs that train teachers and other adults to help recognize the early signs of mental illness in students. That includes $55 million for a new program called Project AWARE (Advancing Wellness and Resilience in Education), which will give states and local school districts grants to administer such programs, while also collecting data on how well they work.

I’ve got nothing against ‘wellness’ nor ‘resilience’, I just have many reservations about whether that’s what we’re going to get out of these programs or not. On the other hand, training people to recognize signs of “mental illness” can be very questionable, especially when one of those early signs is being under the age of 18.

Another $50 million would go toward training master’s-level mental health specialists, such as psychologists, nurses and counselors, who work in schools. The idea is to expand the mental health workforce to prepare for the demands of millions of Americans who will gain health insurance coverage next year under the Affordable Care Act.

The “mental illness” labeling rate has been skyrocketing for years. Imagine the present “mental illness” labeling rate. Imagine that rate going up even further. It’s got to be extremely difficult to sell insurance plans, treatment options, and anti-“stigma” campaigns, without also selling the “diseases” that go along with them.

The consequences of this “mental illness” selling platform doesn’t concern the President very much as, following the Newton Connecticut tragedy, making scapegoats of people in the mental health system rather than achieving any real gun control legislation is one way for him to give the appearance that he’s doing something about the problem of gunmen in schoolyards. I’m afraid it is going to be causative in so far as increased “mental illness” labeling is concerned, and I’m also afraid that it’s not going to be preventative when it comes to massive acts of violence.

Sooner or later, later apparently, it’s going to come around to acknowledging that these citizens who have had their citizenship rights taken away from them are still citizens. Then comes the revelation, now that we’ve got two unequal castes of citizens, how do we refer to them? Dividing people into sick and well no longer works as what we’ve actually got is a legal distinction rather than a medical one. Sick people get well. Lower class citizens get lower wages, if they get wages at all, substandard living conditions, and the distinction of being deprived of their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

The worst of the worse

If there’s a state to be given an Worst Gun Restriction Law in the books award, I think that state would probably have to be New York. New York now has a law encouraging mental health professionals to turn over the names of patients thought violent over to law enforcement. That’s right. Mental health professionals are expected to rat out volatile patients. If law enforcement agrees with this appraisal, the targeted individual is disarmed, and goes onto a criminal background checklist.

After New York state comes the Commonwealth of Virginia. Virginia, of course, has entered more names onto the National Instant Criminal Background Check System database than any other state in the union. After a 3 day detention for evaluation purposes, hospitalization in a mental health facility, voluntary or involuntary, will get you into the system. Voluntary admission serves a plea bargain purpose in this state, but it is not a plea deal that will allow you to keep your 2nd amendment right to bear arms.

Coming in at third place is Maryland. Should you volunteer yourself into the psychiatric hospital in Maryland, if you get out in less than 30 days you could celebrate by purchasing a firearm, however, if you stay for longer than 30 days, your name is entered into the database, and you are prohibited from purchasing a gun.

The problem is that we’re taking guns away from  people who are not violent. Most all of the massive acts of violence that have taken place recently were perpetrated by individuals who would have not been in the database EVEN with the new changes to the law. Disarm a population of people who are more likely to be victims of violence than the perpetrators of violence, and you’ve taken away any effective means of self-defense that this population may have when it comes to people who do have guns.

Beyond preventing them from defending themselves, we are also permitting what would be confidential treatment records to be used for harassment purposes by law enforcement. These records are being used to prejudice public opinion against an entire segment of the population. The most notable example of this prejudice is the enactment of these laws designed to circumvent reasonable doubt in the presumption of future guilt by presumed “sickness”.  You can’t punish a multiple murderer who commits suicide. You can, on the other hand, punish an entirely innocent segment of the population for the crime of the deceased criminal. This essentially is what these laws amount to, prejudice against, and punishment imposed upon, a completely innocent population of people.

If you want to prevent violent crimes of this sort, copy cat crimes, you’re going to have to deal with the forces that cause them. Criminals are responsible, surely, but they are not solely responsible; they are not the only culprits. Criminals exist in the context of society, a society that manufactures criminals. “Mental illness” is no more the source of these crimes than is demonic possession; people were behind these violent acts. If we had a more loving society, a less violent society, then you’re going to see less violent crime. We should be attacking this lack of love, this violence, and we shouldn’t be going after people with problems,  people who are under going personal crises. These problems, these crises, in fact, may stem from the violence and the lack of love you see in our society at large.  Do something substantial about the way neighbor treats neighbor, and you may have done something to remedy what constitutes an intolerable situation.

Governor Seeks To Change Massachusetts Law For The Worse

The performance of various states differs when it comes to ratting out people who have done time in the Loony Bin. It has been reported that 14 states, for example, have 5 or fewer people listed on the federal background check database for reasons of mental health.

I recently had a close encounter with a story in the San Francisco Chronicle, Mass. doesn’t share mental health data. Apparently in Massachusetts it’s illegal to provide the government with information on a person’s mental health treatment background.

Massachusetts has among the toughest gun laws in the nation, but a 43-year-old law bars the state from providing mental health records to an FBI database for gun background checks.

Of course, when it comes to law breakers there are no law breakers like law keepers, take the FBI, for instance.

The Boston Globe reports that the FBI has processed 1.6 million background checks of Bay State residents who seek to buy guns from federally licensed dealers.

The governor is trying to bring Massachusetts law in line with much of the rest of the nation as far as  the oppression, harassment, and persecution of mental patients and former mental patients is concerned.

Gov. Deval Patrick has twice tried unsuccessfully to get legislative approval for the sharing of mental health data, but both have failed in part because of opposition from gun rights activists.

One of his most recent proposals involves calling for universal background checks in his state to include mental health information.

This insistence begs the question of a citizen’s constitutional rights to bare arms. The federal government has been persistently violating the 2nd amendment rights of a good number of citizens on the grounds that it has them on this list. Officials in Massachusetts, in other words, are not the only folks violating the law.

The news of this friction only goes to further substantiate the recent flurry of rumors about a rash of ‘schizophrenia’ outbreaks in high places, especially among officials in state and federal government..

The Government’s Response To The Sandy Hook Tragedy

The good news is that President Obama wants some form of gun control when it comes to automatic weapons and ammo. If we limit the number of massively killing machines that there are out there, we limit the number of chances that you will get the kind of body counts you got at V-Tech and Sandy Hook. Body counts, in fact, almost rivaling the Oklahoma City bombing. Unfortunately, gun control measures are not likely to get very far in today’s atmosphere. You’ve got the gun lobby and a Republican controlled congress to contend with. Talk about gun control always triggers a gun buying frenzy among certain segments of the public as well. The gun control measures are perhaps the least likely items on the agenda to get passed.This leads us to the rest of the counteracting measures, and that’s the bad news.

First there is this matter of closing the loopholes in the federal background check database. The problem here is that people labeled “mentally ill” are actually less likely to commit violent crimes than the general population. This group has become the scapegoat for the acts of violence committed by a very few failed and frustrated individuals. None of the people who committed the multiple shootings we have seen in the recent past would have been caught by such a database even if the so called loopholes were closed. This database targets not only people who have known the inside of a mental institution, but also foreigners in this country illegally, spouse abusers, and ex-felons. This database will be used by law enforcement for harassing the people who are in it. The database itself constitutes a loophole in the bill of rights of the US constitution as none of the people in the database are to be accorded the rights that full citizenship would ordinarily accord a person. As such, it represents a loophole in constitutional protections of citizenship. This certainly creates quite a challenge for the people unfortunate enough to find themselves listed. They’ve got the fight for the civil rights that have been taken away from them, ahead of them.

Additionally, there is the matter of mental health insurance parody. Parity is too good a word. This parody involves insurance companies treating psychosomatic conditions as if they were physical conditions. The key words here are “as if”. We’re expected to allow insurance companies to take up the slack for a broken mental health system. Really. If the mental health system were recovering contributing members of society this wouldn’t be a problem, but that’s not the case. People receiving “mental illness” labels are expected to languish for the duration of their lives in some form of convalescence for which someone else picks up the tab. Insurance parity, on top of job discrimination, equals economic damage. Malingering should not be turned into the kind of a career that insurance parody of this sort can turn it into. This is economic damage. It is economic damage to the individual and it is economic damage to the nation as a whole. It is keeping people weak and dependent who should be strong and independent.

Finally officials want to beef up mental health policing and surveillance in the school systems. They would have more money pumped into counseling and screening children and adolescents in the hopes that they could catch problem kids before they left school and shot bunches of people. The problem is that such an effort is likely to have a result opposite the one intended. Early intervention is not prevention; it actually amounts to causation. Putting money into mental health in the schools is invariably going to increase the numbers of school children labeled “mentally ill”. These numbers have increased dramatically recently in no small measure due to the focus that mental health has received in the mass media. Children that enter mental health treatment don’t always leave mental health treatment alive. There is a statistic that indicates the failure of the mental health system that I alluded to earlier. If 1/2 of the people labeled lifelong mental patients are labeled by the age of 14 years old, as it is indeed said they are, do we really want to label more children? Increasing the numbers of children labeled “seriously mentally ill” is going to increase the numbers of adults labeled “seriously mentally ill”. Children grow up, but they don’t always grow up healthy. A healthy mental health system is a system that is contracting. An unhealthy mental health system is a system that is expanding. We’ve got better things to do than to sell “mental illness” under the pretext of selling mental health.

The government has better ways to serve the people of this country than by beefing up it’s mental health security force the way it wants to do in the schools. This patrolling the hallways of our nation’s schools for errant behavior is going to result in more students penalized, and in many cases, pathologized, for annoying behavior. Children, as a rule, grow up. As they are children, we have to expect them to engage in a certain amount of foolish and silly behavior. We have to expect them to make mistakes. We also have to expect them to be able to learn from mistakes to correct mistakes. Lowering the expectation for some of them that they will ever attain the wisdom that comes with age is not an improvement. Damaging the futures of children in the name of mental health, although the course we are set on, is not the kind of thing we should be doing with our nation’s children.

Old Scapegoat New Scapegoat

Remember the old scapegoat, meet the new scapegoat. Funny thing, but they are the same. I mean by scapegoat people who have been through the mental health system; people who get dumped by their relatives, associates, neighbors, and just plain strangers into the loony trash bin.

I recently came across a petition calling for the  opening up of all closed State Mental Hospitals, and my first thought thereupon was thank heavens so many of them have been demolished. You’d think we had enough problems with the largest prison inmate population in the entire world. Do we really need an extra large mental patient population to boot?

An article encountered suggested “sick” people “helped” by St Elizabeth’s were now being “forced” back into their families and communities by the Community Mental Health Act of 1963, and that this was what was wrong in the nation today. I don’t know how the author could ignore the fact that people forced into St Elizabeth’s were now free to go back into their communities and to have families. I guess that was some kind of minor oversight, or inattention to detail,  on his part.

There is a fine line dividing the “sick” from the well, and this fine line is determined by so-called expert opinion. These so-called experts, in other words, are the people who have been trained to think they know which people should be scapegoats, and which people should be allowed to go about their merry way.

Mental hospitals are places where the functionary staff make all possible effort to kill the spirit of the people imprisoned therein. I think it no wonder that the poet Ezra Pound was held for treason for so many years at St Elizabeth’s. Mental hospitals may be the closest thing we’ve ever had to an Auschwitz in this country.

It is always inconvenient to remember that the NAZI’s rehearsed their Final Solution to what they saw as the Jewish problem on people deemed ‘useless eaters’, people in mental institutions, especially when you want to blame violence on people who go into, and people who have come out of, such institutions.

Mental institutions are not, and never will be, the solution to the violence perpetuated by a very few frustrated and failed individuals with a vengeful fury to unleash. Failure, frustration, and revenge are not pathological conditions. We’ve got a social problem, and we’d do well to look to the social causes of it for a real solution, a social solution. Emphasis on real.

We live in a world that some people find unbearable. Maybe we would do better to make a more livable world for everybody, all of the world’s inhabitants, without exception. We could work on caring more about our neighbors for a start. When you get a solitary individual declaring war on society at large–yen/yang–do you have a raving madman come out of seclusion, or an isolated terrorist without a terror network? Take a good long hard look in the mirror. It happens.

Scapegoat and monitor more people for alleged “mental illness”, deprive more people of their first and second amendment rights, excuse a lack of automatic weapon control measures because of the high rate of traffic accident fatalities ( The 2 wrongs make a right, or a “lesser” wrong, theory.), etc, etc., etc… None of these proposals address the real problem. Again, emphasis on real.