Recently on Twitter, Disparity asked for my opinion on the term mid-life crisis, which “…is often treated as a mental health condition.” The term mid-life crisis has no formal meaning in mental health, though as Disparity says, the concept does emerge from time to time. The original meaning of the word crisis was a turning point in an illness. In the past forty of fifty years, the connotation has extended to embrace almost any kind of challenging situation or adverse event. ...
It is a central theme of this website that psychiatry has done, and continues to do, a great deal of damage to people it claims to help. In my opinion, the damage done by neuroleptic drugs is among the most severe. The increasing use of these products ought to be a huge cause for concern. This is particularly true in that these very toxic drugs are being administered with increasing frequency to children – even to children as young as two years old! ...
BACKGROUND As I suppose everyone knows by now, psychiatry has been on the receiving end of some very serious criticism in recent years. The criticism has come from many sources, including: survivors of psychiatric “treatment,” non-psychiatric mental health practitioners, journalists, the general public, and even from some psychiatrists themselves. The content of the criticisms has been equally varied, and includes: that the concept of mental illness is fundamentally spurious and devoid of explanatory significance; that psychiatric “treatment” (i.e. drugging people) is ineffective, physically damaging and disempowering; that psychiatry has forged and continues to maintain corrupt and corrupting relationships with the pharmaceutical industry with regards to the peddling of drugs and the hijacking of research for commercial ends; etc… ...
There’s a Mail Online article about high numbers of antidepressant prescriptions in Blaenau Gwent. The article is dated June 29, and was drawn to my attention by Nanu Grewal from Australia. The article is about a town in Wales where reportedly one sixth of the population is taking antidepressants. That’s about 17%. So presumably all these people have brain disease. Or perhaps it’s because the unemployment rate is double the national average. That in itself is depressing, but to make matters even worse, a “diagnosis” of depression can reportedly help a person qualify for additional government benefits – a strong temptation for people living below the poverty line. ...
DSM-5 was published on May 18, 2013, amidst great criticism. The fundamental criticism was, and is, that the problems listed in the manual are not illnesses in any ordinary sense of the term. Other critics focused on the pathologizing of normality, the expansion of the diagnostic net by the lowering of thresholds, and the lack of reliability of the so-called diagnoses. The response from the psychiatric community has been mixed. Some, probably most, psychiatrists are keeping their heads down, getting on with the business of selling pills, and hoping that the gravy train won't derail. Others are busy at damage control ...
David Healy, MD, is a controversial figure. On the one hand, he is a fierce and determined opponent of the escalating use of antidepressant drugs. On the other hand, he is one of the world’s leading proponents of electric shock “treatment.” For the latter reason, I’m somewhat hesitant to quote his work, but he writes good anti-antidepressant articles, and his points are usually well-researched and compelling. I’ve recently come across an article called Prozac and SSRIs: Twenty-fifth Anniversary, which Dr. Healy wrote in February of this year. Here are some quotes: ...
BACKGROUND I recently received the following question from Disparity, on Twitter. "I'm interested in all your posts, but they're always telling us what mental illness 'isn't.' Do you have many on what it 'is'? I referred him/her to the post There are No Mental Illnesses and received the following reply: "I have read it a few times. I largely agree with it. But 'something' happens to people. Whatever the label." Questions of this sort arise fairly frequently, and I thought it might be helpful to write a post. WHAT HAPPENS TO PEOPLE? ...
AN INTERESTING STORY Yesterday I came across the following on Twitter from Mental Health @Sectioned_. "I just met someone who told me their remarkable story about falling down the rabbit hole into psychiatric sectioning and forced medication. I listened with fascination to their intricate story in all its twists and turns, looping backwards and forwards with incredible details. The longer we spoke the more was revealed, the crazier and more believable it sounded. I was listening, probing for clarification, trying to grasp what happened and why. First the overview, then the highlights, then more details, expanding out, backing round, drawing me in. There were many parallels in our stories, and many contrasts. It reminded me why I don't really talk in detail about what happened to me: because, if you've not experienced it, it sounds unbelievable. Unless you've experienced the scorching reality of forced drugging, seclusion, assault by nurses and patients, it sounds like a mad fantasy. It's too far outside most people's realities for them to contemplate it being true, and so quietly assume you're deluded. So it smooths life's path to make light, to skirt over the details, to change the topic. And sometimes, sometimes, when I meet someone who's been through something similar, I listen to their story and realize I'm not the only one." ...
BACKGROUND On May 15, Peter Kinderman, PhD, of the University of Liverpool, posted an article on DxSummit.org. It was called So…What Happens Next? The gist of the article was that psychiatric “diagnoses” are conceptually spurious, unhelpful, and even hindersome in practice, and discourage practitioners from pursuing genuine explanations for the problems clients bring to their attention. It was an excellent piece, and I did a short post in which I recommended it strongly. ...
BACKGROUND On 19 April, The Conversation ran an article titled Mental disorders: debunking some myths of the DSM-5, by Perminder Sachdev, MD. Dr. Sachdev is a psychiatrist, and was a member of the DSM-5’s Neurocognitive Disorders Work Group. He works at the School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Australia. (Thanks to Dave Traxson on Twitter for the link.) ANALYSIS Let’s start with the title. “…debunking some myths of the DSM-5.” This sounds good. You might get the impression that he’s going to address the myth of mental illness – the myth that all human problems are illnesses and are best treated by drugs. But – alas – you would be mistaken. Dr. Sachdev lists four myths that he plans to debunk. He refers to these as the “…four key criticisms about DSM-5…” Let’s examine what he says about these one by one. ...