Smoking is So Last Year

February 15th, 2018

“Given the disproportionate burden of tobacco health harms in psychiatric patients, e-cigarettes are being considered as a potential tool for harm reduction.”

E-cigs are battery-powered devices that typically contain nicotine, flavorings, and other chemicals. The liquid is heated into an aerosol that the user inhales. The use of an electronic cigarette is colloquially called “vaping” as a contraction of the inhaled “vapor”. More than 2 million middle and high school students were current users of e-cigarettes in 2016. While E-cigs are not tobacco, the fact that they generally contain nicotine means that they are often considered as tobacco products. In fact, as of 2016 the FDA considers “Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems” as regulated tobacco products, although the deadline for regulatory compliance has been extended.

Within an 18-month tobacco-treatment clinical trial with smokers with serious mental illness over a five-year period, electronic cigarette use by those recruited for the trial increased over time, from 0% in 2009 to 25% in 2013. From this data the authors concluded that serious study should be given to the use of e-cigs as a psychiatric treatment for smoking cessation and/or mental disorders.
[“E-Cigarette Use among Smokers with Serious Mental Illness“, Judith J. Prochaska & Rachel A. Grana, 11/24/2014]

Psychiatric “best practices” recommend that psychiatrists assess tobacco use at every patient visit, since tobacco addiction is covered in the DSM-V under eight separate items, and disorders related to inhalant use have 33 entries. Therefore, the psychiatric industry considers that smoking cessation therapies are their territory, which now extends into vaping.

The DSM considers that addiction is a mental illness. It is not a mental illness and cannot be fixed with psychiatric drugs. This debunked medical model of mental distress is what justifies the prescription of harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs. There is certainly such a thing as addiction and mental distress. There can be physical addiction, which requires physical detoxification; and the mental distress, resulting from a lapse of ethics and morals and not from some hokey chemical imbalance in the brain, requires its own effective treatments.

We’ve written previously about harmful psychotropic drugs being used as smoking cessation therapies. One would expect there to be new psychiatric initiatives to use these for vaping addiction, since it opens up a new class of potential [-victims-] patients for the psychiatric industry. Don’t be fooled. There are non-drug methods to stop smoking or handle other forms of addiction, including addiction to psychiatric drugs themselves. Treating substance abuse with drugs is a major policy blunder; contact your state and federal representatives and let them know you disapprove of this trend.

The White House Taking Action on Veteran Suicides

February 10th, 2018

Presidential Executive Order on Supporting Our Veterans During Their Transition From Uniformed Service to Civilian Life (January 9, 2018)

Relevant quotes from the Presidential Executive Order:

“It is the policy of the United States to support the health and well-being of uniformed service members and veterans. … our Government must improve mental healthcare and access to suicide prevention resources available to veterans … Veterans, in their first year of separation from uniformed service, experience suicide rates approximately two times higher than the overall veteran suicide rate. To help prevent these tragedies, all veterans should have seamless access to high-quality mental healthcare and suicide prevention resources as they transition, with an emphasis on the 1-year period following separation.”

Mr. Trump’s order makes a wide range of mental health services available to all veterans as they transition back to civilian society.

It sounds nice; it sounds appropriate; it sounds like everyone would support it. What’s the “but?”

But, in this society at this time, “mental health services” generally means psychotropic drugs. “Psychotropic” means “acting on the mind; affecting the mental state,” meaning that that the drugs change brain function and result in alterations in perception, mood, consciousness or behavior. They don’t actually fix anything, they just suppress both good and bad feelings.

There is another “but” — these drugs also have serious adverse side effects, and three of the most troubling of these are addiction, violence and suicide.

So the preferred “treatment” for veterans’ mental health and suicide are drugs which have suicide as a side effect. Which came first? The drugs, of course.

The psychiatric industry protests that they have many services available, not just drugs. Well, let’s see —

  1. They can talk about it, which they call “cognitive-behavioral therapy” — which is when a therapist evaluates for the patient and tells them what behaviors they need to change.
  2. They can cut out part of the brain with surgery; like you’re going to let them do that to you.
  3. They can shock the brain with high-voltage electricity; and if you believe that is going to help, we’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn we know you’ll be eager to buy; and once you’ve had a course of electroshock treatments you won’t remember we told you so.
  4. They can wire your vagus nerve, which controls such things as heart rate, to send short bursts of electricity directly into the brain. Uh-huh.
  5. They can wrap a huge magnet around your head, called transcranial magnetic stimulation, and zap the brain with induced electric currents. You might as well just shoot yourself. Whoops, many veterans are already doing that.
And then there are all the other efforts to prescribe “breakthrough” drugs, since the normal psychotropic ones are so damaging — drugs like marijuana, magic mushrooms, MDMA (Ecstasy), Ketamine, etc. Talk about desperation!

What are the alternatives? What can the White House and the Veterans Administration do that would actually be effective help for veterans? If enough people tell the White House and the VA about the horrors of psychiatric treatments and the availability of workable alternatives, they might start to listen. Can you call the White House and make a comment about this?

Contact the White House at https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ and/or leave your comments at 202-456-1111. Contact the various key White House personnel mentioned in the President’s Executive Order as well, but WH musical chairs may make it difficult to nail down their names and contact information. Last we knew, here are some of the names:

Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council- Andrew Bremberg
Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council – either Paul Winfree or Lance Leggitt
Healthcare Policy- Katy Talento
Secretary of Defense – Gen. James Mattis, USMC
Secretary of Homeland Security – Kirstjen Nielsen
Secretary of Veterans Affairs – Dr. David J. Shulkin

You can reference the CCHR STL blog here for more information.

The Loneliness Epidemic

February 2nd, 2018

A recent Scientific American has an extensive article about loneliness.
[“Loneliness Can Be Toxic“, by Francine Russo, January 2018]

Here are some relevant quotes from this article (plus our comments):
“Loneliness is defined as perceived social isolation and the experience of being cut off from others.”

[The dictionary basically says, “the sadness of being alone,” from Middle English alone, al all + one one.]

“…researchers have been probing the nature of different types of loneliness, their biological mechanisms and their effects on mind and body.”

[Recognize here the emphasis on the discredited biological (medical) model of psychiatry.]

“…insufficient social connection … is a major public health concern”.

[Recognize here the inference of a dangerous environment.]

“Growing evidence has linked loneliness to a marked vulnerability to a host of psychological and physiological ills…”

[Recognize here the invocation of a psychological aspect plus the psychiatric medical model.]

“Part of the problem in the scientific literature is that the standard tools for measuring loneliness do not necessarily gauge the same things.”

[Recognize here the admission that psychologists don’t really understand the issue.]

“The most commonly used measure of loneliness, the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale, assesses individuals’ perceived dissatisfaction with the quality or quantity of their relationships.”

[This is a 20-item questionnaire purported to measure one’s subjective feelings of loneliness as well as feelings of social isolation. Participants rate each item on a scale from 1 (Never) to 4 (Often).]

The psychiatric billing bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) has no shortage of items that could be related to loneliness, covering pretty much all the bases — in other words, regardless of what the patient says is the matter, a diagnosis could be found here.

[The purpose of which is to be able to bill insurance for counseling or drugs for any of these diagnoses:]

“Problem related to living alone”
“Disinhibited social engagement disorder”
“Other problem related to psychosocial circumstances”
“Social (pragmatic) communication disorder”
“Social anxiety disorder (social phobia)”
“Social exclusion or rejection”
“Unspecified problem related to social environment”
“Unspecified problem related to unspecified psychosocial circumstances”
“Psychological factors affecting other medical conditions”
“Other personal history of psychological trauma”
“Unspecified personality disorder”

In 1959 a German psychoanalyst, Frieda Fromm-Reichmann, thought that loneliness might arise from premature weaning; her own severe loneliness was apparently related to her own and familial deafness. In 2012 and 2016, published research reported that loneliness was age-related. Other studies reported loneliness factors related to being married, or being employed, or relations with parents, or issues with trust, or with health or discrimination. Again, psychologists don’t really understand it, but they can sure get funds for researching whatever symptoms they think could be related to it.

Then, too, a scan through the side effects of psychotropic drugs gives one the impression that many of these adverse reactions could certainly lead to feelings of loneliness.

At first we thought it was a joke when we read that Prime Minister Theresa May appointed a Minister for Loneliness on January 17, 2018, based on a report from The Jo Cox Commission on Loneliness claiming that over 9 million people in the United Kingdom are lonely. But they are entirely serious; perhaps too serious. One suspects, however, that this is really just another drug marketing campaign diagnosing common life situations such as sadness and loneliness as “mental illness.”

The main “treatment” for symptoms of loneliness is cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), which is a form of psychotherapy that attempts to modify dysfunctional emotions, behaviors, and thoughts — by evaluating and challenging a person’s behaviors and getting the person to change those behaviors, often in combination with psychiatric drugs. Some recommendations are for drug treatment with allopregnanolone, a neurosteroid related to progesterone, although this is still being researched (naturally, since they don’t really understand it.)

So, what is loneliness, and how should it be treated?

Well, let’s stop explaining it in terms of symptoms and then trying to treat those individual symptoms with evaluative psychotherapy or harmful drugs. Let’s find a root cause.

The root cause of any feelings of loneliness is an absence or scarcity of communication. Communication is livingness.

There is certainly no scarcity of silence, which would be another way to describe aloneness, but silence itself is death. The answer is to provide more communication.

The American Psychological Association (APA) states that “Our mission is to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people’s lives.” How unfortunate it is that the APA does not actually use communication as a treatment.

An Affair to Remember

January 25th, 2018
Infidelity literally means unfaithfulness (from the Latin word infidelis, “not faithful”); the word can be used as unfaithfulness, disbelief or disloyalty to a moral obligation, to a religion or religious belief, or as current and relentless news stories have it, as a romantic or sexual relationship with someone other than one’s husband, wife, or partner. It’s certainly related to the hue and cry over sexual misconduct and the stories of sexual abuse dominating the current news environment.

How can we deal effectively with this topic, when it seems that daily lurid revelations are occurring about some highly-placed person’s infidelity or alleged sexual harassment.

“I told my wife the truth. I told her I was seeing a psychiatrist. Then she told me the truth: that she was seeing a psychiatrist, two plumbers, and a bartender!” — Rodney Dangerfield

While it is not our place to make judgments about this, there are some things we can say about psychiatrists’ and psychologists’ involvement in matters of sexual abuse and harassment.

In a British study of therapist-patient sexual contact among psychologists, 25% reported having treated a patient who had been sexually involved with another therapist.

Therapist sexual abuse is sexual abuse. Therapist rape is rape. They will never constitute therapy.

Psychiatrists and psychologists rarely refer to rape as rape. Instead, they downplay it as “sexual contact,” a “sexual relationship” or “crossing the boundaries” when one of its members sexually forces themselves on a patient, often with the help of drugs or electroshock. While psychiatrists account for only 6% of physicians in the country, they comprised 28% of perpetrators disciplined for sex-related offenses.

The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the mental disorders section of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) have greatly assisted psychiatrists and psychologists in their efforts to avoid criminal proceedings for sexual abuse. The DSM decriminalizes illegal acts by defining criminal behavior as a biologically based aberration or “mental disorder.” In this way, dangerous criminals in psychiatry’s own ranks have been excused of all personal responsibility for their actions.

How did this come to be?

The family unit, long held sacred by religion, was purposely weakened by psychiatry’s World Federation for Mental Health, which considered it “the major obstacle to improved mental health.”

In 1993, Catholic psychologist William Coulson admitted that, “The net outcome of sex education, styled as Rogerian encountering [Carl Rogers’ therapy], is more sexual experience. Humanistic psychotherapy, the kind that has virtually taken over the Church in America … dominates so many forms of aberrant education like sex education.”

Considering that, according to William Coulson, the result of sex education is “more sexual experience,” there is no doubt as to psychologists’ intention or the direction of these courses.

Freudian theory developed in the 1890’s called for radical permissiveness in sexual mores. Freud taught that sexual repression was the chief psychological problem of mankind, which has been used to whitewash behavior that society has traditionally considered inappropriate, leading to excessive sexual permissiveness.

Psychiatrists and psychologists cannot be allowed to continue to determine the standards of conduct in any society, or society risks further degradation.

For more information, download and read the CCHR booklets about psychiatry assaulting religion and psychiatric rape.

The Continuing Cannabis Conundrum

January 18th, 2018

We have previously written a number of blogs on cannabis, but it seems the problems won’t go away. So we’re writing about it again.

On January 4, 2018 Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinded the long-standing “Cole Memorandum” issued in 2013 by Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole. These relate to the laws and enforcement policies of cannabis use by the federal government and the various state governments and their drug enforcement agencies. We won’t go into the details, as one expects these things to continue changing, and anyone can get that information off the current news reports.

Here’s what we said before about marijuana:

The conundrum is this:
§ On the one hand, we think that in an ideal society the government should not be interfering in the personal lives of individual citizens. We don’t like the government saying you can’t smoke pot and this is for your own good. It enforces a moral code by fiat without actually making the individual ethical and responsible.
§ On the other hand, we think that the rampant use of marijuana, whether “medical” or “recreational”, is harmful to society and not just harmful to individuals. It puts at risk everyone in contact with drug users, since some of the side effects can be violence, loss of coordination, perception distortions, slower reflexes, reduced mental functions, and so on.

So how do we reconcile these two different points of view? Especially since this is not, in any way, an ideal society.

Talking about marijuana means we are talking about tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) which is the principal psychoactive constituent of marijuana. Psychoactive means that the drug changes brain function and results in alterations in perception, mood, consciousness or behavior.

Because a tolerance builds up, marijuana can lead users to consume stronger drugs to achieve the same high. Marijuana itself does not lead the person to other drugs; people take drugs to get rid of unwanted situations or feelings. The drug masks the problem for a time. When the high fades, the problem, unwanted condition or situation returns more intensely than before.

We reject outright the point of view that marijuana is not harmful in any way. The anecdotal evidence as well as formal research on this is pretty clear, regardless of the public relations protestations to the contrary by people poised to make a lot of money from selling it. We do understand that for some people, some uncomfortable mental and physical symptoms seem to lessen with marijuana use; but one has to understand the why and the consequences of this.

How Do Drugs Work?
Drugs are essentially poisons. The amount taken determines the effect. A small amount acts as a stimulant. A greater amount acts as a sedative. A still larger amount poisons and can kill. This is true of any drug. Only the amount needed to achieve the effect differs.

Drugs block off all sensations, the desirable ones along with the unwanted ones. While drugs might be of short-term value in the handling of pain, they wipe out ability, alertness, and muddy one’s thinking. One always has a choice between being dead with drugs or alive without them.

Drugs affect the mind and destroy creativity. Drug residues lodge in the fatty tissues of the body and stay there, continuing to adversely affect the individual long after the effect of the drug has apparently worn off.

What Can We Do?
How can we resolve this conundrum and come up with some compromise that maintains individual choice and responsibility while at the same time protecting society from the accidents and mistakes and damaging or destructive behaviors that will inevitably occur by legions of pot heads on a high?

It’s no small decision. We do have a suggestion. We’re not sure anyone is listening. The psychiatrists and psychologists can’t wait to have more clients with drug-induced psychoses and their insurance; the pot growers, pot sellers, and tax men are already salivating over the expected profits; the police, attorneys and courts are lined up to take cases; and the users are too stoned to care.

We’d like to hear, first, how you might consider resolving this conundrum. As a society we need to reach an agreement about this, before every state in the union goes off making a conflicting bunch of new laws. It is their constitutional right, after all; but just because they can, should they? And just because you can smoke pot, should you?

For more information, read through the blogs referenced above. Then let us know what you think.

Missouri Foster Care Children at Risk

January 14th, 2018

Following up on the federal class action lawsuit (M.B. v. Corsi) against the Missouri Department of Social Services for the overuse of harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs among vulnerable foster children.

More than 30 percent of Missouri’s 13,000 foster children are on at least one psychotropic medication, with 20 percent taking two or more psychotropic medications at the same time. This is almost twice the national rate of such prescriptions. These drugs are known to cause violence and suicide, as well as being addictive.

For the first time, a federal court has ruled that the failure to oversee the administration of powerful psychotropic medications to children in foster care could violate their rights under the Constitution.

On January 8, 2018 U.S. District Judge Nanette Laughrey denied the state’s motion to dismiss the children’s due process claims. The judge was particularly concerned that the state, by its own admission, fails to maintain complete medical records for the foster children in its care, and does not provide updated health information to foster parents or doctors.

Foster children are drugged with harmful psychotropics at 13 times the rate of children living with their parents.

Recognize that the real problem is that psychiatrists fraudulently diagnose children’s problems as an “illness”, and stigmatize unwanted behavior or study problems as “diseases.” Psychiatry’s stigmatizing labels, programs and treatments are harmful junk science; their diagnoses of “mental disorders” are a hoax – unscientific, fraudulent and harmful.

Click here for more information about psychiatric drugs harming foster care children.

The Radical Permissiveness of Psychiatry

January 13th, 2018

Permissiveness: Allowing or characterized by great or excessive freedom of behavior. A permissive person, society, or way of behaving allows or tolerates things of which other people disapprove.

Apparently the quote “DO AS THOU WILT because men that are free, of gentle birth, well bred and at home in civilized company possess a natural instinct that inclines them to virtue and saves them from vice. This instinct they name their honor.” [François Rabelais, 1534] has been shortened by the psychological and psychiatric industries to the first four words.

From where does this radical permissiveness come?

“The biomedical model [the biological underpinnings of mental disorders] currently dominates psychiatric clinical practice and research.”
“Psychiatry’s growth and power during the twentieth century also can be traced in part to its alliance with Western science’s goals of control and domination of nature. … For example, during this century, capitalism has simultaneously needed to increase consumption and the technical control of social reality in order to maximize profits. This creates a paradox in which morality is slackened to increase permissiveness, and consequently, consumption.”
“Biological psychiatry’s rush to transmogrify much of human life into clinical or biological entities has become increasingly suspect on scientific as well as sociopolitical grounds.”
[“The Biomedicalization of Psychiatry: A Critical Overview“, Carl I. Cohen, M.D., Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 29, No. 6, December 1993]

The problem with the biomedical model is that psychiatrists attempt to explain environmental, behavioral, social and spiritual phenomena with strictly biological factors. This is called “biological reductionism.” It places a heavy emphasis on the chemistry of the brain instead of searching for root causes of mental distress in areas that have more effective treatments. This leads to dependence on psychotropic drugs which have been shown to be addictive and harmful.

The transformation of psychiatry into a purely medical model was driven primarily by third-party reimbursement (insurance), the pharmaceutical industry, and government funding.

Freudian theory developed in the 1890’s called for radical permissiveness in sexual mores and child rearing, and left parents in constant worry of unwittingly perpetrating untold psychological harm upon their children.
[Chapter 3, Psychiatry The Ultimate Betrayal, Bruce Wiseman, Freedom Publishing, 1995]

To this day, thanks to the large-scale Freudian indoctrination of teachers, doctors, social workers, and others, many a mother and father is filled with dread, fearing irreparable mental damage, whenever some minor or major trauma strikes their child.

When lawyers turn to “childhood trauma” as a defense for criminality, it is assumed that the jury and the public will understand this: “everybody knows” that psychological damage comes from one’s childhood.

“The indiscriminate, ‘nonjudgmental’ approach, of dubious value with neurotics, amounts to a frank condoning of crime when applied to offenders and threatens to undermine and eradicate social and moral attitudes. This is the more serious, since this psychiatric-social work approach combines with the ‘permissive’ or ‘progressive’ upbringing of the home and school and a very lax enforcement of justice by the police and the courts.” The statement was made in 1962 by psychiatrist Melitta Schmideberg, president of the Association for the Psychiatric Treatment of Offenders.
[ibid. Chapter 8]

In 1966, schools began to be used as an ideological platform for the abandonment of self-discipline and morality. The assault on social values came with the textbook called Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Strategies for Teachers and Students. Children were asked to abandon values instilled through family, home and church, and substitute new values which they were free to make up.

This “therapeutic education,” or “behavior modification,” gradually replaced academics in favor of feelings and emotions, eroding discipline and promoting permissiveness, redefining and replacing earned self-esteem with psychological doubletalk like “anger management” and “mental health.”

The undermining of traditional education and values can be traced to a German psychologist, Wilhelm Wundt of Leipzig University, who founded “experimental psychology” in 1879. Declaring that man is an animal with no soul, he claimed that thought was merely the result of brain activity — a false premise that has remained the basis of psychiatry until this day.

Wundt was a strong advocate of Gottlieb Fichte, head of psychology at the University of Berlin in 1810, who believed that “Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished.”

Influential educational psychologist Ernst Friedrich Wilhelm Meumann, professor of philosophy and education at Leipzig University and student and assistant of Wundt, sought to radically change schools by the “oppression of the children’s natural inclinations.” His book discussing Mental Hygiene in the Schools became required reading for several generations of education students in Germany and he propagated the idea that schools should be used for “preventative mental health functions.”

For more information download and read the CCHR report Harming Youth — Psychiatry Destroys Young Minds — Report and recommendations on harmful mental health assessments, evaluations, and programs within our schools.

Gaming Disorder – WHO’s the Loser?

January 5th, 2018

The 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is scheduled to be released in June, 2018.

The ICD, published by the World Health Organization (WHO), is the international standard diagnostic tool for epidemiology, health management, and clinical purposes. It is used for the identification of health trends and statistics and for reporting diseases and health conditions by its 194 member countries, although in the U.S. the DSM is used for mental health conditions. Think of WHO as Big Brother for Universal Health Care. With offices in over 150 countries, it is very big business.

The first version of the ICD was published in 1893. WHO took over publishing the ICD when it was formed in 1948. ICD-10 was adopted in 1990. The revision process for ICD-11 was begun in 2007 and has been working in earnest since 2015.

The Beta Draft of ICD-11 contains a new classification which we thought might be of interest to our CCHR STL supporters.

6D11 Gaming disorder
Gaming disorder is characterized by a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behaviour (‘digital gaming’ or ‘video-gaming’), which may be online (i.e., over the Internet) or offline, manifested by:
1) impaired control over gaming (e.g., onset, frequency, intensity, duration, termination, context);
2) increasing priority given to gaming to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other life interests and daily activities; and
3) continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences.

The behaviour pattern is of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning. The pattern of gaming behaviour may be continuous or episodic and recurrent. The gaming behaviour and other features are normally evident over a period of at least 12 months in order for a diagnosis to be assigned, although the required duration may be shortened if all diagnostic requirements are met and symptoms are severe.

6D11 has three subdivisions:
6D11.0 Gaming disorder, predominantly online
6D11.1 Gaming disorder, predominantly offline
6D11.Z Gaming disorder, unspecified

Wait, there’s more.

QF02 Hazardous gaming
Hazardous gaming refers to a pattern of gaming, either online or offline that appreciably increases the risk of harmful physical or mental health consequences to the individual or to others around this individual. The increased risk may be from the frequency of gaming, from the amount of time spent on these activities, from the neglect of other activities and priorities, from risky behaviours associated with gaming or its context, from the adverse consequences of gaming, or from the combination of these. The pattern of gaming often persists in spite of awareness of increased risk of harm to the individual or to others.

Basically, ICD claims that Gaming Disorder is an addictive behavior, and any form of addiction is a mental disorder. Other forms of addiction categorized by ICD are substance abuse, gambling, and other impulse control issues such as pyromania, kleptomania and promiscuity.

Infiltration into the gaming world on behalf of psychiatrists is not totally recent. They have been personally entering the online realm of WoW (World of Warcraft) for some time now, to supposedly deliver therapeutic services inside the game.

The DSM already has Gambling Disorder, more Substance Abuse disorders than you can shake a bong at, pyromania, kleptomania, and more sexual disorders than you can shake — well, you get the idea.

So what are these various behaviors if they are not mental illnesses? They’re called lapses in ethics and morals, and when treated as such there is hope that they can be corrected. Unfortunately, calling them “mental illness” and treating them with psychotropic drugs precludes any possibility of finding out the true root causes and effectively addressing those.

We think the whole thing comes back to what Professor Thomas Szasz originally had to say about this:
• “The term ‘mental illness’ refers to the undesirable thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of persons. Classifying thoughts, feelings, and behaviors as diseases is a logical and semantic error, like classifying the whale as a fish.”
• “If we recognize that ‘mental illness’ is a metaphor for disapproved thoughts, feelings, and behaviors, we are compelled to recognize as well that the primary function of Psychiatry is to control thought, mood, and behavior.”

These so-called mental disorders are just what psychiatry and psychiatrists have inappropriately labeled as “undesirable behavior.” So, WHO is the Loser in this game? It’s you, if you buy psychiatry’s pronouncement of “mental disorder.”

Take Action – Missouri Legislature

December 27th, 2017

Periodically we let you know the progress of various proposed legislation making its way through the Missouri General Assembly and suggest ways for you to contribute your viewpoint to your state Representative and state Senator.

The Missouri General Assembly is the state legislature of the State of Missouri and is composed of two chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate. The General Assembly is responsible for creating laws for governing the State of Missouri. The Revised Statutes of Missouri (RSMo) are electronically available on this site:  http://revisor.mo.gov/.

You can find your Representative and Senator, and their contact information, by entering your 9-digit zip code here.

The Ninety-Ninth General Assembly, Second Regular Session, will convene at 12:00 P.M., Wednesday, January 3, 2018. Pre-filing of bills started December 1, 2017.

This time we’d like to discuss several bills which we’d like you to write your legislators about. Please write from your viewpoint as an individual or professional, and not as a representative of any organization. Let us know the details and any responses you get. The full text of each bill can be found on the House and Senate Joint Bill Tracking site. Just put the bill number into the search box (e.g. SB661).

Check out our handy discussion about How to write to a legislator.

If you are not a voting resident of Missouri, you can find out about legislation in your own state and write your own state legislators; also, we are looking for volunteers to monitor legislation in Missouri and the states surrounding Missouri — let us know if you’d like to help out.

Very Bad Bills

These are bills that further psychiatric abuses of human rights. Please express your opposition and opinions about these to your legislators and copy the sponsors.

1) SB661 – Senate Bill 661 – sponsored by Senator Jeanie Riddle (Republican, District 10).

This act provides that after a person accused of committing a crime has been involuntarily committed to the Department of Mental Health due to lack of mental fitness to stand trial, the legal counsel for the Department shall have standing to participate in hearings regarding involuntary medications for the accused.

The subject of this bill had been introduced previously in 2016 and 2017. We think it is very bad because it allows the Department of Mental Health to force psychiatric drugs on involuntarily committed citizens. Both of these actions — involuntary commitment and enforced drugging — are psychiatric abuses of human rights.

2) SB785 – Senate Bill 785 – sponsored by Senator Jamilah Nasheed (Democrat, District 5).

This act establishes the Coordinating Board for Mental Health Issues in Higher Education (CBMHI). Each public institution of higher education in Missouri shall have one representative, who is either an administrator or counseling director, on the CBMHI.

It requires setting standards and regulations for student counseling facilities that relate to mental health problems, and developing a process for measuring a higher educational institution’s ability to meet student mental health needs. In other words, it will promote psychiatric and psychological counseling, and likely recommend psychiatric drugs as well. While this sounds altruistic, we know that the current state of psychiatric and psychological counseling is an abuse of human rights.

3) HB1363 – House Bill 1363 – sponsored by Representative Bill Kidd (Republican, District 20).

This bill requires teachers and principals to complete two hours of suicide prevention education each school year.

Again, while this sounds altruistic, the current state of so-called “suicide prevention education” is a recommendation for harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs, which are known to cause the very thing they are supposed to prevent, which is violence and suicide.

4) HB1419 – House Bill 1419 – sponsored by Representative Marsha Haefner (Republican, District 95).

This bill requires certain health care professionals to complete two hours of suicide prevention training as a condition of licensure.

More of the same — the current state of so-called “suicide prevention training” is a recommendation for harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs, which are known to cause the very thing they are supposed to prevent, which is violence and suicide.


Very Good Bills

These are bills that support human rights and oppose psychiatric abuses. Please express your support and opinions about these to your legislators and copy the sponsors.

1) SB672 – Senate Bill 672 – sponsored by Senator Andrew Koenig (Republican, District 15).

This act provides that during a child protective investigation if the child is at risk for possible removal the Children’s Division shall provide information to the parent about community service programs that provide support services for families in crisis. Additionally, a parent may temporarily delegate to an attorney-in-fact any powers regarding the care and custody of a child, where a child subject to such power of attorney shall not be considered placed in foster care.

This returns parental rights to the parents instead of forcing a child into foster care. We think this is supportive of human rights, not to mention preventing a child from receiving psychiatric drugging which almost always occurs in foster care.

2) SB786 – Senate Bill 786 – sponsored by Senator Jill Schupp (Democrat, District 24).

This bill modifies provisions relating to “whistle-blower’s” protection for public employees by broadening its scope of application and extending protections to the whistle-blower.

3) HB1294 – House Bill 1294 – sponsored by Representative Cheri Toalson Reisch (Republican, District 44).

This bill specifies that parental liberty to direct the upbringing, education, and care of his or her children is a fundamental right. The State of Missouri and any political subdivision of the state is prohibited from infringing on this right without demonstrating a compelling governmental interest.

Needless to say, we support parental rights as a basic human right. Article 25 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights says, “Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.” And Article 26 says, “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.”

4) HB1451 – House Bill 1451 – sponsored by Representative Karla May (Democrat, District 84).

This bill prohibits the use of electroconvulsive therapy on children under 16 years of age. Any person or mental health facility that administers electroconvulsive therapy to someone under 16 years of age will be fined up to $100,000 or imprisoned for two years, or both, and will be liable for compensation to the person that was given the electroconvulsive therapy.

What can we say? About time! Get this one passed! Write your legislators now!

Holiday Stress

December 24th, 2017

We see a lot of news articles cropping up warning about stress during holidays.

Elf On A Shelf

Personally, we think a lot of it is motivated by some marketer’s bright idea, no doubt under the guidance of an “expert” psychologist or psychiatrist, about how to drum up business for the mental health industry.

Of course, you know what an “expert” is? An “ex” is a has-been; and a “spurt” is a drip under pressure.

Sometimes the advice given is just common sense; but other times the advice is dangerous. Beware, judgment may be in short supply when under a lot of stress.

The Missouri Magazine thinks it is essential to let us know this holiday season how to manage stress. Its advice is mostly common sense.

Medical News Today wants us to manage stress, also, but they recommend you “seek help from a healthcare professional.” Naturally; the marketer in action.

One psychologist recommends you seek help from the American Psychological Association. Naturally.

The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services even has a full-color brochure on how to handle holiday stress. They recommend, surprise, that you call the Missouri Department of Mental Health’s Crisis Intervention line.

Oh, and then there’s all the “research” about holiday stress. The Mayo Clinic thinks women tend to get more stressed during the holiday season. We’re pretty sure that a comprehensive search will find that some scientist, somewhere has reached pretty much any conclusion you care to name about this condition.

We wrote a whole blog previously about stress, you can review it here.

The DSM-V has several entries for stress:
– Acute stress disorder
– Unspecified trauma- and stressor-related disorder
– Other specified trauma- and stressor-related disorder
– Posttraumatic stress disorder
We’re pretty sure you already know our opinion about the DSM.

There are even articles about “stress-free recipes for the holidays”.

Our advice? Read what we have to say about stress, pass this along to your family, friends and associates, let us know what you think about this, and then have a happy, safe, stress-free holiday!