Autism

We wish we could give you all the true data about autism, but we don’t know it all. Instead, we can give you many related facts and a few opinions; perhaps these can help you evaluate the subject. The reason we discuss it at all is because the psychiatric industry has claimed this disorder for its own purposes, and continues to wrestle with the line between unusual and abnormal behavior. For obvious reasons, we mis-trust anything that psychiatry has to say about the condition, especially about treating it with psychotropic drugs.

The word “autism” was coined in 1912 by Swiss psychiatrist Paul Bleuler (1857-1939) from the Greek autos- “self” + –ismos a suffix of action or of state. The notion was originally of “morbid self-absorption.”

The number of people diagnosed with autism has increased dramatically since the 1980s, partly due to changes in diagnostic criteria and practice; the question of whether actual prevalence has increased is unresolved, since diagnosis is based on behavior, not cause or mechanism.

Autism, sometimes called “autism spectrum disorder,” “pervasive developmental disorder,” or “Asperger syndrome,” apparently does not have a single definitive definition that can be used across the board to provide a basis for correcting the condition; it generally refers to a range of symptoms characterized by impairment of the ability to form normal social relationships, by impairment of the ability to communicate with others, and by stereotyped behavior patterns.

A study was once done to figure out how common Asperger’s was, and the results were clear — it was vanishingly rare. Then Allen Frances put it in the DSM, and the number of kids diagnosed with the disorder exploded.

Of course, while Dr. Hans Asperger is credited with shaping our ideas of autism and Asperger syndrome, one may not want to give him that much credit, since he is now linked with the Nazi’s child euthanasia program, recommending dozens of children to be sent for euthanasia.

There are many competing theories about autism’s etiology [its causes or origins]. We have seen articles relating autism to toxins (mercury, pesticides, etc.), nutrition, incomplete breakdown of casein or gluten, vaccination, genetic predisposition, neurological brain disorders, an alteration in how nerve cells and their synapses connect and organize, birth defects, the stress of circumcision, antidepressants, ad nauseum.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), psychiatry’s billing bible, may perpetuate the perception, whether true or false, that autism is related to mental retardation where it discusses atypical autism arising most often in profoundly retarded individuals.

Where to go from here?

Well, we’re not going to spend any more time discussing etiology and treatment, since you can Google those thousands of articles as well as we can. The real point we want to make is that psychiatry currently owns autism, listing “Autism spectrum disorder” in the DSM-5.

In future revisions of the DSM psychiatrists may make it easier to diagnose, increasing the number of children into the mental health system; or they may make it harder to diagnose, excluding children whose families are currently receiving, or hope to receive, some kind of monetary disability support. In any case, the hue and cry is already demanding more psychiatric funding for whatever they are currently calling autism.

At least a million children and adults have an autism diagnosis or a related disorder, such as “Unspecified neurodevelopmental disorder” (and there are ten categories of “developmental disorder” in the DSM-5.)

There are as many recommended therapies for autism as there are theories about the condition; these therapies may include diet, nutrition, behavioral modification, and many other non-invasive alternative health treatments. Of course, the treatment of choice for psychiatrists is the usual list of harmful and addictive antidepressants, antipsychotics, and anti-anxiety drugs, whose devastating side effects are well-documented.

Autism is big business — meaning big profits. One check on the Missouri government web site (www.mo.gov) revealed the word “autism” appearing 1,880 times, and “autistic” appearing 607 times.

The Missouri Department of Mental Health budget in 2012 included over $10 million for various autism services. In 2018 the autism budget is still roughly $10 million, but the budget for the Division of Developmental Disabilities is going to be over one billion dollars.

Granted, there is social justification for providing help to children and families coping with traumatic health situations. Given, however, psychiatry’s history of fraud, abuse, and use of damaging drugs, due diligence suggests examining this field very closely for exaggeration and mis-use.

The Drug Controversy

It is estimated that more than half of autistic school age children are on one or more psychotropic drugs. In at least one study, it was shown that prenatal use of antidepressants increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder in newborn children.

Children with autism are more likely to be prescribed addictive and harmful antipsychotic drugs than their typical peers, according to a large study. They are also prescribed antipsychotics such as risperidone at younger ages, and for longer periods of time. Doctors often prescribe antipsychotics to manage behavioral problems in children with autism rather than as any kind of actual treatment for the condition, since the drugs act to suppress the central nervous system. Other studies also indicate that many children with autism who take antipsychotic medications are not first offered safer and more effective options. A 2017 study suggested that about 20 percent of children with autism in the U.S. are prescribed antipsychotics.

An article in the Los Angeles Times on April 23, 2012 headlined, “Report says studies overstate drugs’ ability to treat autism symptoms.” It went on to say that “Antidepressants are not specifically approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treating autism, but they have become the go-to drugs for trying to control some of its key symptoms. By some estimates, the drugs have been prescribed for as many as one-third of children with the diagnosis. … A series of standard statistical tests designed to check the consistency and reliability of the published data [about the effectiveness of psychiatric drugs prescribed for autism] strongly suggested publication bias. The effect appeared to be so great that the researchers could no longer deem the anti-depressants effective.” [Publication bias occurs when studies that show a drug or treatment is effective are more likely to be published than studies with negative findings.]

Find out more about what you can do to expose psychiatric fraud and abuse, and support CCHR St. Louis so that it can continue to expose psychiatric fraud and abuse. Go to http://www.cchrstl.org/takeaction.shtml.

Is Marijuana Actually Medicinal?

Does cannabis offer a legitimate medical treatment, and do its risks outweigh its benefits?

As far as cancer goes, marijuana is definitely not a cancer cure. In fact, it is not even a palliative for cancer. What it is mostly used for is to dull the pain and nausea of chemotherapy.

Regarding its use as an opioid alternative, marijuana use is now being found to be associated with an increase in nonmedical opioid use.

Quoting from an article in Medscape, “Smoke and Mirrors: Is Marijuana Actually Medicinal?” — “Although there are undoubtedly a few indications in which various forms of cannabis have shown promise, recent research is more commonly characterized by a failure to observe a beneficial effect.”

And particularly, “Cannabis for Mental Health Issues May Cause More Harm.” In fact, “there is a robust and growing body of evidence that cannabis can cause otherwise preventable psychotic illness and worsen its prognosis.” So when people turn up in the emergency room with symptoms of schizophrenia, psychosis, depression or anxiety—-where do you think they are going to end up? That’s right, in the mental health care system and taking prescribed psychiatric drugs; and that is no accidental outcome! It’s been planned.

Marijuana smoke also has all of the detrimental effects previously attributed to tobacco. Marijuana is the second most smoked substance besides tobacco, and carries significant risks for compromised cardiopulmonary health. Consuming one joint gives as much exposure to cancer-producing chemicals as smoking five cigarettes.

Marijuana is a hallucinogen, a drug which distorts how the mind perceives the world. The THC (tetrahydrocannabinol, the principal psychoactive component) stays in the body for weeks, possibly months, depending on the length and intensity of usage. THC damages the immune system.

Next to alcohol, marijuana is the second most frequently found substance in the bodies of drivers involved in fatal automobile accidents.

Consider who is telling you that marijuana is not dangerous and that it will help you. Are these the same people who are trying to sell you some pot? The push for medical marijuana is not about helping the sick, but about profit.

Through a network of nonprofit groups, George Soros has spent at least $80 million on the marijuana legalization effort since 1994. The medical and legal recreational marijuana market is a huge business and projected to grow from $1.4 billion to $10.2 billion over the next five years. Are you sure you want to vote for this insanity?

Click here for more information about the harm that marijuana does.

They’re Coming to Screen You

The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention has released guidelines for suicide prevention (“Recommended Standard Care for People with Suicide Risk“).

The NAASP, a project of Education Development Center, is partially funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), and the Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS).

Their main point of view is that suicide prevention should be managed by health care providers in the same way as prevention of common medical conditions.

The rate of suicide deaths in the U.S. rose significantly between 2000 and 2015 — from 10.44 per 100,000 to 13.26 per 100,000 — coincident with the increase of prescriptions for psychotropic (mind-altering) drugs.

“At least two thirds of suicide deaths occur within about 30 days of a medical contact, be that an emergency department (ED), a primary care practice, or a mental health professional” and up to 70% among the older male psychiatric population. This is not a good recommendation for seeing a psychiatrist.

They believe that suicide screening should be a standard action for all patients in the mental health care system. Mental health screening aims to get the whole population on drugs and thus under control. Contrary to how screening is presented by psychiatrists, there is no scientific evidence to substantiate these claims of screening for suicide risk.

The psychopharmaceutical industry has invented hundreds of mental health screening questionnaires devised from the fraudulent symptoms of “disorders” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), with drug companies paying for and copyrighting these. These questionnaires are all over the Internet, where any “lay person” can complete it, diagnose themselves and go ask their doctor for the drug recommended for it.

Unfortunately, they neglect to mention that the subjective questions used in these screenings are based on the DSM, which medical experts say is an unscientific and unreliable document. In 2004 the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, an independent panel of experts in primary care and prevention, “found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality.” It’s just a way to put more people on prescription drugs. Some suicide risk assessments are designed to fit hand-in-glove with the effects of these drugs, emphasizing the physical symptoms that most respond to psychiatric drugs.

One such screening test called TeenScreen went out of business after admitting that it had a large chance that 84% of children screened could be wrongly identified as suicidal. Screening and early intervention sounds like a great idea until you turn out to be the one being screened.

Since there is no laboratory test that can identify mental illness or suicide risk, the diagnosis of a mental disorder or of a suicide risk is entirely subjective. Basically, it is the opinion of a psychiatrist who has decided he does not like what a person is thinking or feeling.

There certainly should be more attention paid by health care providers to the risk of suicide; however, that attention should be directed toward finding and fixing actual medical conditions and getting patients off of harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs.

Click here for more information about the history of mental health screening and its fraudulent nature.

The Missouri Budget Funds Psychiatric Fraud and Abuse

The Missouri budget, just approved for the next Fiscal Year, contains over two billion insanely bloated dollars for the Department of Mental Health.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We think it is time to call psychiatry and psychology for what they are — failed pseudo sciences with no basis in fact, pseudo sciences that harm their recipients and line the pocketbooks of their practitioners.

 

 

The introduction and passage of legislation designed to curb psychiatric fraud and abuse can contribute to the reduction of the Department of Mental Health budget.

Reports show that:

* 10% to 25% of mental health practitioners sexually abuse patients.
* Psychiatry has the worst fraud track record of all medical disciplines.
* The largest health care fraud suit in history [$375 million] involved the smallest sector of healthcare–psychiatry.
* An estimated $20-$40 billion is defrauded in the mental health industry in any given year.

Download and read the full report “Massive Fraud — Psychiatry’s Corrupt Industry.

Recommendations

1.   Establish or increase the number of psychiatric fraud investigation units to recover funds that are embezzled in the mental health system.

2.   Clinical and financial audits of all government-run and private psychiatric facilities that receive government subsidies or insurance payments should be done to ensure accountability; statistics on admissions, treatment and deaths, without breaching patient confidentiality, should be compiled for review.

3.   A list of convicted psychiatrists and mental health workers, especially those convicted and/or disciplined for fraud and sexual abuse should be kept on state, national and international law enforcement and police agencies databases, to prevent criminally convicted and/or de-registered mental health practitioners from gaining employment elsewhere in the mental health field.

4.   No convicted mental health practitioner should be employed by government agencies, especially in correctional/prison facilities or schools.

5.   The DSM and/or lCD (mental disorders section) should be removed from use in all government agencies, departments and other bodies including criminal, educational and justice systems.

6.   Establish rights for patients and their insurance companies to receive refunds for mental health treatment which did not achieve the promised result or improvement, or which resulted in proven harm to the individual, thereby ensuring that responsibility lies with the individual practitioner and psychiatric facility rather than the government or its agencies.

7.   None of the mental disorders in the DSM/ICD should be eligible for insurance coverage because they have no scientific, physical validation. Governmental, criminal, educational and judicial agencies should not rely on the DSM or lCD (mental disorders section).

8.   Provide funding and insurance coverage only for proven, workable treatments that verifiably and dramatically improve or cure mental health problems.

CCHR Florida takes on the psychiatric industry and their agenda to profit off children and families

Diane Stein, President of Citizens Commission on Human Rights, Florida, an unflinching advocate of human rights, takes on the powerful psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries by exposing their hidden agenda to profit off children and families while committing blatant and horrific human rights abuses.

In Florida, the Baker Act [Florida Statute 394.451 “The Florida Mental Health Act”] allows for “involuntary examination” (also called involuntary commitment or civil commitment). It can be initiated by judges, law enforcement officials, physicians, or mental health professionals. Children and adults are typically picked up by the police and taken to a mental health facility against their will, where their insurance is billed for this abuse.

Watch this 22-minute documentary video and find out how CCHR Florida is helping Florida citizens who have been abused by the mental health industry.

Read more about the Baker Act in Florida here.

In Missouri, involuntary commitment is authorized by Missouri Statute 632.305 (“Detention for evaluation and treatment”.)

CCHR recommends that citizens execute a Living Will, or Letter of Protection from Psychiatric Incarceration and/or Treatment, which directs that psychiatric incarceration, hospitalization, treatment or procedures not be imposed on you.

Read about the unconstitutionality of involuntary commitment laws here.

The Manufactured Crisis of Prescription Drug Prices

“Manufactured Crisis – How Devastating Drug Price Increases Are Harming America’s Seniors”

This report was prepared in 2018 by the U.S. Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee Minority Office as requested by Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

It examines the history of rising drug prices between 2012 and 2017 for the twenty brand-name drugs most commonly prescribed for seniors.

Drugs were identified using data from Medicare Part D, and average prices were statistically calculated to come up with annual weighted average wholesale acquisition costs.

Of the twenty drugs in the report, two are used off-label for psychiatric purposes:
§ Lyrica (pregabalin), approved for controlling epileptic seizures and neuropathic pain, is also used off-label as an anti-anxiety drug; it carries a warning that it may cause suicidal thoughts or actions.

§ Synthroid (levothyroxine), a synthetic thyroid hormone approved for hypothyroidism, is also used off-label as an antidepressant, although a specific, causally significant hormonal deficiency has not been identified for depression; it has potential side effects of hair loss, mental and mood changes such as depression, easily broken bones, heart problems, and seizures.

A Lyrica prescription rose in average cost between 2012 and 2017 from $264 to $600 (a 127% increase), while the number of prescriptions rose from 9.1 million to 10.3 million (a 14% increase).

A Synthroid prescription rose in average cost between 2012 and 2017 from $96 to $153 (a 60% increase), while the number of prescriptions dropped from 23.0 million to 18.4 million (a 20% drop).

The report concludes, “Soaring pharmaceutical drug prices remain a critical concern for patients and policymakers alike. Over the last decade, these significant price increases have emerged as a dominant driver of U.S. health care costs.”

Frankly, we do not have a particular bone to pick about the cost of prescription drugs; what does concern us more is the off-label use of medical drugs for fraudulent psychiatric conditions, and the seriousness of their potential side effects. If this concerns you as well, please let Senator McCaskill know your thoughts about this.

We recommend informed consent for any treatment plan. Protect yourself, your family and friends, with full informed consent. Courts have determined that informed consent for people who receive prescriptions for psychotropic (mood-altering) drugs must include the doctor providing information about possible side effects and benefits, ways to treat side effects, and risks of other conditions, as well as information about alternative treatments.

Many People Taking Antidepressants Discover They Cannot Quit

The New York Times had an article April 7, 2018 discussing the fact that antidepressants are actually addictive and have withdrawal symptoms. Quotes are from this article.

“As far back as the mid-1990s, leading psychiatrists recognized withdrawal as a potential problem for patients taking modern antidepressants.”

On the other hand, CCHR has been making this known since 1969. Psychiatrists have been loathe to admit the addictive nature of antidepressants and other psychotropic (mind-altering) drugs, and euphemistically call the side effects of withdrawing from psychiatric drugs “discontinuation syndrome”.

Drug addiction in the 1960’s became an increasing problem, and when investigated it was found that psychiatrists were pushing drugs and addicting people as a “cure.”

“Long-term use of antidepressants is surging in the United States, according to a new analysis of federal data by The New York Times. Some 15.5 million Americans have been taking the medications for at least five years. The rate has almost doubled since 2010, and more than tripled since 2000.”

Nearly 25 million adults have been on antidepressants for at least two years, a 60 percent increase since 2010.

“Many who try to quit say they cannot because of withdrawal symptoms they were never warned about.”

We recommend Informed Consent. Protect yourself, your family and friends, with full informed consent. Courts have determined that informed consent for people who receive prescriptions for psychotropic (mood-altering) drugs must include the doctor providing information about possible side effects and benefits, ways to treat side effects, and risks of other conditions, as well as information about alternative treatments.

“Antidepressants are not harmless; they commonly cause emotional numbing, sexual problems like a lack of desire or erectile dysfunction and weight gain.”

“Patients who try to stop taking the drugs often say they cannot. In a recent survey of 250 long-term users of psychiatric drugs — most commonly antidepressants — about half who wound down their prescriptions rated the withdrawal as severe. Nearly half who tried to quit could not do so because of these symptoms.”

“The truth is that the state of the science is absolutely inadequate … We don’t have enough information about what antidepressant withdrawal entails, so we can’t design proper tapering approaches.”

Polypharmacy is another significant problem, wherein a patient is prescribed many, possibly negatively-interacting drugs, often by multiple doctors who might be unaware of each other’s prescription orders. Often, these are drugs that the patient has been taking for a long period; they may be affecting the patient’s health negatively or are simply no longer beneficial. This is often addressed by deprescribing, which is the process of reducing the medication burden of a patient who might no longer need one or more of their prescriptions. Deprescribing principles are intended to improve health care for the patient by minimizing the harm and costs associated with polypharmacy, and minimizing the withdrawal effects of stopping one or more drugs.

Medications that may be considered for discontinuation include drugs that are no longer indicated, drugs that pose a risk for untoward side effects, drugs that interact adversely, drugs that are given to mitigate the side effects of another drug, and addictive drugs that have withdrawal side effects. However, addictive drugs should never be discontinued abruptly, since the withdrawal side effects can be severe.

For more information about how to safely withdraw from these harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs, download and read the booklet Coming Off Psych Drugs Harm Reduction Guide.

Victims of therapist sexual abuse encouraged to speak out during National Sexual Assault Awareness Month

Press Release

CCHR International
The Mental Health Industry Watchdog
April 4, 2018

With studies showing an average of 6 to 10 percent of psychiatrists and psychologists sexually abusing their patients, including children as young as three, Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) is encouraging victims of such abuse to contact it and speak out.[1]

Coinciding with April being Sexual Assault Awareness Month, CCHR also launched a petition calling for uniform laws to prosecute sexual harassment and assault of mental health patients [https://www.change.org/p/state-legislators-laws-needed-to-prosecute-psychiatrist-psychologist-patient-sexual-abuse-as-felony], calling the problem catastrophic. The sexual crimes committed by psychiatrists are estimated at 37 times greater than rapes occurring in the general community, one U.S. law firm stated, estimating that about 150,000 female patients have been assaulted.[2]

CCHR, a mental health watchdog, points to studies showing that mental health practitioners abusing their patients are often repeat offenders. A U.S. national survey of therapist-client sex involving minors also revealed one out of 20 clients who had been sexually abused by their therapist was a minor, with girls as young as three and boys as young as seven.[3]

Clinicians have compared psychotherapist-patient sexual involvement to rape, child molestation, and incest, putting victims at increased risk of suicide, according to the study, “Psychotherapists’ Sexual Relationships with Their Patients” in Annals of Health Law. [4] Such sexual assault victims commonly struggle with emotional repercussions such as: Feelings of no self-worth, denial, crying spells, paranoia, helplessness, loneliness, shame, anxiety, nightmares, insomnia, flashbacks, numbness, withdrawal, depression, fear of relationships and intimacy, and more. [5] The findings of a national study of 958 patients sexually abused by their therapist suggested that 90% were harmed and of those, only 17% recovered. About 14% of those who had been sexually involved with a therapist attempted suicide.[6]

The National Sexual Violence Resource Center which started Sexual Assault Awareness Month states, “With the #MeToo movement shining an unprecedented spotlight on this complex societal issue, it is a critical opportunity for informed news coverage to advance the public conversation.”[7] CCHR says that public conversation must include the rampant assault of women and children in the mental health system.

The group is calling for uniform therapist-sexual assault laws to be enacted throughout the U.S. and internationally. In 2016 a U.S. investigation by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that in 49 states and the District of Columbia, multiple gaps in laws can leave patients vulnerable to abusive physicians.[8]

CCHR cites various studies in support of psychiatrist/psychologist/psychotherapist patient sexual assault laws:

  • Psychiatrists themselves indicate that 65% of their new patients inform them of previous psychiatrists who have sexually abused them. Sexual assault or rape is not just limited to females. Men are also victims of therapist sexual abuse or rape.[9]
  • A 2012 study found psychiatrists in Canada were four times as likely as other doctors to be sanctioned for sexual misconduct.[10]
  • “More spectacular cases may involve the use of drugs to sedate patients or Svengali-like manipulation of patients who perform nonsexual and sexual services,” a Los Angeles Times article on the subject reported.[11]
  • A Canadian task force on sexual abuse of patients found that patients younger than 14 years accounted for 8.7% of reports of therapist sexual abuse.[12]
  • A study published in the Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry Law reported those therapists who report having sex with their patients are often repeat offenders with some surveys noting over 50% of male therapists reporting sexual involvement with more than one patient.[13]
  • Psychiatrists have an ethical obligation to expose colleagues who sexually abuse their patients.[14]
  • A survey of therapists published in the journal Professional Psychology reported that almost nine of 10 therapists said they had been sexually attracted to a patient, and 58% said they had been sexually aroused in the presence of a patient.[15]

A report in Annals of Health Law said that when sexual contact occurs in a psychotherapeutic setting, it is not unusual for the patient to have been persuaded that it was a necessary and integral part of the therapy itself.[16] The practice is referred to as “therapeutic deception,” which CCHR recommends should elicit greater penalties if used to sexually abuse a patient.

In one of the first lawsuits involving such abuse, the New York Appellate Court affirmed a trial courts decision which found that the relationship between a patient and psychiatrist was a fiduciary one, and it based liability on the psychiatrist’s misuse of his position of overpowering influence and trust to coerce a patient to have sex with him. According to the trial court, “[T]here is a public policy to protect a patient from the deliberate and malicious abuse of power and breach of trust by a psychiatrist when that patient entrusts to him her body and mind in the hope that he will use his best efforts to effect a cure.”[17]

At least 10 U.S. states specify “consent” is not a valid defense (CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, MN, NE, SD, ND, WI). Current Psychiatry referred to psychiatrist-patient sexual contact as a “boundary violation,” while acknowledging that such contact with patients is “inherently harmful to patients, always unethical, and usually illegal.”[18]

In a U.S. survey of psychiatrist-patient sex, 73% of psychiatrists who admitted they had sexual contact with their patients claimed it was committed in the name of “love” or “pleasure”; 19% said it was to “enhance the patient’s self-esteem” or provide a “restitutive emotional experience for the patient,” while others said it was merely a “judgment lapse.”[19]

CCHR says such excuses add weight to the need for uniform patient sexual assault laws, arguing that no lay rapist could argue that he “crossed the boundary,” his violent act was for the victim’s “self-esteem.”

Defrauding Insurance Companies

Some therapists that have sexually assaulted their patients add to the abuse by billing health insurance companies, fraudulently claiming they provided a “consultation.” For example, a psychologist in Florida was accused of having sex multiple times with one of his female patients and billing her insurance company $1,400 for “sessions,” according to records from the Florida Department of Health.[20]

CCHR encourages anyone who has knowledge of a psychiatrist, psychologist or psychotherapist sexually abusing a family member or friend to report this to CCHR, to call CCHR’s hotline at 1-800-869-2247, or fill out an abuse case report form [http://www.cchr.org/take-action/report-psychiatric-abuse.html] on the CCHR website.

References:

[1] “Doctor Sexual Assault Cases: Capable Philadelphia Medical Malpractice Lawyers Fight for Justice,” https://www.beasleyfirm.com/medical-malpractice/doctor-sexual-assault/; Kenneth S. Pope, “Therapist-Patient Sex as Sex Abuse: Six Scientific, Professional, and Practical Dilemmas in Addressing Victimization and Rehabilitation,” https://kspope.com/sexiss/therapy1.php
[2] “Doctor Sexual Assault Cases: Capable Philadelphia Medical Malpractice Lawyers Fight for Justice,” https://www.beasleyfirm.com/medical-malpractice/doctor-sexual-assault/
[4] Clifton Perry, Joan Wallman Kuruc, “Psychotherapists’ Sexual Relationships with Their Patients,” Annals of Health Law, Vol. 2, Issue 1, 1993, https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.bing.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1356&context=annals
[5] Op. cit., “Doctor Sexual Assault Cases: Capable Philadelphia Medical Malpractice Lawyers Fight for Justice”
[8] “50-state review uncovers how patients are vulnerable to abusive physicians,” The Atlanta Journal Constitution, 17 Nov. 2016, https://www.ajc.com/news/national/state-review-uncovers-how-patients-are-vulnerable-abusive-physicians/MrE462LHAPKilYj3SA2crN/
[9] Op. cit. “Doctor Sexual Assault Cases.”
[10] “Psychiatrists four times as likely as other Canadian doctors to be disciplined for sexual misconduct: study,” The National Post, 6 Dec. 2012
[11] “When Doctors and Patients Become Involved : Ethics: Sexual contact between therapists and patients is not new. But now it is the subject of a growing number of malpractice cases,” Los Angeles Times, reprinting a Washington Post article, 9 Nov. 1989, http://articles.latimes.com/1989-11-09/news/vw-1375_1_malpractice-cases
[12] “Statistics & Laws Regarding Sexual Abuse by a Doctor or a Health Care Provider,” Averly Law Firm, 18 Mar. 2012, http://www.coloradosuperlawyer.com/injury-law/medical-malpractice/statistics-laws-regarding-sexual-abuse-by-a-doctor-or-a-health-care-provider/
[13] Gary C. Hankins et al, “Patient-Therapist Sexual Involvement: A Review of Clinical and Research Data,” Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry Law, Vol. 22, No.1, 1994, http://jaapl.org/content/jaapl/22/1/109.full.pdf
[15] “Many Therapists Feel Rage, Fear, Desire Toward Patients,” Chicago Tribune, 12 Sept. 2013, http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1993-09-12/features/9309120024_1_therapists-patient-feelings
[16] Clifton Perry, Joan Wallman Kuruc, “Psychotherapists’ Sexual Relationships with Their Patients,” Annals of Health Law, Vol. 2, Issue 1, 1993, https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.bing.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1356&context=annals
[17] Clifton Perry, Joan Wallman Kuruc, “Psychotherapists’ Sexual Relationships with Their Patients,” Annals of Health Law, Vol. 2, Issue 1, 1993, https://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.bing.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1356&context=annals
[18] “Psychiatrist/patient boundaries: When it’s OK to stretch the line,” Current Psychiatry, 2008 August;7(8):53-62, http://www.mdedge.com/currentpsychiatry/article/63241/psychiatrist/patient-boundaries-when-its-ok-stretch-line
[19] Nanette Gartrell, M.D., Judith Herman, M.D., et al., “Psychiatrist-Patient Sexual Contact: Results of a National Survey, I: Prevalence,” American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 143 No. 9, Sept. 1986, p. 1128
[20] Tamara Lush, “Tampa psychologist accused of billing insurance for sex with patient,” Associated Press, 18 Feb 2010, http://www.foxnews.com/story/2010/02/18/florida-psychologist-accused-having-sex-with-patient.html.

Psychiatry is Now Called Behavioral Health

The Board of Trustees of the former National Association of Psychiatric Health Systems (NAPHS) announced the association has changed its name to the National Association for Behavioral Healthcare (NABH), effective Monday, March 19, 2018.

NABH advocates for behavioral healthcare and represents behavior healthcare provider organizations such as psychiatric hospitals.

The reason they gave for the name change is to reflect the association’s mission to advocate for behavioral healthcare, because these healthcare needs are too complex to represent solely by reference to psychiatry.

We conjecture in addition that by removing the word “psychiatric” they are acknowledging that this word is gaining negative connotations in society.

In their anxiety to keep their failures explained, psychiatry continually redefines key words; in this case, replacing “psychiatric” with “behavioral health”. The emphasis is on describing ever more complicated conditions instead of curing them. The continual cry for more government funding buys no cures, but only how incurable it all is.

In fact, healthcare needs are relatively simple, and the effort to represent it as very complex is an obfuscation that facilitates asking for more funds to support more and more harmful and ineffective treatments.

Research has shown that proper medical screening by non-psychiatric diagnostic specialists could eliminate more than 40% of psychiatric admissions. Medical studies have shown time and again that for many patients, what appear to be mental problems are actually caused by an undiagnosed and untreated physical illness or condition.

While life is full of problems, and sometimes those problems can be overwhelming, it is important to know that psychiatry, its diagnoses and its drugs, are the wrong direction to go. The drugs can only chemically mask problems and symptoms; they cannot and never will be able to solve problems.

Click here for more information about the real crisis in mental health care today.

Trauma Informed Therapy is the Newest Psych Buzzword

“Trauma Informed Therapy is centered on the understanding of the emotional, neurological, psychological, social, and biological effects of trauma,” in the misleading idea that trauma experienced when young affects the mental well-being of individuals throughout life.

We call it misleading because while it is certainly true that trauma can affect one’s outlook on life, it is a mistake to think that this is a ripe field for psychiatric treatment just because psychiatrists and psychologists think there is no other treatment for it, when in fact the hardy resilience of children, and of adults, is often overlooked. Psychiatrists and psychologists think they have uncovered something new by focusing on the relationship between trauma and present-time adverse behaviors, thoughts, and emotions. The unfortunate aspect of this is that their “treatments” only make the matter worse.

Trauma focused therapy is a branch of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), which as we’ve said before is a form of psychotherapy that attempts to modify dysfunctional emotions, behaviors, and thoughts — by evaluating for the person, challenging the person’s behaviors, and getting the person to change those behaviors, often in combination with psychiatric drugs.

Trauma therapy is a direct result of the alarming spread of the fraudulent diagnosis of PTSD – so-called Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Originally applied to soldiers suffering from battlefield exhaustion, PTSD has become blurred as a catch-all diagnosis for some 175 combinations of symptoms, becoming the label for identifying the impact of adverse events (trauma) on ordinary people. This means that normal responses to catastrophic events have often been interpreted as mental disorders, leading directly to calling “trauma” the new “black,” and spawning an entirely new opportunity to expand psychiatric “treatment” to a broader patient population.

Why is this bad?

Psychiatric trauma treatment at best is useless, and at worst highly destructive to victims seeking help. By medicalizing what is a non-medical condition and introducing harmful drugs as a therapy, victims have been denied effective treatment options.

There is no better example of tyranny over the minds of men than what is being given to children and adults in the name of “help” through behaviorist programs such as CBT and Trauma therapy. The entirety of these psychological and psychiatric programs are founded on the tacit assumptions that mental health “experts” know all about the mind and mental phenomena, know a better way of life, a better value system and how to improve lives beyond the understanding and capability of everyone else in society.

The reality is that all these mental health programs are designed to control people towards specific ideological objectives at the expense of the person’s sanity and well-being. Do we really want to institutionalize mandatory psychiatric counseling and screening, which is where all this is heading?

Claiming that even normal behavior is a mental disorder and that drugs are the solution, psychiatrists and psychologists have insinuated themselves into positions of authority. If someone is exhibiting behavioral problems, there are many things that can be done besides the exclusive drug- and behavior modification-based options that are the backbone of mental health services today.

In fact, studies have indicated that many mental health consumers, that is people under the supposed care of some mental health provider, program or institution, have experienced traumatic, frightening, humiliating, or distressing events during their treatment or hospitalization. This is why CCHR encourages victims of psychiatric fraud or abuse to report these events.

Legal protections should be put in place to ensure that psychiatrists and psychologists are prohibited from violating the right of every person to exercise all civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights as recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and in other relevant instruments.