Psychiatric Clinic Sued for Negligence

You may recall that in October 2009, Alyssa Bustamante, then 15 years old, strangled and stabbed to death 9-year-old Elizabeth Olten in St. Martins, Missouri.

In February 2012, Bustamante was sentenced to life in prison for second-degree murder.

Bustamante was a client at Pathways Community Behavioral Healthcare and taking Prozac when she committed the crime. She had previously been hospitalized in 2007 at the Mid-Missouri Mental Health Center in Columbia for attempted suicide.

Olten’s mother, Patricia Preiss, is now suing the clinic for negligent failure to warn Preiss and her family about Bustamante’s violent tendencies. Similar claims are being made against Dr. Niger Sultana, a Pathways psychiatrist, and Ron Wilson, a Pathways counselor.

This lawsuit was filed the same day Preiss won a court judgment against Bustamante’s legal guardian grandparents for wrongful death.

The issue of Prozac causing violent behavior was raised at the sentencing hearing. As is common in such cases, the psychiatrist for the defense argued that Prozac can cause violence; and the psychiatrist for the prosecution argued that Prozac cannot cause violence. Psychiatric “expert” witnesses are widely criticized for providing testimony to suit their clients’ purposes.

Psychiatry’s increasing influence in criminal justice has produced only escalating crime rates internationally. Although incapable of either predicting future dangerousness or of rehabilitating criminals, psychiatrists still testify, in court on behalf of the highest bidder, asserting that offenders are not responsible for what they have done, but are instead “victims” of fictitious mental disorders. The result is rising crime, as lawbreakers are put back on the streets to wreak more havoc, unrepentant and uncorrected.

Yet during trials, in sentencing, in probation hearings, psychiatrists are still called upon for their opinions. And, sadly, these opinions are considered.

In further abuse, psychotropic drugs are then given to incarcerated youths and adults. Instead of rehabilitating the inmate so that he can become a productive member of society, these drugs make it even more difficult for him to escape the dwindling spiral of criminality and can induce continued violent behavior in prison. It is time to hold the psychiatrists and psychologists in our judicial and penal systems responsible.

Psychiatry has had the opportunity to prove itself but has instead proven to be a colossal failure. The cost to society has been catastrophic, not only in terms of money.

Psychiatry was posed as a solution and became a problem. The first step is to remove psychiatric influence from the courts, police departments, prisons and schools. Contact your local, state and federal officials and tell them what you think. Ask them to remove psychiatrists and psychologists as advisors or as counselors from courts, police forces, prisons and criminal rehabilitation and parole services.

Stop the Stigma: Buy More Psych Drugs?

Little known but Extremely Relevant Fact: The Campaign to “Stop the Stigma” of “Mental Illness” was launched by the Pharmaceutical Industry.

Lately we have been reading a deluge of news articles from all around the country about various campaigns to “stop the stigma of mental illness.” We wondered what all the fuss was about.

With a seemingly altruistic agenda, the fact is the campaign to end the “stigma” of mental illness is one driven and funded by those who benefit from more and more people being labeled mentally ill — pharma, psychiatry and pharmaceutical front groups such as NAMI and CHADD.

For example, take NAMI’s campaign to stop the “stigma” and “end discrimination” against the mentally ill — the “Founding Sponsors” were Abbott Labs, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Novartis, SmithKline Beecham and Wyeth-Ayerst Labs. So next time you see an ad promoting “stop the stigma” see it for what it is, a pharmaceutical marketing campaign.

The majority of the public may or may not be familiar with these so-called mental health advocacy organizations, such as the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), Children and Adults with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (CHADD), or the myriad of bipolar, depression or ADHD “support groups” that are inundating the internet.

But they need to be.


These are groups operating under the guise of advocates for the “mentally ill,” which in reality are heavily funded pharmaceutical front groups — lobbying and working on state and federal laws which effect the entire nation — from our elderly in nursing homes to our military, pregnant women, nursing mothers and school children.

Presenting themselves as patient advocacy groups is highly disingenuous not only to their membership, many of which may have a sincere desire to help a loved one or a family member with mental problems, but to legislators, the press and the American public — for they have consistently lobbied for legislation that benefits the mental health and pharmaceutical industries which fund them, and not patients they claim to represent.

Certainly any organization claiming to be for the rights of patients diagnosed mentally ill would have as their primary goal, full informed consent in the field of mental health — including full and complete disclosure of all drug risks, the right to refuse treatment, the right to know that psychiatric diagnoses are not medical conditions (evident by the fact there is not one confirmatory medical or scientific test). Above all such groups would provide patients with an abundance of information on non-harmful, non- drug, medical solutions and options considering the dangerous and well documented risks of psychiatric drugs by international drug regulatory agencies.

These groups do not.

To put it simply, these groups are not what they appear to be. Yet their influence over legislation, lobbying, drug regulation (or lack thereof), and public relations campaigns is substantial and effects the entire nation. For they claim to be the voice of the “mentally ill.” But are they? Or are they the result of a brilliant marketing/lobbying campaign designed to benefit the Psycho/Pharmaceutical industry that funds them?

Go here to read how all this started!

There are groups that are not funded by pharmaceutical companies, that truly do have the best interests of the consumer/patient and parent as their goal. You can find out more about such organizations here.

Do Something About It

Show a CCHR documentary DVD to all your family, friends, neighbors, and associates.

Psychiatric Drugs and War: A Suicide Mission

CCHR International is pleased to announce the first article in a four-part series by award-winning investigative journalist Kelly Patricia O’Meara, “Psychiatric Drugs and War: A Suicide Mission,” exploring the epidemic of suicides in the military and the correlation to dramatic increases in psychiatric drug prescriptions to treat the emotional scars of battle.

In this first article, O’Meara examines the statistics relating to psychiatric drug use and military suicides, including:

• The 150% increase in military suicides from 2001 to 2009 and the 76 percent increase in psychiatric drug prescriptions over the same time period.

• The Department of Defense admission that nearly one-third of suicides in the military occurred among those who had never seen combat duty.

• The mass prescribing of Seroquel to troops, a powerful antipsychotic drug approved by the FDA for “schizophrenia” and “bipolar disorder,” and how in just the last year, the military wrote more than fifty-four thousand Seroquel prescriptions off-label — for “disorders” not even approved by the FDA.

• The FDA’s Medication Guide for Seroquel which lists “Risk of Suicidal Thoughts or Actions,” as one of Seroquel’s “serious side effects.”

Click HERE to read the article now.