Month: August 2013

Army psychiatrist convicted of murder

Posted on by cchrstl

Army psychiatrist convicted of murder

A military jury on August 23 convicted Maj. Nidal Hasan in the deadly 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood, returning a unanimous verdict of premeditated murder that makes the Army psychiatrist eligible for the death penalty in the shocking assault against American troops at home by one of their own.

Hasan, a Virginia-born Muslim, said he acted to protect Muslim insurgents abroad from American aggression; and that his attack was a jihad against U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Prosecutors never charged Hasan as a terrorist, in spite of the obvious and intentional terrorism of the attack. Hasan leaked documents during the trial to journalists that revealed him telling military mental health workers that he could “still be a martyr” if executed.

Now, let’s notice the really significant part of this drama — Hasan is a PSYCHIATRIST!

Would anyone reading this be surprised to discover that there is a solid link between psychiatry and terrorism?

Terrorism is created; it is not human nature. Terrorists are made, not born. Ultimately, terrorism is the result of madmen bent on destruction, and these madmen are typically the result of psychiatric behavioral control, and psychiatrists are often found to be consumers of their own treatments.

The huge missing “elephant in the room” is the high likelihood that Hasan was medicated with potent brain-altering, violence-causing, psychiatric drugs. These would be drugs that Hasan had easy access to and which he was probably prescribing widely to his traumatized soldier-patients. Psychiatrists are notorious for treating themselves with their own psychiatric drugs.

Some might express surprise that a man whose profession is about caring would turn to violence. “Caring” actually has nothing to do with it. Modern psychiatry is not about caring for, counseling and empowering people; it’s about medicating, controlling and suppressing them.

Dr. Peter Breggin says that, “The most recent data show that soldiers are being snowed under not only with antidepressants and tranquilizers, but increasingly with antipsychotic drugs like Risperdal, Zyprexa, Geodon and Seroquel. To cover up their own therapeutic impotence, psychiatrists chemically suppress our troops and push them back onto the front lines. That’s the kind of poisonous psychiatry that Hasan was practicing in combination with his poisonous ideology.”

Over the last decade an explosion of gratuitous violence has terrorized the world scene. Examination of these destructive phenomena reveals the influence of psychiatric treatment behind virtually all acts of terrorism. From glorifying the blatantly criminal acts of suicide bombers to reducing the hideous acts of a maniacal murderer to psychological or biological bad luck, psychiatrists on both sides of the terrorist conflict share the same twisted perspective on the criminal mind. This perspective protects and denies the dangerousness of the criminal at the expense of honest citizens.

Most terrorist groups today embrace extremist political views and hold racist positions that range from “white supremacism” and anti-Semitism to radical religious fundamentalism and anti-Westernism. Research shows that psychiatry or psychology has influenced and even created such characteristics, spawning racial and political hatred that has resulted in the murder of millions.

Hasan is a domestic terrorist, a traitor, and a madman — much like the rest of the psychiatric profession which is bent on promoting violence in society with harmful, violence-causing drugs.

Citizens groups and government officials should work together to ensure governments first expose, and then work to abolish, psychiatry’s hidden manipulation of society. Please support your local CCHR in this effort.

For more information, click here to download and read the full CCHR report “Chaos and Terror Manufactured by Psychiatry”.

Your Federal Government at Work

Posted on by cchrstl

Your Federal Government at Work

Last June the President hosted the National Conference on Mental Health to talk about how to raise awareness of mental health issues and make it easier for everyone to get the mental health care “they need.”

The President’s Fiscal Year 2014 Budget proposal includes large amounts of taxpayer money helping teachers recognize signs of “mental illness” in their students and referring them to “mental health care;” supporting state-based mental health programs aimed young people ages 16-to-25; and training 5,000 additional mental health professionals with an emphasis on treating these students and young adults.

The goal is to have more Americans seek mental health treatment, and make sure that their insurance pays for it.

The Affordable Care Act is a major player in this big brother view of mental heath care, expanding mental health benefits and federal insurance parity protections for more than 60 million Americans. There are 314 million Americans, so this expansion is aimed at roughly 20% of the entire U.S. population. The Affordable Care Act requires new health plans to cover depression screenings for adults and behavioral assessments for children, and soon insurance companies will no longer be able to deny health care coverage to anyone because of a pre-existing mental health condition.

Are you looking forward to this? Are you not excited about the government guaranteeing “treatment” for all the fraudulent mental disorders in the new DSM-5? Get ready to sign up, because the Whitehouse knows what’s good for you!

The only thing is, they are not talking about the rampant fraud and abuse in the mental health care industry, and the very real damage that psychiatric drugs and treatments cause. They are not funding any efforts to curb the fraud and abuse. They are certainly not suggesting that psychiatry itself is a fraudulent and abusive practice.

What can you do about it? As a non-political organization, we are not suggesting political action. But we are suggesting that you Find Out and Fight Back in a manner consistent with your own views in the matter. Occasionally we might make some particular suggestions about what you can do.

Speaking of which, here are some suggestions.

FIND OUT

Review the material on the various CCHR websites and in the various CCHR publications and documentaries. You can start here: www.CCHRSTL.org.

If you have not seen any of the CCHR documentaries, watch them now. You can request a free information kit here.

Satisfy yourself that psychiatry and the current mental health care industry in America does not have your best interests at heart.

Sure, people can have mental trauma, and they need effective care. However, psychiatry is harmful junk science; your family and friends deserve better. Find out about the alternatives to harmful psychiatric treatments.

Ask yourself how many people you know who are taking psychiatric drugs, and if you really think this is OK.

FIGHT BACK

Support CCHR by becoming a member of CCHR St. Louis and request a DVD documentary. Show the documentary to your family, friends and associates; to your school groups and church groups; to your legislators; to your attorney and your insurance provider. You get the idea. Tell us what you did.

Give a CCHR documentary or booklet to someone.

Contact your local, state and federal officials, and let them know what you think about the fraud and abuse in the mental health industry. Write Letters to the Editor of your local news media.

Forward this newsletter to everyone you know and recommend they subscribe.

Volunteer some time to help CCHR fight back. Donate some funds to help CCHR fight back.

Execute a Living Will — a Letter of Protection Against Unwanted Psychiatric Incarceration and/or Treatment.

Report all instances of complaints and adverse psychotropic drug reactions to your national drug regulatory agency. In the U.S. this is at www.fda.gov/medwatch.

There are many other ways to help. The alternative may be a United States where everyone is taking psychiatric drugs on government orders.

Amanda Bynes case and its relevance to Missouri

Posted on by cchrstl

Amanda Bynes case and its relevance to Missouri

Former child star Amanda Bynes was committed to a psychiatric facility and reportedly is being treated for mental symptoms labeled as schizophrenia. According to California law, doctors can extend her commitment if she is “gravely disabled as a result of a mental disorder.”

This case is relevant for Missouri because of the legal standard used to commit her, that she was “gravely disabled.” That is not currently allowed in Missouri, but there was legislation introduced in the last session that would have allowed that, and it will likely be introduced again in the next legislative session.

Missouri House Bill 929 purportedly would help parents deal with their adult children who go off the rails before it gets to the point of physical harm — just like Amanda Bynes’ parents are trying to do. She is literally the “poster child” for this type of legislation and will help fertilize the ground for passage next year unless we write our Missouri legislators and let them know what we think about involuntary, or civil, commitment.

The bill changes the standards for determining when a person is in need of mental health detention and evaluation. The person must be held in a psychiatric facility if mentally ill and “gravely disabled” which is defined as “a condition in which a person, as a result of mental illness or mental disorder, lacks judgment in the management of his or her resources and in the conduct of his or her social relations to the extent that his or her health or safety is significantly endangered and he or she lacks the capacity to understand that this is so.”

Statutory checks on the abuse of civil commitment laws are scarce, readily sidestepped and widely ignored. Yet the minds and memories of those subjected to this capriciousness have frequently been destroyed after involuntary imprisonment in psychiatric facilities across the nation — be it a small clinic, private hospital or a government–run institution. And commitment laws have been used for every wrong reason: financial, sexual, business advantage, inheritance, political suppression, and even to maintain governmental secrecy.

When any psychiatrist has full legal power to cause your involuntary physical detention by force (kidnapping), subject you to physical pain and mental stress (torture), leave you permanently mentally damaged (cruel and unusual punishment), with or without proving to your peers that you are a danger to yourself or have committed a crime (due process of law, trial by jury) then, by definition, a totalitarian state exists.

Because of their ubiquity and far–reaching powers, involuntary commitment laws lay a truly concrete foundation for totalitarianism. And they are not, it must be stressed, a threat of what might be, but a present danger — representing America’s gaping breach in the otherwise admirable wall of individual Constitutional rights.

With health care eating up vast amounts of our national budget, the first spending cut to make is the cost of “treating” people who prefer not to be mentally treated. Involuntary commitment laws hike federal, state, county, city and private health care costs under the strange circumstance of a patient–recipient who cannot say no.

Involuntary commitment creates an astonishing debt load on our health care system. Given a very conservative daily cost of $940 for hospitalization and treatment, each involuntary commitment costs around $16,700. With up to 1.5 million people committed yearly, and using the conservative individual figure of $16,700, the annual health care drain is almost $25 billion! And this is paying for a service that most would refuse if given the chance.

The Missouri Revised Statutes (RSMo) Chapter 632 Section 300, Chapter 660 Section 290, and Chapter 632 Section 305 specify the conditions under which, and by whom, someone can be forcibly incarcerated in a mental health facility.

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.

Download and read the full CCHR report “Involuntary Psychiatric Commitment – A Crack In The Door Of Constitutional Freedoms“. Forward this newsletter to your family, friends and associates, and recommend that they subscribe.

Salem Missouri, psychiatric hotbed

Posted on by cchrstl

Salem Missouri, psychiatric hotbed

The Salem Missouri News reported June 25 that staff at a Department of Mental Health (DMH) contractor, Enrichment Services Inc. (ESI) located in Salem (125 miles southwest of St. Louis,) took developmentally disabled consumers to adult establishments for sex entertainment and gambling.

While the DMH insisted that no patient abuse occurred, they did admit that this was inappropriate behavior and that if such trips continued the provider’s contract would be cancelled.

So, another mental health care provider gets away with inappropriate behavior. No discipline, just a warning. “The legal standard for abuse or neglect could not be met,” they said, while at the same time bemoaning the fact that taxpayer dollars were used for the offense.

Meanwhile, everyone is so pleased that the DMH took such a strong stand against inappropriate behavior with their mental health care consumers. (That was sarcasm; sometimes my sarcasm if not stated as such does not completely come through in an email.)

Such treatment of those under the care of the Department of Mental Health is never help; it is a betrayal in the guise of help, and an all-too-frequent occurrence in the mental health industry. Psychiatrists and psychologists cannot be allowed to continue to determine the standards of conduct in any society.

Patients, their families and guardians, should be provided written information on their caretakers’ professional standards and informed that any behavior outside those standards is inappropriate and subject to discipline; and that “patient consent” is not a defense. Any patient, or their family or guardian, who is subjected to such inappropriate behavior should file a complaint with the Missouri Office of Constituent Services at 800-364-9687 or email constituentsvcs@dmh.mo.gov with a copy to the local police department.

If you are so moved, please express your concern to ESI, the Dent County Developmental Disabilities Board, the Missouri Association of County Developmental Disabilities Services, the Missouri Department of Mental Health, and the Salem News.

[All emails here for convenience: constituentsvcs@dmh.mo.gov; enrichmentservices@embarqmail.com; sb40board@embarqmail.com; leswagner@macdds.org; Keith.Schafer@dmh.mo.gov; salemnews@thesalemnewsonline.com]

Click here for more information about psychiatric sexual misconduct.

Psychiatric Morphology

Posted on by cchrstl

Psychiatric Morphology

Morphology: the study of the form and structure of something (from Greek morphe, form.)

We have been seeing a recent spate of media about the jam the psycho-pharmaceutical industry has placed itself in, and how that came to be. Many news and magazine articles, radio and TV programs are discussing the history and morphology of psychiatry, the ridiculous fraudulent nature of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), and the epidemic of harmful and addictive psychiatric drug use across this nation and the world.

This is not limited to the United States. Much of the rest of the world uses the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD) in the same manner as the U.S. uses the DSM. ICD has the same kind of silly characterizations for mental distress as the DSM, such as “mental disorders” related to one’s difficulty reading, spelling, doing arithmetic; and other categories that the rest of us just know as stress such as disaster, war and other hostilities; smoking, drinking, “lack of physical exercise,” “inappropriate diet,” “lack of relaxation or leisure;” and indeed even for other peoples’ problems such as a “family history of mental and behavioural disorders.” Yes, one can be labeled with a mental disorder because someone else in one’s family was so labeled; we call this the eugenics of psychiatry.

An August 2nd article by Will Self in the United Kingdom’s Guardian News, “Psychiatrists: the drug pushers,” is an example of the recurrent backlash against psychiatric fraud and abuse. Here are a few choice quotes:

“What do psychiatrists have to offer … beyond their capacity to legally administer psychoactive drugs, and in some cases forcibly confine those they deem to be mentally ill?”

“… only psychiatry deals in mandatory social care and legal sanction.”

“Yet while the regime under which those diagnosed with mental pathologies has changed immensely in the last half-century, the prognosis remains no better. Some say that it is manifestly worse.”

This is what we would like to address in our morphology of psychiatry: the fact that, even with the many changes the psychiatric industry trumpets over the last fifty or hundred years, the bottom line is that psychiatry’s reliance on brutality and coercion has not changed since the moment it was born.

Without any ability to cure, psychiatrists have always relied on intimidation, force and fear to control those they claim to help. Because of its history of cruel and unworkable treatments, psychiatry is the ugly stepchild of medicine, and must enforce its treatments on the helpless in order to exist at all.

The pseudoscientific ideology of eugenics, the theory that human beings could be selectively bred to encourage desirable traits and weed out the undesirable, was spread by psychiatrists as blatant racism that justifies shoddy treatment of poor people and ethnic minorities. Between 11 and 17 million people were murdered during the Holocaust, all judged eugenically “inferior” and marked for death. And psychiatrists designed the entire machinery and, in some cases, ran it.

The psychiatric ideology of eugenics embraced by Nazi psychiatrists was never abolished after the end of Hitler’s Third Reich, but has continued to present day, and is evident in the ICD’s classification for “family history of mental and behavioural disorders.” For the proof, watch the CCHR documentary, “The Age of Fear – Psychiatry’s Reign of Terror,” and show it to your family, friends and associates.

Common Core Controversy Continued

Posted on by cchrstl

Common Core Controversy Continued

Opposition to the Common Core State Standards is growing

Four states — Texas, Virginia, Alaska, and Nebraska — have not adopted the Common Core State Standards for public school curricula and testing. Minnesota chose to adopt only the English standards and declined the Mathematics standards.

Nine states which had previously adopted the Standards — Missouri, Kansas, Michigan, Georgia, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Alabama, South Carolina, Utah — are having second thoughts about it in one form or another. For example, in Missouri:

HB 616 “Prohibits the State Board of Education from adopting and implementing the standards for public schools developed by the Common Core Standards Initiative” was introduced by Representative Kurt Bahr (R-102) although it did not come to a vote during the legislative session just ended.
SB 210 “Requires the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to hold public meetings in each congressional district on the Common Core State Standards” was introduced by Senator John Lamping (R-24) although it did not come to a final vote during the legislative session just ended.

In May, the Texas House of Representatives voted 140-2 to pass language prohibiting Texas from participating in the standards. Texas, however, has never adopted the standards and likely will not.

One flaw of Common Core seems to be around the assessment tests, and the maxim that “what gets tested gets taught.”

Critics also say that the whole Common Core effort is a backdoor way of establishing a national school curriculum, taking educational decisions away from the states. Amendment X to the Constitution of the United States, states that, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” This is taken to mean, in this context, that a national educational curriculum mandate is in violation of the Constitution. Of course, proponents of Common Core point out that these Standards are developed and run by the states, not by the federal government. On the other hand, opponents of Common Core consider it as an end-run around having a federally mandated curriculum; in other words, while it is not officially a federal mandate, there are most certainly federal incentives (read “federal dollars”) for those states who implement it.

Without going any further into the pros and cons of the Common Core Standards themselves, we do want to watch out, however, for the first step down a fast slide toward the federal government telling teachers what should go on in their classrooms, and the conversion of schools and classrooms into the mental health clinics that the White House seems to desperately desire.

The President’s Fiscal Year 2014 Budget includes $205 million for programs to help identify children’s mental health concerns, improve access to mental health services and “support safer school environments,” including $55 million for Project AWARE (Advancing Wellness and Resilience in Education) to provide Mental Health “First Aid” training in schools and communities and to help school districts and their communities work together to ensure that students with mental health issues are referred to the services they need; $50 million to train 5,000 new mental health professionals to serve students and young adults, including social workers, counselors, psychologists, and other mental health professionals; and $25 million for Healthy Transitions, a new competitive grant to help support transitioning youth (ages 16-25) and their families access and navigate behavioral health treatment systems.

The federal government is even now working out how existing group health plans that offer mental health services must cover them at parity under the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008. In addition, the Affordable Care Act requires all new small group and individual plans to cover mental health.

For more information about the dangers of mandated mental health insurance coverage, download and read the CCHR report “The Vital Case Against Mandated Mental Health Parity.”

For more information about harmful psychiatric influences in education, download the CCHR report “Harming Youth — Psychiatry Destroys Young Minds — Report and recommendations on harmful mental health  assessments, evaluations, and programs within our schools.”


As a result of psychiatric and psychological intervention in schools, harmful behaviorist programs and psychotropic (mind-altering) drugs now decimate our schools. These programs have trampled on the rights and roles of parents and have provided society with rising crime, drug abuse and suicide rates.

Contact your local, state and federal representatives and let them know what you think about turning our schools into mental health clinics and turning our children into mental health patients.

Forward this newsletter to your family, friends and associates and recommend that they subscribe.