Posts Tagged ‘Abuse’

CCHR Notifies Electroshock Hospitals On The Failure To Inform Patients Of Risks

Monday, November 1st, 2021

Watchdog says electroshock must be banned, but until this occurs, hospitals are being notified that omitting patient information of how electroshock treatment causes brain-damage and memory loss may constitute consumer fraud.

Until ECT is banned, CCHR intends to investigate and monitor precisely what information is provided to potential ECT patients and their families by electroshock-hospitals, so that such information may be available to regulatory entities and legal counsel for the those harmed by this practice.

CCHR is writing to the more than 400 psychiatric facilities in the U.S. delivering ECT alerting them to the recognized risks that patients must be informed of to protect them and to avoid consumer fraud action being taken against the hospital and psychiatrists administering ECT. As part of a worldwide movement that wants electroshock permanently banned, until this occurs, every known risk of the damaging practice must be disclosed along with all safer, non-physically invasive alternatives that are available.

CCHR’s review of hospital websites offering ECT and electroshock informed consent forms, shows grossly inadequate information, which is misleading to patients. At a time when mental health is so prevalent in the news, better information must be disclosed until this brain-damaging procedure is banned.

Example: Approximately 150,000 people get ECT every year in the US, with 2,000 shock treatments being done every year by Washington University in St. Louis psychiatrists at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, who still claim that this abusive treatment is safe and effective in spite of abundant evidence to the contrary. When psychiatrists say ECT is “effective”, they mean the patient feels less depressed; of course, the patient doesn’t feel much of anything anymore, good or bad. In fact, what ECT really does is similar to smacking your thumb with a hammer, making it seem that no other problem is important. (Of course, they give you a general anesthetic to suppress the pain. The body still feels it; shocking, isn’t it?)

So why do they still perform ECT? Because they charge up to $2500 per session; and if you are on Medicare you are a prime candidate for this barbaric “treatment.”

The bottom line is that electroshock should be banned and because, arguably, its use constitutes assault and battery — certainly from a patient’s perspective. It does not belong in any mental health system.

Take Action

ECT is a brutal practice and people should sign CCHR’s online petition supporting a ban.

Epes Tut Zikh (Something Is Happening)

Monday, September 20th, 2021

The Yiddish idiom “epes tut zikh” (????? ??? ???) loosely translates to “something is happening”. It expresses the idea that one does not know the reason for whatever is happening. For example, being stuck in traffic without knowing why is “epes tut zikh.”

Things are happening today on many fronts with no discernible reasons to explain exactly why.

Now, the physical Universe in which we live is unthinking, and there are no “reasons” for things that happen solely in the physical Universe, in the sense that the Universe has “thought” about it with some purpose.

However, living beings do think and have purposes, and so can have (but do not have to have) a reason for doing something.

When we look around we see any number of events and situations with no clearly discernible reasons. If there are reasons, they might be considered hidden. Or in many cases, there are so many possible reasons that no one can agree on them, provoking constant and debilitating argumentation.

If one actually knew all the true reasons for some unwanted event or situation, it could theoretically be terminatedly handled. Whenever such an event or situation occurs which persists and resists being handled, the true reasons are generally widely unknown or unacknowledged; and speculation, gossip, and arguments predominate.

Examples:

Antisemitism
Random senseless violence
School shootings
Motiveless and unpredictable suicide
Racism
War
Terrorism
Religious intolerance
Sexual discrimination
Pandemic outbreak

It is to the advantage of certain professions to let, or even encourage, this kind of negative situation to persist. This is called “the dangerous environment,” in which it is thought that one’s livelihood would be compromised or endangered if the situation were to be totally handled.

This includes professions which require a dangerous environment for their continued existence, because they make their living off of it — such as the politician, the policeman, the newspaperman, the insurance salesman, the undertaker, the terrorist, the psychiatrist, and others.

Why Does psychiatry Persist?

Since 1969 CCHR has documented and exposed the failures, fraud and abuse of psychiatry; yet psychiatry persists in its relentless quest to harm as many people as it can.

“So, why is the truth of psychiatry’s consistent record of getting it wrong and doing damage not setting society free to toss psychiatry on the garbage heap of history?”
[10 Reasons Why Psychiatry Lives On, by Bruce Levine, PhD]

“How is it that governments keep investing billions of dollars into psychiatry—known within the mental health system as a “non-science”—to improve conditions it admits it cannot cure?”
[“Why Psychiatry Sees Itself As A Dying Industry“]

These references highlight many of the hidden reasons psychiatry continues its fraudulent and abusive practices. Underlying these is a common human failing — the inability to confront evil.

Evil takes a bit of confronting. One must start with observation and education. The information is there; the reasons are there; we’ve pointed you to it. Find Out! Fight Back!

Psychiatry does not commit human rights abuse. It is a human rights abuse.
Psychiatry does not commit human rights abuse. It is a human rights abuse.

Putting Profit Above Children’s Lives

Monday, August 30th, 2021

The child mental health industry is a system that puts profit above children’s lives, preying on unsuspecting parents and taking advantage of disadvantaged children, such as those covered under Medicaid (state and federal health coverage for lower income families and those with disabilities). It is rife with abuse, yet this hugely profitable industry is rarely held to account for its rampant abuse of our most vulnerable—children.

It is an industry which milks the foster care system for huge profit, where children are four times more likely to be given mind-altering psychotropic drugs than non-foster care children, and much more likely to be prescribed cocktails of these drugs.

It is an industry that electroshocks children including babies, using state funds for lower income families (Medicaid).

It is a business masquerading as healthcare which sells parents and legislators on the idea of helping troubled children. Yet this help is more often simply incarcerating children in behavioral schools or psychiatric wards, where treatment consists of psychiatric drug cocktails, degradation, solitary confinement, and brutal restraint procedures which have killed children. And all of this is done under the guise of helping children.

The abuse is not limited to one chain of psychiatric facilities or one mode of psychiatric behavioral “treatment.” This abuse in the child mental health industry is systemic—yet unknown to most of the public.

For example: Information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) reveals that 19 states are currently administering electroshock to children, with 7 of those states electroshocking children aged 0-5 years old. These are all children being electroshocked while psychiatrists and facilities bill Medicaid for their “treatment.”

Yet another example — Only one month after the world witnessed the tragic death of George Floyd, unable to breathe as he was physically restrained and held to the ground, 16-year-old Cornelius Frederick, an African American, was physically restrained at Sequel Youth & Family Services’ facility in Michigan, and also cried out, “I can’t breathe!” before passing out. Thirty hours later, on May 1, 2020, he was dead. Cornelius had gone into cardiac arrest while being restrained by Lakeside Academy staff, a residential psychiatric facility that treated foster care and other kids with behavioral issues. A witness to Cornelius’s restraint said, “[T]his kid threw a sandwich. He was being unruly and they couldn’t control him. So, four guys…the size of rugby players tackled him.”

Cornelius is not alone; countless children have suffocated and died after being subjected to deadly restraints within these psychiatric facilities and behavioral treatment centers.

This is not healthcare. This is child abuse. And it is just the tip of the iceberg.

Please help us to support the cause and end the abuse of children in the psychiatric industry. We are making incredible progress, as many of the psychiatric facilities abusing these children are now under investigation. And many state legislators want to put an end to this abuse. There is more to be done, and so we ask you to continue to support our Fight For Kids campaign. Please support the cause and also watch our latest video here.

For more information, visit our Child Psychiatric Treatment page here.

Childhood Is Not A Mental Disorder

Britney Spears’ Conservatorship Challenge

Monday, August 9th, 2021

[Condensed from Jan Eastgate, President, CCHR International]

The pop icon’s traumatic story of being held captive by a punitive guardianship law, with abusive psychiatric evaluations and forced mood-altering drugs, has prompted legislators to act. But proposed laws, while applaudable, fall short on needed protections.

Conservatorships, which place guardians over the control of a person’s life when deemed incompetent, are often based on a subjective psychiatric evaluation. As such, while it is very easy for someone to be placed under a conservatorship order because of a psychiatric diagnosis, it’s very hard to get out of one. The diagnosis is stigmatizing and is hard to disprove because of its subjectivity. It can also expand over the years, especially where there may be deterioration in the individual from powerful psychotropic drugs prescribed to them.

The late professor of psychiatry and co-founder of Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) Dr. Thomas Szasz, warned against state intervention that allows psychiatry to circumvent individual and constitutional rights. He called it “The Therapeutic State,” where the state gives psychiatry the power to be an institution of social control. “When I use the term therapeutic state, I use it ironically, it’s therapeutic for the people who are doing the locking up, who are doing the therapy, it’s not therapeutic for the victims, for the patients,” Szasz said. “The therapeutic state seeks to remedy personal and social problems defined as diseases; its beneficiaries are often ‘helped’ against their will; it is a totalitarian state, governed by the rule of therapeutic discretion.”

CCHR asks legislators to review the World Health Organization’s recent guideline for protections of people with mental health disabilities. WHO recommends countries “repeal guardianship and other substitute decision-making legislation and replace it with laws that recognize legal capacity and promote supported decision-making, including the use of advance plans [living wills] and best interpretation of will and preference.”

In Britney’s case, the conservatorship was put into place in 2008, while she struggled with her mental health, and gave her father broad control over her life and finances. Britney obtained a court order recently to reinforce her inherent right to obtain the legal counsel of her choice. Her new attorney must petition the court to have the current conservatorship removed.

Britney pleaded that the conservatorship over her affairs has made her feel “demoralized and enslaved.” She has been subjected to numerous psychiatric evaluations and medications, stating: “I want to end the conservatorship without being evaluated,” she said. The system in place is “abusive,” Britney said in court, accusing her conservators of forcing her to take mood-stabilizing drugs and perform against her will.

Britney also told the court that her previous psychiatrist (who died in 2019) was abusive in his treatment of her. She alleged that she was subjected to lengthy psychological evaluations, forced into a $60,000-a-month inpatient facility and told that she wouldn’t be able to see her children if she failed to comply. “To be totally honest with you, when [the doctor] passed away, I got on my knees and thanked God,” she said. She was then forced to see a therapist three days a week. Paparazzi humiliated her by taking photos of her crying after the emotional sessions. She asked the judge last month to be allowed to be part of her own care plan.

NBC News reported that allegations of abusive psychiatrists in conservatorships are not uncommon. Doctors are asked to file capacity declarations with the court which form about 75 percent of how judges base their decisions to keep someone under court-ordered guardianship.

The WHO’s “Guidance on community mental health services: Promoting person-centered and rights-based approaches” released in June 2021, is very clear about abuse in the mental health system: “Many people with mental health conditions and psychosocial disabilities are denied the right to exercise their legal capacity; that is, the right to make decisions for oneself and to have those decisions respected by others. Based on stigmatizing assumptions about their status – that their decisions are unreasonable or bring negative consequences, or that their decision-making skills are deficient, or that they cannot understand and make decisions for themselves or communicate their will and preferences – it has become acceptable in services in countries throughout the world, for others to step in and make decisions for people with mental health conditions and psychosocial disabilities. In many countries, this is implemented through schemes like guardianship, supervision and surrogacy, and is legitimized by laws and practices.”

As an organization that has exposed abuses in the mental health industry for more than fifty years, CCHR has definitely come across unscrupulous guardians that have been able to secure the help of psychiatrists to maintain control over an individual, especially their finances. The diagnostic aspect of conservatorship needs closer scrutiny.

State laws need to ensure that someone who is subject to a psychiatric evaluation also has freedom of choice and the right to obtain a second medical—as opposed to a psychiatric—opinion. Contact your state legislators and express your viewpoint about this.

The WHO guidelines are clear about protecting individual rights to choose. It also recommends people sign a Living Will to express their treatment and guardianship preferences should their liberty be threatened by competency issues.

Something is Rotten in Canton

Monday, July 19th, 2021

Let’s Electroshock Children Who Misbehave

In March of 2020 the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) banned the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center in Canton, Massachusetts from using electric shock devices on their autistic and other mentally troubled children. In July of 2021 a federal appeals court removed the ban. The school is once again electro shocking about 60 students a day.

The school administers electric skin shocks in a form of “aversion therapy” for aggressive or self-injurious behavior. School staff trigger a shock to a child by using a remote control that zaps children with electric current when they misbehave. The school calls this a “medical device.” Since 1987 a state court must determine that such forced treatment is appropriate.

This electrical stimulation device delivers a powerful and painful electric shock to the wearer’s skin in an effort to punish. This school is the only facility in the country that uses coercive electric shock therapy to “treat” individuals who severely self-injure or are aggressive.

The FDA finally recognized in March 2020 (after 20 years) that these devices “present substantial psychological and physical risks and, in fact, can worsen underlying symptoms—while leading to heightened anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.”

Unfortunately, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia overturned the FDA ban on July 6, 2021, stating that the ban was a regulation of the practice of medicine, which is outside the FDA’s area of authority.

The History of Abuse

In April 2016, the FDA first proposed banning electrical stimulation devices for self-injurious or aggressive behavior.

In 2018, the media reported that the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center would be allowed to continue administering electric shocks to its special needs students after a judge ruled the procedure conformed to the “accepted standard of care,” in spite of the practice being condemned by disability rights groups and the ACLU.

On December 3, 2018, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of The Organization of American States published a Precautionary Measure calling for the school to immediately cease electroshocking special needs children as a disciplinary measure.

In March 2020 the FDA finally determined that the devices presented a substantial and unreasonable risk to self-injurious and aggressive patients, justifying banning the devices for that purpose.

The Appeals Court

The appeals court examined the question, “Does the FDA have legal authority to ban an otherwise legal device from a particular use?”

The court concluded that current law prohibits the FDA from regulating the practice of medicine, and therefore it vacated the FDA’s rule banning electrical stimulation devices for self-injurious and aggressive behavior. There was one dissenting opinion; the Chief Judge found in favor of the FDA. [Read the full court opinion here.]

Of course, the lie in the argument is that electro shocking children is “practicing medicine.” In fact it is torture, not medicine.

The Case Against Torture

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has remarked that Electro Convulsive Treatment (ECT) amounts to torture. The World Health Organization (WHO) has also stated that there are no indications for the use of ECT on minors. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) calls for a ban on “forced treatment.”

Granted that ECT is more severe than electric skin shocks, just have someone force you to stick your finger into an electric wall socket and tell us that this is not torture.

Disguising social control as medical treatment is a deceit which conceals an abuse.” This is a de facto abuse of power, as it seeks to limit and control the individual instead of helping the individual to get better and improve their conditions in life.

In the United Nations July 24, 2018 Annual Report of the High Commissioner “Mental health and human rights,” it states, “States should ensure that all health care and services, including all mental health care and services, are based on the free and informed consent of the individual concerned, and that legal provisions and policies permitting the use of coercion and forced interventions, including involuntary hospitalization and institutionalization, the use of restraints, psychosurgery, forced medication, and other forced measures aimed at correcting or fixing an actual or perceived impairment, including those allowing for consent or authorization by a third party, are repealed. States should reframe and recognize these practices as constituting torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and as amounting to discrimination against users of mental health services, persons with mental health conditions and persons with psychosocial disabilities.”

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, formally adopted on December 10, 1948 states, “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

CCHR’s own Mental Health Declaration of Human Rights, written in 1969, states these rights, among others:
“The right to refuse any treatment the patient considers harmful.”
“No person shall be given psychiatric or psychological treatment against his or her will.”

Sign the petition to ban electroshock here.

A Truly Great Library Contains Something To Offend Everyone

Monday, May 3rd, 2021

“He who takes offense when offense was not intended is a fool, yet he who takes offense when offense is intended is an even greater fool for he has succumbed to the will of his adversary.” –Brigham Young

Offense and Offend, two related words of wide contemporary usage. Here are a few different meanings (we take wide liberties with grammar):

– something that outrages
– the act of displeasing or affronting
– the state of being insulted or morally outraged
– to transgress
– to violate a law or rule
– to cause difficulty, discomfort, or injury
– to cause dislike, anger, or vexation

[Ultimately from Latin offendere “to strike against, displease” from of- “on account of” + -fendere “to hit”.]

We mention these words because we notice a large amount of social commentary and speculation about those taking or giving offense.

In particular, we notice an apparent spike in instances where someone has taken offense at another, or at another’s opinion, or at least remarking on such; whether such offense was intended or not.

We’ve noticed this tendency more and more frequently over the last few years, and wondered what possible relation this could have with psychiatric and psychological infiltration into society.

We’re not the only ones who have noticed this phenomenon. Psychology Today published various articles about it, although we don’t think they accurately attributed its cause.

Sensitivity Training Destroys Personal Responsibility

Psychiatry’s deliberate infiltration of religion and pastoral counseling provides some clues. Psychiatrists first sought to replace religion with their “soulless science” in the late 1800’s. In 1940, psychiatry openly declared its anti-religion plans when British psychiatrist John Rawling Rees, a co–founder of the World Federation for Mental Health (WFMH), spoke of psychiatry infiltrating the Church.

Another co–founder of the WFMH, Canadian psychiatrist G. Brock Chisholm, reinforced this master plan in 1945 when he spoke about freeing the race from crippling religious values.

As a result of psychiatry’s subversive plan for religion, the concepts of good and bad behavior, right and wrong conduct and personal responsibility have taken such a beating that people today have few or no guidelines for checking, judging or directing their behavior. The consequences have been devastating for both society and religion.

Sensitivity Training developed by psychologists in the 1950’s spread rapidly to religious leaders and churches, invalidating personal responsibility in favor of lowered moral standards, leaving a confused populace open to being morally outraged, i.e. offended, by nearly anything.

Since 1967, morals have been usurped through the education system with the implementation of “Values Clarification.” Part of the Outcome-Based Education (OBE) package of techniques, “Values Clarification” emerged from Germany and was introduced into the U.S. classroom under various names, including Sensitivity Training, Self-Esteem training, Anger Management and Conflict Resolution, to name a few. None are any more than mental techniques designed to modify behavior – or more bluntly, alter beliefs and lower personal responsibility.

Psychiatric Folly

If a person acts in ways that annoy, upset or offend psychiatrists, they may be diagnosed as mentally ill and treated against their will.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) has an entry called “Intermittent explosive disorder”, which means repeated, sudden episodes of impulsive, aggressive, violent behavior or angry verbal outbursts which are out of proportion to the situation.

In other words, psychiatrists can call you mentally ill and prescribe harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs if you give or take offense. This should act as a warning not to call your psychiatrist names.

Then again, some of these drugs have side effects which look to an outsider as if the person does have such a disorder. Aggressive or hostile behavior is a side effect of psychostimulants, newer antidepressants, antipsychotics, and anti-anxiety drugs. Of course, if you experience such side effects, you can also be diagnosed with the mental disorder “Other adverse effect of medication”, so psychiatrists can label you mentally ill whether you are taking their drugs or not.

If you know of any psychiatrist or psychologist who has committed a legal offense, a sexual offense, financial irregularity, malpractice, fraud or any other crime, report this to the police and to CCHR.

What’s Wrong with U.S. Healthcare

Monday, April 19th, 2021

Reference: “What’s Wrong with U.S. Healthcare and how to Fix it: A Systematic Approach to Improved Healthcare at Lower Cost”
by Les Ruthven, Ph.D.
November 16, 2020
Available on Amazon

“Unfortunately one must be especially skeptical of all pharmaceutical industry sponsored health research for drugs and also for many medical devises, the latter especially mental health problems.”

Dr. Ruthven is a psychologist specializing in clinical neuropsychology and behavioral health management. He believes that a better quality of healthcare occurs when patients have information they can apply to resolving their own health problems. Much of this book is an examination of standard of care psychiatric practices that do not appear to meet necessary scientific standards of proof.

He says, “I can think of no better way to achieve affordable healthcare than by insisting that a particular drug or therapy is only reimbursable if the treatment has been proven to be substantially effective (and safe) by sound research and not just because practitioners believe the treatment is effective or that the treatment is FDA approved.”

Of course, CCHR has been documenting the facts about psychiatry, psychiatric drugs and other harmful psychiatric treatments for over 50 years, and can state with certainty that:

1. psychiatric “disorders” are not medical diseases;
2. psychiatrists deal exclusively with mental “disorders,” not proven diseases;
3. psychiatry has never established the cause of any “mental disorders”;
4. the theory that mental disorders derive from a “chemical imbalance” in the brain is unproven opinion, not fact;
5. the brain is not the real cause of life’s problems.

CCHR’s work will only be complete when psychiatry’s fraudulent practices are eliminated and it is held accountable for its harmful treatments and human rights violations.

Find out more here: http://www.CCHRSTL.org/

http://www.cchrstl.org/

Great Circle Child Abuse in Missouri

Monday, February 22nd, 2021

Great Circle, the largest provider of residential psychiatric treatment for juveniles (mainly in foster care) in Missouri, announced February 15 2021 that it will shut down its residential treatment program in Webster Groves, a suburb of St. Louis.

The FBI raided them on February 2, 2021 due to alleged child abuse. The Missouri Department of Social Services had suspended placements there on January 22, 2021. Webster Groves police arrested three of their employees on suspicion of child abuse. The nonprofit’s former CEO, Vincent Hillyer, was charged with child abuse in 2019.

Great Circle has 12 other residential facilities in Missouri for juvenile psychiatric treatment which so far remain open, although the FBI raid included their facility near St. James, Missouri.

The psychiatric abuse of foster children is a growing concern, especially the use of harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs as a restraint mechanism.

A previous lawsuit against the Missouri Department of Social Services claimed that children in Missouri foster care are at increased risk of being improperly or unnecessarily administered psychotropic drugs, leaving the children vulnerable to various serious adverse effects, including hallucinations, self-harm and suicidal thoughts.

Roughly 13,000 children are in Missouri’s foster care system. More than 30% of them are prescribed these harmful drugs, and 20% are taking two or more drugs at the same time. Medicaid pays for a majority of the healthcare services that children in foster care receive, including psychotropic drugs.

Most psychotropic drugs have not been FDA approved to treat children, who are at great risk of serious harm from these drugs because the drugs play Russian Roulette with neurotransmitters in the brain.

Contact your State legislators and let them know what you think about this.

[UPDATE 3/3/2021] Four additional employees of Great Circle are now charged with abusing residents, including two children with autism. 

[UPDATE 3/31/2021] A Missouri Department of Social Services audit of Medicaid claims for services paid through the state to Great Circle identified $1,992,157 in “improper billing.”

Psychiatrists: An Invasive Alien Species?

Monday, November 23rd, 2020

Reference:
United Nations Promoting Sustainable Development
Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 25 September 2015
Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

Sustainable: Of, relating to, or being a method or lifestyle for using resources so that the resources can be maintained and continued, and are not depleted or permanently damaged.

[from Old French sustenir (French: soutenir), from Latin sustineo, sustinere, from sub– (under) + teneo (hold, uphold, possess, guard, maintain)]

The U.N. Sustainable Development Goals

The 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and their 169 associated targets adopted in 2015 and accepted by all Member States seek to realize the human rights of all and balance economic, social and environmental factors towards peace and prosperity for all.

To this end we examine some of the existing factors which block or inhibit the realization of these goals, and which must be eliminated so that the goals can be achieved in practice.

SDG 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and
reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.

Target 15.8: By 2020, introduce measures to prevent the introduction and significantly reduce the impact of invasive alien species on land and water ecosystems and control or eradicate the priority species.

How Psychiatry Obstructs Target 15.8

While calling psychiatrists an invasive alien species may be facetious, it highlights the abhorrent characteristics of the psychiatric industry.

The role of a true scientist is to make a better world for all men and women. Psychiatry claims it is a science, yet its actions clearly indicate otherwise.

Psychiatry, from its outset, has had two main goals: the degradation and dominance of Man, and the harvesting of government billions.

Psychiatry breaks the most basic laws of humanity. Psychiatry itself is an abuse of human rights.

— Psychiatry promotes easy-seizure involuntary commitment laws, clearly an affront to human rights.

— Psychiatrists developed the racial purity ideology used by Hitler which lead to the Nazi euthanasia program, and they ran the Nazi concentration camps.

— Psychiatrists around the world have used incarceration of patients for political reasons, to suppress the rights of political dissidents.

— Psychiatric mind-altering drugs are used to create terrorists.

Psychiatric fraud is rampant. The United States loses up to $40 billion annually due to fraudulent practices in the mental health industry.

— Between 10% and 25% of mental health practitioners sexually abuse their patients. To cover up their crime, psychiatrists have used drugs or electroshock in an effort to eliminate the patient’s memory of the rape.

There is more. CCHR has been documenting psychiatry’s human rights abuses since 1969. Psychiatry might as well be an invasive alien species, since it certainly does not represent decent human beings.

Psychiatric fraud and abuse must be eradicated so that SDG 15 can occur.

Scientists Gave Ketamine to Sheep and were Baaaffled by the Result

Sunday, July 5th, 2020

“While studying the effects of ketamine on sheep, researchers say they found something truly strange: high doses of the drug appeared to turn the sheep’s brains off…”

First, why were they abusing sheep?

Second, we already know that ketamine is abusive to people.

And finally, we already know that ketamine, a powerful psychedelic anesthetic, is being relentlessly touted as a “new antidepressant” when in fact it just knocks you out so you don’t feel much of anything, a surefire clue that the brain has been turned off.

The same applies to Spravato (Esketamine), a nasal spray version of the anesthetic drug.

Ketamine is also known to be an illicit party drug, used by rapists to quell their victim’s movements. It’s hard to imagine how this “Club Drug” could be hailed by some psychiatrists as a potential solution for suicidal patients.

The use of ketamine to treat so-called depression is unethical and actually harmful, since it precludes the patient from finding out what is actually wrong and getting that treated. Psychiatrists pushing ketamine or esketamine are shameful drug pushers who are making a buck off people’s misfortune.

Click here for the truth they don’t want you to know about ketamine.

Ketamine for everything