Immigration and Mental Health

“An open-borders group that has benefited from U.S. taxpayer dollars and is funded by left-wing billionaire George Soros launched a smartphone application to help illegal immigrants avoid federal authorities.” [Quotes from a Judicial Watch article.]

The group behind the app is called United We Dream, and was started by the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). Both the NILC and its offshoot, United We Dream, get funding from Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Also, “Between 2008 and 2010, NILC received $206,453 in U.S. government grants.”

“The organization…claims to have played a leadership role in spearheading Barack Obama’s amnesty program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which has shielded hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens from deportation.”

The United We Dream battle cry is “We changed the immigration debate by courageously declaring that we are ‘undocumented, unafraid and here to stay!'”

You might ask why CCHR may be interested in this?

After reviewing the lawsuit we previously reported about the coercive psychiatric drugging of immigrant children, we thought there might be further connections between this whole immigrant thing and the mental health industry. And no surprise, we found it.

The United We Dream and other associated websites point to a “Mental Health Toolkit” “designed to alleviate not only the stress and anxiety of folks across the nation and keep ours [sic] families secure, but also to give the reader tools that will allow them to conduct safe zone events and incorporate stress reducing activities within their community work and daily lives.”

Uh-huh. And how do you think they propose to do this?

Well, they refer legal and illegal (they prefer to say “undocumented”) immigrants directly into the mental health system, where they can be prescribed harmful and addictive psychiatric drugs.

“Mental Health America Resources: Available in English, and Spanish. This page includes several resources including, a local MHA affiliate locator, psychoeducation for mental health, support groups/resources, and national resources for mental health.”

Plus, legal and illegal immigrants are directed to call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline if needed. The NSPL is funded by the federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the same agency which fraudulently claims that 1 in 5 Americans are mentally ill.

All this “mental health” information is cheerfully provided to immigrants by Dr. Luz M. Garcini, PhD, MPH, a clinical psychologist at Rice University.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5®) costs $210 and in 991 pages lists all 955 of the diagnostic codes needed by psychiatrists for insurance reimbursement. None of its diagnoses have clinical tests as a mental disorder (they are evaluated by opinion), and many of them can be assumed to directly apply to illegal immigrants. Who would have thought in 2013 when DSM-5 was released that it was preparing for the surge of new migrant patients? For example:

Academic or educational problem
Acculturation difficulty [i.e. cultural modification of an individual by adapting to traits from another culture]
Acute stress disorder
Adjustment disorder
Adjustment disorder, Unspecified
Adjustment disorder, With anxiety
Adjustment disorder, With depressed mood
Adjustment disorder, With disturbance of conduct
Adjustment disorder, With mixed anxiety and depressed mood
Adjustment disorder, With mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct
Discord with neighbor, lodger, or landlord
Discord with social service provider, including probation officer, case manager, or social services worker
Disruption of family by separation or divorce
Exposure to disaster, war, or other hostilities
Extreme poverty
Generalized anxiety disorder
Homelessness
Imprisonment or other incarceration
Inadequate housing
Insufficient social insurance or welfare support
Lack of adequate food or safe drinking water
Language disorder
Other personal risk factors
Other problem related to employment
Other problem related to psychosocial circumstances
Personal history (past history) of neglect in childhood
Posttraumatic stress disorder
Problems related to other legal circumstances
Target of (perceived) adverse discrimination or persecution
Unavailability or inaccessibility of health care facilities
Unavailability or inaccessibility of other helping agencies
Victim of terrorism or torture

We’re sure there are other relevant diagnoses, we just lost count.

So what exactly is this all about?

1. The mental health industry is targeting the immigrant community as ripe for exploitation.

2. The U.S. government has been suckered to pay for the “mental health” of illegal immigrants.

This all points to the extraordinary pervasiveness of fraudulent and harmful psychiatric and psychological mental health practices throughout society.

“Defectives” was the sweeping label in 1916 that Canadian psychiatrist Charles Kirk Clarke, a founder of the Canadian Mental Health Association, applied to immigrants from eastern and central Europe. Only now, with such a large and increasing immigrant population, and with public outcry rising against fraudulent and abusive psychiatric practices, the mental health industry is trying to bolster its services by targeting immigrants as one of their newest sources of income.

Fueled by a glut of research papers decrying the risk of immigrants with mental disorders, a hysteria fueled by tales of immigrant gangs running wild, and a government willing to pay for anything SAMHSA and Soros want, we now have a full blown immigration crisis with no one looking at its psychiatric foundations.

Whatever solutions there may be for these various problems, the most basic one, the one needing the most confront, and the one with the most potential return on investment, is the obliteration of the psychiatric industry and its affront to human rights.

So Help Me I’ll Whip You

So Help Me I’ll Whip You

So Whip Me I’ll Help You

[Conversation between the sadist psychiatrist and her masochist patient.]

A psychiatrist in Tennessee had her license suspended for whipping patients and comparing them to mules.

The Tennessee Department of Health suspended Valerie Louise Augustus’ medical license in June 2018 because of her treatment towards multiple patients in 2015. Augustus owns and operates Christian Psychiatrist Services in Germantown, which is a suburb of Memphis.

She whipped mental health patients with a riding crop, whips, and other objects when they failed to adhere to her recommendations; can’t say this was a very Christian treatment, can we? It’s a shame it took Tennessee three years to reach this conclusion.

But patient abuse is typical of the psychiatric industry, and in spite of all psychiatric protestations to the contrary, coercive psychiatry has not changed much in the last hundred years. In spite of their sophisticated pseudoscientific trappings, psychiatry has not advanced beyond the cruelty and barbarism of its earliest treatments.

Such psychiatric procedures qualify as “assault and battery” in every respect except one; they are lawful. Psychiatry has placed itself above the law, from where it can assault and batter its unfortunate victims, all in the name of “treatment.” Note that this psychiatrist was not criminally charged with any crime; she got a 60-day suspension of her license and can be reinstated after taking a two-day medical ethics course. She should be in jail.

There are humane alternatives to psychiatric abuse. People in desperate circumstances must be provided proper and effective medical care. Psychiatric physical assault should be outlawed and the psychiatrist who authorizes it or performs it should be criminally culpable.

Psychiatric colleges, their institutions and psychiatrists themselves must be held accountable for the abuses of basic statutory and human rights committed daily in the name of “help.”

If you know someone who has been assaulted by a mental health practitioner, seek attorney advice about filing a civil suit against any offending psychiatrist and their hospital, associations and teaching institutions for compensatory and punitive damages.

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.

Psychiatry’s Reign of Terror

Emil Kraepelin (1856-1926), known as the “father of modern psychiatry” and original architect of what became the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), established the basic suppressive fundamentals of the Holocaust. The pattern was: Label someone with a false psychiatric diagnosis; Remove them from society; Put them into special camps or institutions; Destroy them.

Suppress: to put down by force or authority; to squash any attempt at betterment; an antisocial expression of antagonism toward life, living or attempts to do better in life.

Psychiatrists today, all over the world, use and apply the same basic suppressive fundamentals of Kraepelin in the mental health industry. Label someone with a false psychiatric diagnosis; Involuntarily commit them to a psychiatric facility, or put children into foster care, or put the elderly into a nursing home, or enforce psychiatric treatment on those incarcerated in prison; Forcibly give them harmful “treatments” such as psychiatric drugs, electric shock, or brain surgery which either cripples them or kills them.

A recently published article in the journal History of Psychiatry by three psychiatrists chronicles the Nazi’s use of electroshock treatment to eliminate mental patients and other “undesirables” from the population. The authors detail that in 1944 Dr. Emil Gelny, working at psychiatric hospitals in Gugging and Mauer-Öhling, Austria, began systematically killing patients with an ECT machine. Today, ECT is a big money-maker for the psychiatric industry.

The origin of psychiatric false data
In 1879, German psychologist Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) of Leipzig University provided the ultimate scientific “proof” for eugenics and racism, by arrogantly declaring that as man’s soul could not be measured with scientific instruments, it did not exist.

Kraepelin was a student of Wundt; in 1917 he founded the German Research Institute for Psychiatry in Munich (funded by the Rockefeller Foundation in 1924), which became the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute of Psychiatry during World War II, and after the War was renamed as the Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry. This institute’s mission was, and is, to prove that mental disorders are just biological, genetic brain disorders. German psychiatrist Alfred Erich Hoche (1865-1943) in 1920 endorsed exterminating “life unworthy of living.” Swiss psychiatrist Ernst Rüdin (1874-1952) worked under Kraepelin for 18 years, and was instrumental in designing The Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring in 1933 (the “sterilization law”) which provided the legal basis for compulsory sterilization, which ultimately led to the euthanasia (killing) of six million Jews during World War II.

There were hundreds of psychiatrists in Germany directing and carrying out the atrocities prior to and during the Holocaust. Dr. Schmuhl said, “In my opinion, you cannot say that there are only a few bad apples within psychiatry who did National Socialism’s groundwork, but it is a problem with the entire profession.”

It wasn’t just during the War that these atrocities were perpetrated. Long before in 1905, psychiatrist Rüdin and eugenicist Alfred Ploetz were among the founders of the German Society for Racial Hygiene, a euphemism for eradicating undesirable traits in the population by removing those “undesirables” with sterilization or murder. Starting in 1934 under the sterilization Law, the number of people who were involuntarily sterilized may be as high as 400,000, with up to 5,000 who died as a consequence. Another 275,000 psychiatric patients were murdered, including an estimated 100,000 who starved to death in German mental hospitals. Starting in 1938 the “child euthanasia” program killed over 5,000 babies and children in 31 “pediatric wards” by the psychiatrists in various psychiatric hospitals.

Then in 1939 the first gas chamber killings began in Fort VII concentration camp in Posen, Poland. In 1940-1941, over 70,000 mental patients were killed by poison gas in six psychiatric centers. From 1942-1945 another 250,000 mental patients in psychiatric hospitals were killed. This was only the beginning of the psychiatric atrocities.

For more information, watch the CCHR Documentary The Age of Fear – Psychiatry’s Reign of Terror, which contains shocking personal testimony and revealing inside footage that tell the true story of psychiatry, whose reliance on brutality and coercion has not changed since the moment it was born in Germany.

The Age of Fear education package is also provided free of charge to historians, professors and human rights activists who give lectures and group instruction, teach school or university classes or run community learning programs.

Previous CCHR STL blogs on this subject
http://www.cchrstl.org/wordpress/2017/06/11/the-racism-of-psychiatry/
http://www.cchrstl.org/wordpress/2017/05/22/racism-how-psychiatry-creates-and-perpetuates-it/
http://www.cchrstl.org/wordpress/2016/12/10/nazis-on-drugs/
http://www.cchrstl.org/wordpress/2016/03/25/holocaust-commemoration-in-london-details-hitlers-use-of-psychiatric-genocide-program/
http://www.cchrstl.org/wordpress/2012/11/10/the-age-of-fear-psychiatrys-reign-of-terror/
http://www.cchrstl.org/wordpress/2017/03/19/washington-university-in-st-louis-shocks-pregnant-women/

References
1. Psychiatrists-the Men Behind Hitler, by Dr. Thomas Röder and etc., Freedom Publishing, 1999.

2. Die Gesellschaft Deutscher Neurologen und Psychiater im Nationalsozialismus (The Society of German Neurologists and Psychiatrists in National Socialism), by Hans-Walter Schmuhl, Springer, 2015. Professor Schmuhl is a German historian who has published numerous history books, especially the history of euthanasia.

3. G Gazdag, GS Ungvari, and H Czech, “Mass killing under the guise of ECT: the darkest chapter in the history of biological psychiatry,” In History of Psychiatry, Sage Publications, 2017.

Trust Us, We Know What We’re Doing

The June 5, 2017 issue of The Weekly Standard magazine discloses that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and fifteen other Federal Departments and Agencies have issued final revisions to the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (the Common Rule). The Final Rule was published in the Federal Register on January 19, 2017.

“For nearly 40 years, the federal government has enforced the ‘Common Rule.’ The rule required researchers in the social and medical sciences to get the approval of an independent review board, or IRB, for their federally funded experiments. The purpose of the boards, which are usually set up by the researchers’ universities, is to protect human research subjects—college students, usually—from potentially harmful experiments.”

“In January the Department of Health and Human Services relaxed its regulations governing the use of the review boards. For example, psychological researchers who believe their experiments entail only ‘benign behavioral interventions’ can exempt themselves from seeking the approval of their IRB…”

The article cites another example of the mental health industry trying to push its boundaries. “…members of the American Psychiatric Association are hoping to repeal the APA’s ‘Goldwater Rule,’ which forbids members from pronouncing on the psychological health of public figures whom they haven’t examined personally.”

The article concludes with, “…the exalted role social scientists have assumed in the public conversation requires that we view them with redoubled scrutiny and skepticism. ‘Trust Us, We Know What We’re Doing’ is a suspicious motto for any profession.”

Here is an extract of the actual wording of the exemption in the text of the Final Common Rule as recorded in the Federal Register:

“…the following categories of human subjects research are exempt from this policy:…Research involving benign behavioral interventions in conjunction with the collection of information from an adult subject through verbal or written responses…”

There are a lot of ifs, ands and buts in this convoluted rule. However, the bottom line is that the original goal of protecting human research subjects is being eroded in favor of the convenience of researchers. The ethics of allowing psychologists or psychiatrists to run experiments without independent oversight is questionable.

One of the essential problems with psychology is its reliance upon psychiatric or biological behavioral models—-a far cry from its foundations as the study of the human spirit.

For reference, here is a paper on Ethical Problems in Psychiatric Research.

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR RIGHTS PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY

RIGHTS UNDER SIEGE: FIGHTING BACK

NARPA ANNUAL RIGHTS CONFERENCE
August 25-28, 2016
Pointe Hilton Squaw Peak Resort
Phoenix, Arizona
Registration form at www.narpa.org

Conference Keynotes and Highlights

Robert Whitaker, Author
Psychiatry Under the Influence: Institutional Corruption, Social Injury,
and Prescriptions for Reform and Mad in America

Mort Cohen, J.D., Professor of Law, Golden Gate University
Litigator of Landmark Forced Treatment Cases
Lifelong Champion for the Rights of Marginalized and Disadvantaged Peoples

Caroline White, Social Activist and Survivor
Trainer/Facilitator for Western Massachusetts Recovery Learning Community & Hearing Voices USA

Eve Hill, J.D.
Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights
U.S. Department of Justice

Peter Lehmann, Publisher and Activist
Co-Editor Journal of Critical Psychology, Counseling, and Psychotherapy
Author, Coming Off Psychiatric Drugs
Founder of Self-Help and Survivor Groups in Germany and Europe

Special Plenary
Arlene Kanter, J.D., L.L.M.
Professor,  Syracuse University School of Law
Recent Developments in Mental Health Law – 2016
Annual plenary by legal scholar presenting updates and interpretation on the most recent legal cases affecting disability rights and mental health law.

Holocaust Commemoration in London Details Hitler’s Use of Psychiatric Genocide Program

Holocaust Commemoration in London Details Hitler’s Use of Psychiatric Genocide Program

 International Holocaust Remembrance Day forum discloses the sordid role psychiatry played in the Nazi genocide.

LONDON, March 3, 2016 /PRNewswire/ — Community leaders gathered for a Holocaust Commemoration and Human Dignity forum hosted by the London Church of Scientology heard accounts of Hitler’s lethal weapon to eliminate “unwanted” people by means of a psychiatric eugenics genocide program.

After one minute of silence to honor the millions who lost their lives during the Holocaust, attendees learned of the secret eugenics program spawned in the late 1800s by Swiss German psychiatrist Alfred Ploetz. As documented in the Citizens Commission on Human Rights documentary, Psychiatry: An Industry of Death, eugenics is the so-called “science” and practice of “improving the human race” by selective breeding to eliminate those considered “inferior.”

German psychiatrists used eugenics to justify the sterilization and murder of the mentally and physically disabled. In collusion with the Nazi regime, they then extended this to encompass those considered socially and politically unacceptable. They used starvation, sterilization and lethal injection to accomplish their sordid aims and expanded the program into the concentration camps where they systematically gassed Jews, Roma, Poles, and anyone else Hitler wanted to eliminate.

Other subsequent genocides have harrowing similarities. The 10-year Bosnia and Kosovo conflicts in the 1990s had the same psychiatric theories at their root. Psychiatrists Jovan Raskovic and Radovan Karadzic inspired racial and religious genocide in Bosnia including mass torture and rape. Former President Slobodan Milosevic, a Karadzic patient, perpetrated and financed the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.

It was not until 1999 that German psychiatrists finally admitted publicly that psychiatry had spawned eugenics and the racial inferiority/superiority ideology that poisoned the minds of the German people for almost three decades, laying the foundation for the Holocaust.

The conference went on to explore modern psychiatric procedures that include categorizing difficult or unruly children and labeling them with invented “mental disorders” so they drug them into being “normal” or “acceptable.”

Today even normal childhood behavior—such as crying or being energetic—is labeled and codified as a mental disorder, the solution for which is mind-altering and highly addictive pharmaceutical drugs, and even electric shock.

While psychiatric crime occasionally surfaces in the media—as with a recent rash of headlines on a study linking their prescribing of antidepressants to suicide—psychiatrists continue to practice with impunity. They prey on “those who are vulnerable—those who feel they have no voice or rights and should just do as they are told,” said keynote speaker the Director of Citizens Commission on Human Rights in the UK, who detailed how the rights of patients are being compromised and what they and their families can do and say to successfully fight these abuses.

“We have a duty to help those in need,” said Daniels, “and by helping them understand their human rights we can empower them to make their lives better.”

Click here to report mental health human rights abuse to Citizens Commission on Human Rights, or click here to report psychiatric abuse in a specific State of the U.S. Click here for more information about the politics of psychiatry.

United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

The United Nations (U.N.) has published their master plan for world government: Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

There are 91 Declarations, and 17 Goals. Here are some.

Declaration 26. To promote physical and mental health and well-being, and to extend life expectancy for all, we must achieve universal health coverage and access to quality health care. No one must be left behind. We commit to accelerating the progress made to date in reducing newborn, child and maternal mortality by ending all such preventable deaths before 2030. We are committed to ensuring universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education. We will equally accelerate the pace of progress made in fighting malaria, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, hepatitis, Ebola and other communicable diseases and epidemics, including by addressing growing anti-microbial resistance and the problem of unattended diseases affecting developing countries. We are committed to the prevention and treatment of non-communicable diseases, including behavioural, developmental and neurological disorders, which constitute a major challenge for sustainable development.

Goal 3.4. By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.

These are laudable goals.

We fear, however, that any goals given to the current mental health care industry for implementation would only pervert the good purpose and cause more suffering than actual help.

They have already tried, more than once, to push heavy drug use on children and teens while rolling out “screening” programs that refer kids to psychiatric and psychological treatment.

Refusing to cooperate with such grand plans might seem U.N.American. We’re only saying, there might be a significant difference between the plans and the implementation.

Psychiatry is the epitome of coercive care. For almost 50 years, psychiatry has promoted its theory that the only “treatment” for severe mental “illness” is neuroleptic drugs. However, this idea rests on a fault line. The truth is that not only is the drugging of severely mentally disturbed patients unnecessary–and expensive, thus profitable–it causes brain- and life-damaging side effects.

The simple truth is that there are workable alternatives to psychiatry’s mind-, brain- and body-damaging treatments. With this U.N. “sustainability” effort, there will be more calls for mandatory mental illness screening for adults and children everywhere. We urge all who have an interest in preserving the mental health and freedom of their families and communities to FIND OUT and FIGHT BACK. Something must be done to establish real help for those who need it.

Click here for more information about alternatives to psychiatric abuse.

Who is the Predator Here?

Who is the Predator Here?

We approach this topic with some trepidation, as there can be considerable fixed opinions regarding the topic of sex.

We feel, however, that the news is relevant — and we’d like your permission to continue reading. We aren’t concerned so much with offending anyone; we’re sure we do that anyway by exposing the fraud and abuse inherent in the mental health care system. So if you have an emotional reaction to this information, we dare you to read on.

If you may be feeling upset, angry, or otherwise overwhelmed by any of the material we present in our newsletters, know this: The intention in presenting these materials is not at all to make anyone feel overwhelmed or upset. Our intention is to expose what has been hidden from the general public by various forces, to shine the light of truth on the psychiatric industry, and to restore human rights and dignity to the field of mental health.

Our intention is for you to be enraged by the pervasive abuse of human rights by the psychiatric mental health care industry and incite you to action. If you know of people who have been harmed by a psychiatrist or by a psychiatric facility, encourage them to file a complaint.

Sex offenders who have completed their prison sentences are often detained (usually for life) in prison-like psychiatric facilities based on the completely mistaken assumption that their having committed sexual crimes somehow means they are also mentally ill. These however, are criminal actions and are covered by criminal justice, not psychiatric diagnoses.

A recent article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch discusses this topic. [“Judge calls sex predator law misapplied“, 9/12/2015]

A U.S. District Judge ruled that Missouri’s sexually violent predator law, although constitutional, is seriously misapplied.

“The judge wrote that there is a ‘pervasive sense of hopelessness’ at the Department of Mental Health’s Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, or SORTS program, because patients aren’t being properly released.”

“SORTS is indefinitely committing about 200 people to treatment in the belief that they might re-offend.”

“The overwhelming evidence at trial — much of which came from Defendants’ own experts — did establish that the SORTS civil commitment program suffers from systemic failures regarding risk assessment and release that have resulted in the continued confinement of individuals who no longer meet the criteria for commitment, in violation of the Due Process Clause. … The Constitution does not allow (Missouri officials) to impose lifetime detention on individuals who have completed their prison sentences and who no longer pose a danger to the public, no matter how heinous their past conduct.”

They call this process “civil commitment” – an attempt to make it sound less harsh than “involuntary commitment.”

Displaying a surprising ignorance of (and careless indifference to) proper diagnostic practice, psychologists and psychiatrists routinely and rotely misdiagnose mental disorder in sexual offenders who are in fact clearly no more than simple criminals.

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.

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 others, 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, and in this case of a person who has already paid their time in prison.

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.

Click here for more information about involuntary commitment.

The Glue of Society

The Glue of Society

Religion is the glue that binds a culture together. Yet it has become customary to mock religion in America today.

We’re not talking here about devotion to a particular religious practice. We are talking about a decline in moral values that used to be shored up by our religious faith, religious leaders, and religious communities.

Diversity of belief is a sign of a healthy democracy. Yet we observe not just diversity, but hostility and antagonism.

A society that unjustly restricts the religious practices of one group will likely be found to undermine justice for all other groups.

There is a relationship between religion, religious freedom, and violence that needs further exploration. We find, yet again, that the junk sciences of psychiatry and psychology are involved in the decline of this culture.

A May 2014 study by researchers at Georgetown University and Brigham Young University found that, “Standards and practices of honesty and integrity rest, ultimately, on…ideas of right and wrong, which for most of us are grounded in principles of religion and the teachings of religious leaders.”

As a result of psychiatrists’ 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.

A co-founder of the World Federation for Mental Health, Canadian psychiatrist G. Brock Chisholm, reinforced this master plan in 1945 by targeting religious values and calling for psychiatrists to free “the race … from its crippling burden of good and evil.” Viciously usurping age-old religious principles, psychiatrists have sanitized criminal conduct and defined sin and evil as “mental disorders,” “treatable” with harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs.

Following are several Chisholm quotes:

“To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism and religious dogmas…”

“If the race is to be freed from its crippling burden of good and evil it must be psychiatrists who take the original responsibility.”

“The re-interpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith…are the belated objectives of practically all effective psychotherapy. The fact is, that most psychiatrists and psychologists and other respectable people have escaped from these moral chains and are able to observe and think freely.”

Let’s face it, we’ve been fed a pack of lies and we are now seriously trying to eradicate, with terrorism on one side and the “war on terror” on the other side, each other.

Society is coming unglued.

Click here for more information about this.