Posts Tagged ‘justice’

Take Action – Missouri Legislature – Involuntary Commitment

Wednesday, March 22nd, 2017

Periodically we let you know the progress of various proposed legislation making its way through the Missouri General Assembly and suggest ways for you to contribute your viewpoint to your state Representative and state Senator.

You can find your Representative and Senator, and their contact information, by entering your 9-digit zip code here.

This time, we’d like to discuss Senate Bill SB221, “Authorizes legal counsel for the Department of Mental Health to have standing in certain hearings involving a person unable to stand trial due to lack of mental fitness”, sponsored by Senator Jeanie Riddle (R, District 10).

“This act provides that after a person accused of committing a crime has been committed to the Department of Mental Health due to lack of mental fitness to stand trial, the legal counsel for the Department shall have standing to participate in hearings regarding involuntary medications for the accused.”

First off, we’d like to say that Involuntary Commitment (also called civil commitment) is a crack in the door of constitutional freedoms, and should be abolished.

This bill would modify Section 552.020, RSMo (Missouri Revised Statutes) which establishes this type of involuntary commitment in the state. The main topic of this statute states, “No person who as a result of mental disease or defect lacks capacity to understand the proceedings against him or her or to assist in his or her own defense shall be tried, convicted or sentenced for the commission of an offense so long as the incapacity endures.” Instead, the person is incarcerated against their will in a psychiatric facility. In effect, they are put in jail without a trial. This is often called NGRI, “Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity.”

Here (in italics) is the main requested change in the law: “If the court determines that the accused lacks mental fitness to proceed, the criminal proceedings shall be suspended and the court shall commit him or her to the director of the department of mental health. After the person has been committed, legal counsel for the department of mental health shall have standing to file motions and participate in hearings on the issue of involuntary medications.

In other words, once the person becomes an involuntary ward of the state in a psychiatric facility, then the Department of Mental Health can force the person to be placed on psychiatric drugs by petitioning the court.

When any psychiatric facility has full legal power to cause your involuntary physical detention by force (kidnapping), drug you senseless, 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.

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 we have not even mentioned yet that the involuntary psychiatric drugs that this proposed change in the law sanctions are harmful and addictive, and are known to cause violence and suicide.

The person who pleads NGRI to a crime needs effective justice and rehabilitation, not psychiatric drugs.

Contact your Missouri state Representative and Senator, and let them know what you think about this.

For more information click here.

Florida Court Rules Physician May Be Liable in Suicide

Sunday, September 11th, 2016

Florida’s Supreme Court ruled August 25, 2016 that a physician could be sued for medical malpractice in the case of a patient’s suicide. [Medscape Medical News, 2016-08-26] The victim was taking antidepressant psychiatric drugs. The Florida Supreme Court ruled that the case should proceed to trial.

The prescribing doctor, Joseph Stephen Chirillo, Jr., M.D., is a Family Physician in Englewood, Florida and was treating the victim for depression.

Evidence cited was, 1) Dr. Chirillo knew that patients who stopped taking Effexor abruptly had an increased risk for suicide, and 2) stopping Effexor was “a contributing factor” in the decedent’s suicide.

Primary Care doctors are often continuing the psychiatric drug bandwagon pioneered by psychiatrists. In fact, it may now be that more people get antidepressants from their family doctor than from a psychiatrist.

Medscape believes that one in five patients prescribed antidepressants stop taking them without telling their doctor. It has been known for quite some time that the side effects of violence and suicide can occur from abrupt withdrawal as well as from continuing to take these harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs. No one should stop taking any psychiatric drug without the advice and assistance of a competent medical doctor.

For more information about coming off of psychiatric drugs safely, click here.

Side effects (also called “adverse reactions”) are the body’s natural response to having a chemical disrupt its normal functioning.

One could also say that there are no drug side effects, these adverse reactions are actually the drug’s real effects; some of these effects just happen to be unwanted. Read more about how drugs work here.

Psychiatry’s theory that a brain–based, chemical imbalance causes mental illness was invented to sell drugs. Misled by all the drug marketing efforts, 100 million people worldwide—20 million of them children—are taking psychotropic drugs, convinced they are correcting some physical or chemical imbalance in their body. In reality, they are taking powerful substances so dangerous they can cause hallucinations, psychosis, heart irregularities, diabetes, hostility, aggression, sexual dysfunction and suicide.

While not everyone on psychotropic drugs commits suicide or uncontrolled acts of violence, the effects of the many other side effects can be horrendous. Not the least of which is the fact that the biological drug model (based on bogus mental disorders) is a disease marketing campaign which prevents governments from funding real medical solutions for people experiencing difficulty. While the patient may be lulled into a temporary sense of wellness, whatever condition has caused the symptom is still present and often growing worse, as the original condition has not been found and treated.

Because of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), psychiatrists and family physicians have deceived millions into thinking that the best answer to life’s many routine problems and challenges lies with the “latest and greatest” psychiatric drug.

The Greater Good

Saturday, August 27th, 2016

What are the limits that the State can do claiming “The Greater Good?”

Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of certain laws. To pass a strict scrutiny review, the legislature must have passed the law to further a “compelling governmental interest,” and must have narrowly tailored the law to achieve that interest.

The concept of “strict scrutiny” arises from the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The situations we are considering here are any attempts by the legislature to require that a child or adult be forced to take psychotropic drugs, or indeed to be forced to accept any kind of psychiatric treatment, including involuntary commitment.

There are not many issues in the field of mental hygiene law which raise more controversy than that of involuntary commitment and treatment. The courts have unequivocally recognized that involuntary treatment, meaning involuntary or “civil” commitment and enforced drugging, by the government is a substantial deprivation of liberty, and therefore falls under the aegis of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. However, there has continued to be a legal erosion of this principle by passing laws stipulating the rules of due process in such cases, all intended to give the State more power to enforce their own considerations of what is the greater good.

Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 632 Section 300 is an example. To paraphrase,  if a mental health coordinator has reasonable cause to believe, as the result of personal observation or investigation, that the likelihood of serious harm by a person to himself or others as a result of a mental disorder is imminent unless the person is immediately taken into custody, the mental health coordinator must request a peace officer to take the person into custody and transport them to a mental health facility.

We no longer have any compelling governmental interest, since it is one person’s judgment or opinion, not the government’s; and the due process of law in this case is just one person’s judgment or opinion, sanctioned by a law that clearly was tailored to bypass strict scrutiny.

The fact that these actions are couched in such doublespeak as “to prevent him from committing harm” is unfortunate, for it hides the evil intention to incapacitate the individual.

For more information, click here.

Who is the Predator Here?

Friday, October 9th, 2015

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.

Sneaky Ways to Enforce Mental Health Care on Citizens

Saturday, August 8th, 2015

Sneaky Ways to Enforce Mental Health Care on Citizens

We would like to discuss Missouri Senate Bills 331 & 21 [SS/SCS/SBs 331 & 21This act modifies and enacts provisions relating to law enforcement officers.] This act is mostly about police officers wearing cameras.

While it did not progress through this year’s legislative session into law, we might assume it will be re-introduced in December for next year’s session. It has a particularly odious section on mental health care.

Here is the offending section:

If a state of emergency is proclaimed in response to civil unrest, the governor shall, at the request of the county health department, assign a sufficient number of state social workers, counselors, or psychologists to provide counseling and mental health services in the region affected by the unrest.

This language was originally introduced in SB 21 by Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal (Democrat, District 14).

We predicted last year, after the Ferguson riots, that the mental health care industry would be moving into the community in force. (See our newsletters Behavioral Health in St. Louis and Ferguson Missouri Mental Health Tips and Ferguson and Human Rights.)

Specifically —

“A primary strategy of behavioral health is the extension of services into the community — at home, school, workplace and other community settings.”

“Be aware that every mental health group in the area, and indeed in the country, is going to be offering ‘support and counseling’ to Ferguson residents for their ‘anger and grief.’ Since we already know that the psychiatric and psychological mental health care industry is an affront to human rights, special care is needed to avoid getting sucked into the mental health treatment mill.”

“State Senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal … is pushing psychiatric mental health care on the community.” She was quoted as saying, “What should have happened since day one is we should have had counselors out in the streets and psychologists because this community is experiencing PTSD right now and frankly, I think some officers are, too.”

Now the mental health care industry would like to make their interference in social unrest a law. Next they will be involuntarily committing protestors as a solution. We’ve been down that “final solution” path before, and it isn’t pretty.

For sure, incidents like Ferguson need to be addressed. Whether it is called “civil unrest” or “riot”, it is really, at bottom, caused by injustice.

You can not cure injustice with psychological counseling. You cure it by restoring justice.

Go here for more information about psychiatric and psychological corruption of justice.

Human Rights Concerns with the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act of 2015

Saturday, July 18th, 2015

Human Rights Concerns with the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act of 2015

Congressional Rep. Tim Murphy (R., PA) originally introduced the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R.3717) in 2013. Not to be outdone by H.R.6 the 21st Century Cures Act, he has reintroduced it to this year’s Congress as H.R.2646 the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act of 2015.

Rep. Murphy is a psychologist, and a staunch supporter of “mental health care” as defined by the psychiatric and psychological industries; not to mention the pharmaceutical and insurance industries.

Official Title of the Act: “To make available needed psychiatric, psychological, and supportive services for individuals with mental illness and families in mental health crisis, and for other purposes.”

The Act creates a new position in the Department of Health and Human Services – an official to be known as the Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders. (As if we need another bureaucracy in the psych industry.)

The Act creates more funding for psych-based “treatments.”

The Act expands the bureaucracy surrounding “parity in mental health and substance use disorder benefits” under Medicare and Medicaid.

The Act provides for grants in early childhood intervention and treatment programs, and specialized preschool and elementary school programs.

The Act provides for grants in “Assisted Outpatient Treatment” programs.

The Act requires states to have a law that enforces court-ordered involuntary mental health treatment for the “mentally disabled” if the state want to receive certain federal funding.

The Act expands mental health training for primary care physicians.

This isn’t even half of the proposed legislation.

The Act spends lots more money on “suicide prevention” all up and down the entire educational chain, from elementary school through college.

The Act establishes an entirely new bureaucracy called the “Interagency Serious Mental Illness Coordinating Committee.”

Of course, the Act also expands the availability of and insurance coverage for psychiatric prescription drugs, as well as lifting limits on Medicare payments for inpatient psychiatric hospital services.

The Act expands the Community Mental Health Care programs.

The Act increases funding for the National Institute of Mental Health.

And even that’s not all the Act does to strengthen the already fraudulent and abusive psychiatric mental health industry.

CCHR Supporters should really consider contacting their Congressmen to express their opinions about this affront to rationality.

Let us know when you contact your Congressmen about this, and any response you may receive.

Legislative Elimination of Harmful Psychiatric Practices

Thursday, May 28th, 2015

Legislative Elimination of Harmful Psychiatric Practices

FLORIDA

There is a law on the books in Florida that if enforced would end harmful psychiatric practices there. It makes illegal all unscientific, fraudulent and unproven healthcare treatments. [Florida Statutes 456.072 (1)(a)]

“456.072?Grounds for discipline; penalties; enforcement.—
(1)?The following acts shall constitute grounds for which the disciplinary actions specified in subsection (2) may be taken:
(a)?Making misleading, deceptive, or fraudulent representations in or related to the practice of the licensee’s profession.”

However, there is a second law on the Florida books which states that if the practitioner uses treatments “generally accepted” by his peers then it is OK. This opens the door to the practitioner having to use the treatments his peers “generally accept” or be subject to administrative discipline and malpractice laws. [Florida Statutes 766.102 (1)]

“766.102?Medical negligence; standards of recovery; expert witness.—
(1)?In any action for recovery of damages based on the death or personal injury of any person in which it is alleged that such death or injury resulted from the negligence of a health care provider as defined in s. 766.202(4), the claimant shall have the burden of proving by the greater weight of evidence that the alleged actions of the health care provider represented a breach of the prevailing professional standard of care for that health care provider. The prevailing professional standard of care for a given health care provider shall be that level of care, skill, and treatment which, in light of all relevant surrounding circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably prudent similar health care providers.”

To confuse matters even more, there is a third law on the Florida books that makes it illegal for a doctor to prescribe controlled substances like narcotics and psychiatric drugs for pain without a full and complete physical exam, full history obtained and imaging like MRI, CAT Scans, drug tests, etc. And then only after other less or non harmful therapies have been attempted can powerful narcotics and powerful tranquilizers be prescribed on an ongoing basis for physical pain. [Florida Statutes 458.331(1)(t)1]

“458.331?Grounds for disciplinary action; action by the board and department.—
(1)?The following acts constitute grounds for denial of a license or disciplinary action … (t)?Notwithstanding s. 456.072(2) but as specified in s. 456.50(2):
1.?Committing medical malpractice as defined in s. 456.50. The board shall give great weight to the provisions of s. 766.102 when enforcing this paragraph.”

This third law was used to bust countless pill-mill doctors. They had their licenses suspended, revoked, and were charged and convicted in criminal courts.

But the psychs are “exempt” from this law. Why? Because psychiatric “treatments” such as psychiatric drugs are the prevailing standard of care.

MISSOURI

In Missouri, these are some Statutes regarding standard of care and related topics:

[197.080.1 2.(3)(b) Department of Health and Senior Services] “A departmental investigation of a complaint shall be focused on the specific regulatory standard and departmental written interpretive guidance and publicly available professionally recognized standard of care related to the complaint.”

[538.225. 1 Tort Actions Based on Improper Health Care] “In any action against a health care provider for damages for personal injury or death on account of the rendering of or failure to render health care services, the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s attorney shall file an affidavit with the court stating that he or she has obtained the written opinion of a legally qualified health care provider which states that the defendant health care provider failed to use such care as a reasonably prudent and careful health care provider would have under similar circumstances and that such failure to use such reasonable care directly caused or directly contributed to cause the damages claimed in the petition.

[334.100.2  Physicians and Surgeons–Therapists–Athletic Trainers–Health Care Providers] “The board may cause a complaint to be filed with the administrative hearing commission … against any holder of any certificate of registration or authority, permit or license required by this chapter … for any one or any combination of the following causes: … (4) Misconduct, fraud, misrepresentation, dishonesty, unethical conduct or unprofessional conduct in the performance of the functions or duties of any profession licensed or regulated by this chapter, including, but not limited to, the following: … (5) Any conduct or practice which is or might be harmful or dangerous to the mental or physical health of a patient … .”

CONCLUSIONS

Overall it seems that the pattern of these laws, while intending to protect citizens from physician malpractice, are not really effective in the case of harmful psychiatric practices, for these reasons:

1. The laws are subject to interpretation by lawyers and courts as to what is harmful;

2. The psychiatric industry itself controls its standard of care(using its own Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [DSM] as its reference);

3. There is a built-in legal contradiction between the standard of care and medical malpractice — while one law defines malpractice, another law negates it with standard of care.

We see the solution as having to directly legislate against abusive, fraudulent and harmful psychiatric practices.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Concerned citizens and groups should relentlessly advocate legal and policy protections that force psychiatry to honor every individual’s right to be treated with humanity and respect and to recognize the inherent dignity of the person. These include protections from economic, sexual and other forms of exploitation.

2. Legal protections should be put in place to ensure that psychiatrists and psychologists are prohibited from violating the right of any person to exercise all civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights as recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and in other relevant instruments, such as the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment.

3. No person should ever be forced to undergo electric shock treatment, psychosurgery, coercive psychiatric treatment, or the enforced administration of mind-altering drugs. Parents cannot be forced or manipulated into permitting the drugging of their children by psychiatrists, other practitioners or school personnel. Governments should outlaw such abuses.

4. The responsible officials of regulatory agencies or their advisers must be held accountable and criminally charged for harm caused by psychiatric drugs and other psychiatric “treatment” if it is established that they knew, or should have known, of such harm either through clinical trial results, adverse reaction reports or broadly available public information.

5. Every individual who has been subject to such abuse should be helped to file a complaint to police and professional licensing bodies and have this abuse investigated and prosecuted. The individual should be helped also to obtain competent legal advice about filing a civil suit for damages against any offending psychiatrist and his or her hospital, associations and teaching institutions.

6. The United Nations, NGOs, human rights groups and concerned citizens should work together to create a new international human rights covenant that states sign and ratify to protect the right of all individuals from mind control and psychiatric abuse.

SIGN UP HERE.

Criminalization of Mental Health Care

Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014

Prisons: America’s New Asylums

Reference: “The Treatment of Persons with Mental Illness in Prisons and Jails: A State Survey”, 8 April 2014, Treatment Advocacy Center.

Although the Treatment Advocacy Center (TAC) is motivated primarily by psychiatric treatment and psychiatric drugs, they do present some interesting facts and viewpoints on mental health care in prisons and jails.

A major part of the treatment for prison inmates (used less for rehabilitation than for managing and disciplining inmates) is a regimen of powerful psychiatric drugs, despite numerous studies showing that aggression, violence and suicide are tied to their use. One study in California reported that 73 percent of prison suicides had a history of mental health treatment (meaning psychotropic drugs.)

The TAC report, of course, does not mention the violence and suicidal side effects of psychotropic drugs, preferring to push psych treatment and psych drugs instead.

Prisons and jails have become America’s new mental asylums. The number of individuals with serious mental symptoms in prisons and jails now exceeds the number of patients in state psychiatric hospitals tenfold. The cost of maintaining these inmates in prison skyrockets when psychiatric drugs are being used.

Notice we said “mental symptoms” instead of the popular press phrase “mental illness.” This is because, while people can indeed have debilitating mental trauma, this is not in fact a “mental illness”; it is a set of symptoms indicating some root cause which has not yet been found and handled. More than likely it is a legitimate medical problem that has not been diagnosed and treated, or it is the end result of illiteracy, or it is a side effect of taking drugs — legal or otherwise.

From 1770 to 1820 in the U.S., mentally traumatized persons were routinely confined in prisons and jails. This practice was inhumane, and it was replaced by housing such persons in hospitals until 1970. Since 1970 the earlier practice of routinely confining such persons in prisons and jails has resumed. So it has been known for almost 200 years that confining persons with mental trauma in prison is inhumane, yet this is now the current state of affairs.

In 2012, approximately 356 thousand inmates with mental health issues were confined in prisons and jails. On the other hand, only 35 thousand were in state psychiatric hospitals. In Missouri, it is estimated that 20 percent of the prison population has mental health issues, and this figure has apparently been steadily increasing.

TAC, in lockstep with the psycho-pharmaceutical industry, believes that providing appropriate treatment for inmates with mental health issues is the administration of psychiatric drugs.

Unfortunately, in TAC’s view, a prisoner can object to treatment with psychiatric drugs. Thus, the primary purpose of the referenced paper is to examine how psychiatric drugs can be forced on prison inmates without their permission. They call it “treatment over objection,” and it has its own mental diagnosis as justification.

This diagnosis is called “anosognosia,” from the Greek a + nosos + gnosis, meaning not + disease + knowing. In English terms, it means “ignorance of the presence of disease.” In other words, a person who refuses treatment (in this case a prison inmate refusing psychiatric drugs) is diagnosed with anosognosia as a justification for forcing treatment on the person against their will, since they are obviously ignorant of their own diseased condition.

In 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court (Washington v. Harper) held that an inmate with mental trauma need not be imminently dangerous before being medicated against his or her will, and that such an authorization may occur by administrative hearing rather than a judicial one. Thirty-one states, including Missouri, implement prison policies that allow an administrative (not a court) proceeding to force an inmate to take psychiatric drugs.

The Missouri Department of Corrections allows non-emergency involuntary administration of psychiatric drugs in cases where no immediate danger exists but the inmate poses a future likelihood of harm to self or others without treatment. The committee that authorizes this is composed of a psychiatrist, the associate superintendent, and the regional manager of mental health services. County jails may also use the same process.

The responsibility for helping people with mental trauma has gone to prisons and jails. Their primary method of treatment is psychotropic drugs known to cause violence and suicide — both when taking the drugs and when withdrawing from them. Prison violence and suicide are increasing; prison costs are increasing as more drugs are used; coercive measures are used to increase the prison population taking psychotropic drugs.

Does anyone see a problem with this trend?

FIND OUT! FIGHT BACK!

Johnson & Johnson Will Pay $2.2 Billion

Wednesday, November 27th, 2013

Johnson & Johnson Will Pay $2.2 Billion to Settle Charges of Illegally Promoting Antipsychotic Drug

This past month Johnson & Johnson agreed to pay more than $2.2 billion in fines to settle accusations that it improperly promoted the antipsychotic drug Risperdal to older adults and children.

It is the third-largest pharmaceutical settlement ever in the U.S. and the largest in a string of cases involving the marketing of antipsychotic drugs. It also reflects a decade-long effort by U.S. authorities to hold pharmaceutical companies accountable for illegally marketing drugs to older patients with dementia as well as children, despite the grave health risks of the drugs.

The U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, recently announced that the rate of mass shootings in the U.S. is increasing. Although the information could hardly come as a surprise to most Americans, what is interesting is that the nation’s top cop provided no clues as to what may be causing this severe increase in deadly violent acts.

A beginning point might be to ask if there is a common denominator among the shooters. For instance, at the same time that mass-shootings have increased in the U.S., so has the use of prescription psychiatric drugs.

Psychiatrists prescribe antipsychotic drugs to children in one third of all visits, which is three times higher than during the 1990’s, and nearly 90 percent of those prescriptions written between 2005 and 2009 were prescribed for something other than what the Food and Drug Administration approved them for. Antipsychotics such as the Risperdal improperly promoted by J&J have been described as a chemical lobotomy because of their ability to disable normal brain function.

Click here to read more information about this.

Bradley Manning under psychiatric treatment

Sunday, September 8th, 2013

Bradley Manning under psychiatric treatment

Various news reports have been discussing 25-year-old former intelligence analyst Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who was convicted of disclosing reams of classified information through WikiLeaks.

Apparently Manning was receiving psychiatric treatment while he was deployed in Iraq during 2009-2010.

Then when Manning was detained for nine months in the Quantico, Virginia maximum security brig he continued to receive psychiatric treatment. Reports say that Manning licked his cell bars while sleepwalking as a side effect of the drugs he was being given. A few months before Manning arrived at Quantico, another inmate of the brig had killed himself while under the same psychiatrist’s care.

After being sentenced to 35 years in prison, Manning was transferred to the prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. One expects that psychiatric treatment for Manning will be continued there. One news report we saw said that Manning had received both anti-depression and anti-anxiety drugs.

While we express no official position regarding his actions, we certainly have an official position on his psychiatric “treatment.”

According to psychiatric thinking, the “solution” for everything from the most minor to most severe personal problem is strictly limited to: 1) Diagnosing symptoms using the scientifically discredited Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; 2) Assigning a mental illness label; 3) Designating a restrictive, generally coercive and costly range of harmful treatments.

As decades of psychiatric monopoly over the world’s mental health reflects, this unilateral approach leads only to upwardly spiraling mental illness statistics, continuously escalating funding demands — and away from any cures.

What do we mean by “cure?” For the individual a cure means nothing less than complete and permanent absence of any overwhelming physical or mental trauma. For the society it means the rehabilitation of the individual as a consistently honest, ethical, productive and successful member.

Psychiatry cannot and never has produced a cure. Trusted with the care for our mentally disturbed, psychiatry has failed utterly to provide any humane solutions to their plight. Psychiatrists are failed medical practitioners who have betrayed their pledge to help patients in order to legally push their own dangerous psychotropic drugs.

In a significant departure from medical diagnosis, psychiatric diagnoses are devoted to categorization of symptoms only, not the observation of actual physical disease. None of the diagnoses are supported by scientific evidence of biological disease or a mental illness of any kind.

Psychiatry would prefer to say or imply that only brain-based, mental “illnesses” can affect irrational behavior or thinking, that they need long-term, if not life-long care, and that they are incurable. These falsehoods have been so successfully disseminated throughout the mental health system and amongst the public, that countless numbers have become trapped as lifelong patients of psychiatric and psychological services. These falsehoods must be exposed.

The psychiatric profession has been gradually but steadily undermining the foundations of our culture — individual responsibility, standards of achievement, education and justice. The bottom line, stated by Dr. Thomas Szasz, is that “psychiatrists have been largely responsible for creating the problems they have ostensibly tried to solve.”

The rehabilitation of criminals is a long-forgotten dream. We build more prisons and pass even tougher laws in the belief that these will act as a deterrent. In the 1940’s, psychiatry’s leaders proclaimed their intention to infiltrate the field of the law and bring about the “re-interpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong;” with the consequence that today, because of psychiatric influence, the justice system is failing.

For more information about how this occurred, and how psychiatry’s ideologies and actions have contributed to today’s failing criminal rehabilitation and increasing crime rate, download and read the CCHR bookletEroding Justice — Psychiatry’s Corruption of Law — Report and recommendations on psychiatry subverting the courts and corrective services.”