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

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

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

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

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.”

Charges reinstated against Detroit Mom Maryanne Godboldo

Charges reinstated against Detroit Mom Maryanne Godboldo

Charges have been reinstated against Detroit mother Maryanne Godboldo, who faced down a SWAT team and a tank for refusing to administer a dangerous and potentially lethal psychiatric drug (Risperdal) to her daughter.

Godboldo’s attorney, Allison Folmar said, “It shocks the conscience a judge never signed the order, a judge never read the order, a judge never consented to the order to go into my clients home and essentially break in. You cannot force an antipsychotic medication upon a child, and that’s what they were there to do. We’re ready for trial. If there has to be a trial, we’re ready for trial. My client did nothing illegal.”

The fact that they have reinstated these charges against Maryanne tells us one thing—the alliance of psychiatry and the state is powerful and it does not want someone like Maryanne being an example to others that a parent has the right to fight back against a corrupt system—a system which can mandate a parent to risk the life of their child with a drug like Risperdal, which is documented to cause diabetes, stroke, heart attack, violence, and death.

That the alliance of psychiatry and the state have that power over life and death is not only a travesty of justice, but is itself, insane.

Read more about this and watch the news video here.

Veterans Treatment Courts

Veterans Treatment Courts

One of the bills passed by the Missouri legislature this session, and awaiting signature by Governor Nixon, is Senate Bill 118, an act authorizing Missouri circuit courts to establish Veterans Treatment Courts, which would “provide an alternative for the judicial system to dispose of cases which stem from substance abuse or mental illness of military veterans or current military personnel.”

We have many serious concerns about this bill, which we would like to share with you. The bill is only three printed pages, and is mostly vague about how these courts would be implemented.

This has a similarity to existing Drug Treatment Courts, which currently cost $6,190 per case. The Fiscal Note accompanying this bill states that if a circuit court decides to create a veterans treatment court, they will be able to do so utilizing existing resources, and would make referrals for substance abuse or mental health treatment to existing Federal level programs or community-based treatment programs; therefore they assume the proposal would not create any additional funding concerns. As with other government bureaucracies, we have doubts about the veracity in practice of “no additional funding needed.”

Mental health courts are facilities established to deal with arrests for misdemeanors or non-violent felonies. Rather than allowing the guilty parties to take responsibility for their crimes, they are diverted to a psychiatric treatment center on the premise that they suffer from “mental illness” which will respond positively to antipsychotic drugs and that psychiatric treatment will stop the criminal behavior. There is no evidence that supports this false premise. It is another form of coercive “community mental health treatment.”

In a review of 20 mental health courts, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law found that these courts “may function as a coercive agent – in many ways similar to the controversial intervention, outpatient commitment – compelling an individual to participate in treatment under threat of court sanctions. However, the services available to the individual may be only those offered by a system that has already failed to help. Too many public mental health systems offer little more than medication.”

“A veterans treatment court shall combine judicial supervision, drug testing, and substance abuse and mental health treatment to participants who have served or are currently serving the United States armed forces, including members of the reserves, national guard, or state guard.”

First of all, this is degrading to veterans, assuming they are mental cases needing psychiatric treatment, and labeling them for life.

“Any statement made by a participant as part of participation in the veterans treatment court program, or any report made by the staff of the program, shall not be admissible as evidence against the participant in any criminal, juvenile, or civil proceeding.”

This totally removes individual responsibility and accountability for their criminal actions from the participating veterans.

Any circuit court, or combination of circuit courts, can establish their own conditions and rules for these veterans treatment courts. This inconsistency could lead not only to redundant and costly efforts, but also to discrimination as a result of differing implementations between courts.

All records and reports relevant to a veteran’s treatment program must be treated as closed records, “not to be disclosed to any person outside of the veterans treatment court.” This would make it difficult if not impossible for a veteran harmed by such a treatment program to have any legal recourse for damages.

As we already have a criminal probation system in place, we can only assume that this bill is a shameless attempt by the psychiatric industry to troll for more patients from the ranks of troubled veterans.

If you share these feelings about Governor Nixon signing this bill into law, now is the time to contact him with your concerns and suggest that he veto it.

If you appreciate these newsletters, please forward them to your family, friends and associates, and recommend that they subscribe.

Pill Mill Psychiatrist Disciplined

Effective February 1, 2013, the Medical Board of California placed psychiatrist Nathan Brian Kuemmerle on seven years’ probation, with an actual one year suspension beginning February 17, 2013.

Kuemmerle, who formerly practiced in West Hollywood, was charged with operating a “pill mill” out of his office: writing thousands of narcotics prescriptions for cash, without examining patients.

On May 18, 2011, Nathan Kuemmerle was sentenced in Los Angeles federal court to time served and three years probation, following his January conviction on one charge of distribution of a controlled substance—specifically, 180 tablets of Xanax.

Investigations revealed that Kuemmerle was the number one prescriber of the most powerful dosage of the stimulant drug Adderall in the state of California and the second-highest prescriber of Schedule II controlled substances (the designation used by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration for drugs of greatest danger, addiction and abuse).

Kuemmerle is reported to have written prescriptions for cash, without legitimate medical purposes, to make money to pay for his addiction to methamphetamine.

The Medical Board of California placed conditions on Kuemmerle upon his return to practice: He is prohibited from supervising physician assistants, engaging in the solo act of medicine, and shall not order, prescribe, dispense, administer, furnish, or possess any controlled substances; and, shall not issue an oral or written recommendation or approval to a patient for possession or cultivation of marijuana for personal medical purposes.

YOU CAN HELP spread the word about psychiatric fraud and abuse. Watch the CCHR documentary DVDs and show them to your family, friends, and associates. The fraud is real, the abuse is real, and the truth is real scary – but something can always be done about it. Don’t wait for someone else to do something about it!

Psychiatric Clinic Sued for Negligence

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mental Health Courts

Mental Health Courts are facilities established to deal with arrests for misdemeanors or non-violent felonies. Rather than allowing the guilty parties to take responsibility for their crimes, they are diverted to a psychiatric treatment center on the premise that they suffer from “mental illness” which will respond positively to antipsychotic drugs. The assertion that criminal behavior is caused by a psychiatric problem and that treatment will stop the behavior has no evidence to support this false premise. It is simply another form of coercive psychiatric treatment.

In a review of 20 mental health courts, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law found that these courts “may function as a coercive agent – in many ways similar to the controversial intervention, outpatient commitment – compelling an individual to participate in treatment under threat of court sanctions. However, the services available to the individual may be only those offered by a system that has already failed to help. Too many public mental health systems offer little more than medication.”

There are clear indications that governments’ endorsement of mental health courts and “community policing” (as it is referred to in some European countries) will see more patients forced into a life of mentally and physically dangerous drug consumption and dependence, with no hope of a cure.

Mental health courts, starting in the 1980’s and 1990’s, attempt to link offenders who would ordinarily be prison-bound to long-term community-based treatment, connecting with the Community Mental Health Centers system that was established in 1955. Mental health courts proliferated in the early 2000’s due to funding from the federal Mental Health Courts Program administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance.

Community Mental Health Centers became legalized drug dealerships that not only supplied drugs to former mental hospital patients, but also supplied psychiatric prescriptions to individuals not suffering from any serious mental problems. Community Mental Health programs have been an expensive and colossal failure, creating homelessness, drug addiction, crime and unemployment all over the world.

For more information download and read the free CCHR booklet “The Real Crisis in Mental Health Today“.