Psychiatry's Coercive "Care"

8/9/2019 Psychiatry's Coercive "Care"

1/32


2/32


3/32

CONTENTSIntroduction: Harmingthe Disturbed ...............................

Chapter One: CommunityMental Health Origins .................

Chapter Two:Dangerous Drug Treatment .......

Chapter Three:Arbitrary Commitments ...............

Chapter Four:Improving Mental Health ............

Recommendations .......................

Citizens Commission onHuman Rights International .........

COMMUNITYRUIN

Psychiatrys Coercive Care


4/32

With the rapid growth of gov-ernment Community MentalHealth programs for severelymentally disturbed individu-als now costing billions of

dollars, how is mental health faring in our com-munities today?

The U.S. New Freedom Commission on Mental

Health issued a report that claimed, Effective, state-of-the-art treatments vital for quality care and recoveryare now available formost serious mentalillnesses and seriousemotional disorders.1[Emphasis added]

For those who knowlittle about psychiatryand Community MentalHealth, this appears tobe great news. However,exactly what are these vital treatments?

They principally involve an automatic, one-for-one prescription of drugs called neuroleptics (fromGreek, meaning nerve seizing, reflective of how thedrugs act like a chemical lobotomy).

The cost of neuroleptics for the treatment of so-called schizophrenic patients across the United Statesat over $10 million (?8.2 million) a day.2 Treatment isusually life-long.

Then again, what should we pay for qualitycare, for recovery, for the opportunity to bring thesepeople back to productive lives?

According to several non-psychiatric and

independent research experiments, the answerto that question is Not much at all. Quality care

resulting in recovery and reintegration can be veryinexpensive, as well as rapid, permanent, and mostsignificantly, drug free.

In an eight-year study, the World HealthOrganization found that severely mentally dis-turbed patients in three economically disadvantagedcountries whose treatment plans do not includea heavy reliance on drugs India, Nigeria and

Colombia found that patients did dramaticallybetter than their counterparts in the United States and

four other developedcountries. A follow-upstudy reached a similarconclusion.3

In the United Statesin the 1970s, the late Dr.Loren Moshers SoteriaHouse experiment was based on the idea thatschizophrenia can be

overcome without drugs. Soteria clients who didnt

receive neuroleptics actually did the best, comparedto hospital and drug-treated control subjects. Swiss,Swedish and Finnish researchers have replicatedand validated the experiment and are still using thistoday.

In Italy, Dr. Georgio Antonucci dismantled someof the most oppressive psychiatric wards by treatingseverely disturbed patients with compassion, respectand withoutdrugs. Within months, the most violentwards became the calmest.

Robert Whitaker revealed in his book Mad InAmerica that the treatment outcomes for people

with schizophrenia have actually worsened overthe past several decades. Today, they are no better

INTRODUCTIONHarming the Disturbed

I N T R O D U C T I O NH a r m i n g t h e D i s t u r b e d

2

Psychiatry promotes that the only treatmentfor severe mental illness is neuroleptic

[antipsychotic] drugs. The truth is that not onlyis the drugging of severely mentally disturbed

patients unnecessary and expensive itcauses brain- and life-damaging effects.

Jan Eastgate


5/32

than they were in the early 20th century, yet theUnited States has by far the highest consumptionof neuroleptics of any country.

What does all this mean?As any self-respecting physical scientist will

tell you, a theory is good only so long as it works.He knows that when he encounters facts that dontfit the theory, he must continue to investigate and

modify or discard the theory based on the actualevidence discovered.

For many years, psychiatry has promoted itstheory that the only treatment for severe mentalillness is neuroleptic drugs. However, thisidea is faulty. The truth is that not only is thedrugging of severely mentally disturbed patientsunnecessary and expensive it causes brain- andlife-damaging side effects.

This publication exposes the faults in psychiatrysarguments its fraud, lies and other deceptions.Knowing this information makes it very easy to seewhy psychiatrists would attack any alternative and

better solution to the problems of severe mentaldisturbance.

For the truth is, we are not just dealing witha lack of scientific skill or method, or even with aquasi-science. Seemingly benign statements, such asThere is clear scientific evidence that newer classesof medications can better treat the symptoms ofschizophrenia and depression with far fewer sideeffects, are not backed up by evidence and constituteoutright medical fraud.

Psychiatrys approach to the treatment of theseverely mentally disturbed the evidence-based,

scientific and operational backbone of communitymental health and other psychiatric programs is

bad science and bad medicine but is very goodbusiness for psychiatry.

The simple truth is that there are workablealternatives to psychiatrys mind-, brain- and body-

damaging treatments. With psychiatry now callingfor mandatory mental illness screening for adultsand children everywhere, we urge all who have aninterest in preserving the mental health, the physicalhealth and the freedom of their families, communitiesand nations, to read this publication. Something mustbe done to establish real help for those who need it.

Sincerely,

Jan Eastgate

President, Citizens Commissionon Human Rights International

I N T R O D U C T I O NH a r m i n g t h e D i s t u r b e d

3


6/32

5

3

1

2

4

Community Mental Health (CMH)

has been promoted as the solution

to institutional problems. However,

it has been an expensive failure.

By the 1970s, enough neurolepticdrugs and antidepressants were

being prescribed outside psychiatric

hospitals to keep some three to four

million Americans drugged full-time.

The Netherlands Institute of

Mental Health and Addiction

reported that the CMH program

in Europe created homelessness,

drug addiction, criminal activities,

disturbances to public peace and

order and unemployment.

In Australia, the Federal

Human Rights Commissioner

Brian Burdekin announced that

deinstitutionalization was a fraud

and a failure. British officials also

acknowledged its failure.

Psychiatrys CMH care budget in

the U.S. has soared by more than

6,000% since 1969. Today the esti-

mated costs are around $11 billion

(E

9 billion) a year.

IMPORTANT FACTS


7/32

CHAPTER ONECommunity MentalHealth Origins

C H A P T E R O N EC o m m u n i t y M e n t a l H e a l t h O r i g i n s

5

Community Mental Health (CMH)is a major psychiatric expansioninitiative. It began in the UnitedStates in the 1960s and spread toother countries in the 1980s. It

has netted psychiatry and the pharmaceuticalindustry many billions of dollars.

Prior to this, patients had been ware-

housed in Bedlam-like psychiatric institutions,pumped full of drugs to make them submissive,and left to wallow in drug-induced stupors.Throughout the1950s, pressure grewfrom all quarters toaddress the appallingconditions, the lackof results and thegrowing cost burden.

CMH was pro-moted as the solutionto all institutional

problems. The prem-ise, based almostentirely on the devel-opment and use ofneuroleptic drugs,was that patientscould now be suc-cessfully released back into society. Ongoingservice would be provided through government-funded units called Community Mental HealthCenters (CMHCs). These centers would tend tothe patients from within the community, dispens-

ing the neuroleptics that would keep them undercontrol. Governments would save money and

individuals would improve faster. The plan wascalled deinstitutionalization.

Psychiatrist Jack Ewalt hinted at a moreglobal intent for deinstitutionalization at thetime: The program should serve the troubled,the disturbed, the slow, the ill, and the healthyof all age groups.4 [Emphasis added] In otherwords psychiatrists were to go beyond the

mentally disturbed, obtaining a healthy clienteleto drug.

From Snake Pitsto Snake Oil

Author PeterSchrag wrote that bythe mid-1970s, enoughneuroleptic drugs andantidepressants were being prescribed out-side hospitals to keepsome three to four mil-

lion people medicatedfull-time roughly 10times the number who,according to the [psychi-atrists] own arguments,are so crazy that theywould have to be locked

up in hospitals if there were no drugs.5Dr. Thomas Szasz, professor of psychiatry

emeritus, declared that psychiatrys miracu-lous offerings were simply the psychiatricprofessions latest snake oil: drugs and deinsti-

tutionalization. As usual, psychiatrists definedtheir latest fad as a combination of scientific

Community mental health

would not merely treat people but

whole communities; it would, if pos-

sible, take on the mayors and the people

concerned about the cities as clients;

it would treat society itself and not

merely its individual citizens and it

was the drugs which gave it its most

powerful technology.

Peter Schrag, author ofMind Control


8/32

revolutions and moral reform, and cast it in therhetoric of treatment and civil liberties. Theyclaimed that psychotropic drugs relieved thesymptoms of mental illness and enabled the

patients to be discharged from mental hospi-tals. Community Mental Health Centers were

touted as providing the least restrictive settingfor delivering the best available mental healthservices. Such were the claims of psychiatriststo justify the policy of forcibly drugging

and relocating their hospitalized patients. Itsounded grand. Unfortunately, it was a lie.6

Even the AmericanPsychiatric Association(APA) publication

Madness and Gov-ernment admitted, [P]sychiatrists gavethe impression to elect-ed officials that cureswere the rule, not theexception inflatedexpectations went

unchallenged. In short,CMHCs were over-sold as curative orga-nizational units.7

The truth is thatCMHCs became legal-ized drug dealershipsthat not only suppliedpsychiatric drugs toformer mental hospi-tal patients, but alsosupplied prescriptionsto individuals freeof serious mentalproblems.

Deinstitutionaliz-ation failed and soci-ety has been strug-

gling with the disastrous results ever since.Dr. Dorine Baudin of the Netherlands

Institute of Mental Health and Addictionreported that the CMHC program in Europehad created homelessness, drug addiction,crime, disturbance to public peace and order,unemployment, and intolerance of deviance.8

C H A P T E R O N EC o m m u n i t y M e n t a l H e a l t h O r i g i n s

6

Community Mental Healthis a highly touted but failing socialinnovation. It already bears the

familiar pattern of past mentalhealth promises that raised falsehopes of imminent solutions, and

wound up only recapitulating theproblems they were to solve.

Ralph Nader,

U.S. consumer advocate

Ralph Nader


9/32

U.S. consumer advocate Ralph Nader calledCMHCs a highly touted but failing socialinnovation. It already bears the familiarpattern of past mental health promises that

were initiated amid great moral fervor, raisedfalse hopes of imminent solutions, and woundup only recapitulating the problems they wereto solve.9

In Australia, federal Human RightsCommissioner Brian Burdekin announced thatdeinstitutionalization was a fraud and a failure.British officials also acknowledged the failure ofcommunity mental health care.10

Meanwhile, psychiatrys CMHC budget inthe United States soared from $143 million (?117million) in 1969 to over $11 billion (?9 billion) amore than 7,500% increase in funding, for a mere

10 times increase in the number of patients and,more importantly, no results.

If collecting these billions in inflatedfees for non-workable treatments wasnt badenough, a congressional committee found thatCMHCs had diverted between $40 million(?32.7 million) and $100 million (?81.8 million)to improper uses; i.e., into the pocketsof psychiatrists.11

The psychiatrists have consistently blamedthe failure of deinstitutionalization on a lack ofcommunity mental health funding. In reality, theycreate the drug-induced crisis themselves and

then, shamelessly, demand yet more money.

607%

6,242%Spending on Community Mental Health Centers

(CMHCs in the United States) has increased

more than 100 times faster than the increase

in number of people using CMHC clinics. Despite

eating up taxpayer billions, the clinics have failed

their patients and become little more than legalized

drug dealerships for the homeless.

COMMUNITYMENTAL HEALTH

Exorbitant Cost, Colossal Failure

U.S. CMHC andpsychiatric outpatient

clinics increase in usage

U.S. CMHC anpsychiatric outpatieclinics increase in co

COMMUNITY MENTALHEALTH FAILURE:In 1963, the United States

psychiatric research body,National Institute of MentalHealth (NIMH), under

psychiatrist Robert Felix (right),implemented a community health

program which relied heavily onthe use of mind-altering

psychiatric drugs. Spawning aninternational trend, it sent drugged

patients into the streets, homelessand incapable. After more than$50 billion (?39billion) spent onit, the program is an abject failure.

Increasein use =

Increasein cost =


10/32

Mind-altering neuroleptic drugs

are the destructive mainstay of

community mental health

programs.

The drugs hinder normal brain

function and produce pathology

much like the lobotomy which

psychotropic drugs replaced.

The homeless individuals

commonly seen grimacing and

talking to themselves on the streetare exhibiting the symptoms of

psychiatric drug-induced damage.

Newer neuroleptics (antipsychotics)

have sold at significantly higher

prices, in one case at 30 times

the price of the older versions.

One new antipsychotic drug

costs $3,000 (E2,456) to $9,000

(E7,368) more per patient, with

no benefit as to symptoms, side

effects or overall quality of life.

The drugs can cause serious

side effects, notably diabetes,

in some cases leading to death.

In just one eight-year period more

than 280 patients taking the new

antipsychotics developed

diabetes; 75 became severely

ill and 23 died.

These drugs can also cause suicidal

or violent behavior.

1

2

34

5

6

IMPORTANT FACTS


11/32

The advent of Community MentalHealth psychiatric programs wouldnot have been possible without thedevelopment and use of neurolepticdrugs, also known as antipsychotics,

for mentally disturbed individuals.The first generation of neuroleptics, now com-

monly referred to as typical antipsychotics or typi-

cals, appeared during the 1960s. They were heavilypromoted as miracle drugs that, according to one

New York Times article,made it possible for mostof the mentally ill to besuccessfully and quicklytreated in their own com-munities and returned to auseful place in society.12[Emphasis added]

These claims werefalse. An article in the

American Journal of

Bioethics stated, Thereality was that thetherapies damaged the

brains frontal lobes,which is the distinguish-ing feature of the human

brain. The neurolepticdrugs used since the 1950s worked by hinder-ing normal brain function: they dimmed psy-chosis, but produced pathology often worsethan the condition for which they have beenprescribedmuch like physical lobotomy which

psychotropic drugs replaced.

13

The homeless individuals commonly seen

grimacing and talking to themselves on the streetare exhibiting the effects of such psychiatric drug-induced damage. Tardive dyskinesia (tardive,late appearing and dyskinesia, abnormal musclemovement) and tardive dystonia (dystonia,abnormal muscle tension) are permanent conditionscaused by tranquilizers in which the muscles of theface and body contort and spasm involuntarily.

In short, the drug-induced reactions are of sucha nature that an observer could be forgiven for assum-

ing the person so affectedwas mentally ill and per-haps even dangerous. Aperson suffering fromsuch a reaction, even toa minor degree, wouldexperience great difficul-ty in being accepted bythe man in the streetas normal, wrote PamGorring, author ofMental

Disorder or Madness?14

Neuroleptic patients became sluggish, apa-thetic, disinclined towalk, less alert and hadan empty look a vacuityof expression on their

faces. Patients also complained of drowsiness, weak-ness, apathy, a lack of initiative and a loss of interestin surroundings.15

Robert Whitaker, author of Mad in America,reported, The image we have today of schizophre-

nia is not that of madness whatever that might be in its natural state. All of the traits that we

C H A P T E R T W OD a n g e r o u s D r u g T r e a t m e n t

9

The creation of a tale of a

breakthrough medication could be

carefully plotted. Such was the case with

the [new neuroleptics], and behind the

public facade of medical achievement

is a story of science marred by greed,

deaths, and the deliberate deceptionof the American public.

Robert Whitaker, Mad in America: Bad

Science, Bad Medicine, and the Enduring

Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill

CHAPTER TWODangerous DrugTreatment


12/32

awkward gait, the jerking arm movements, thevacant facial expression, the sleepiness, the lack ofinitiative are symptoms due, at least in large partto the effects of neuroleptics. Our perceptions of

how those ill with schizophrenia think, behave,and look are all perceptions of people altered bymedication, and not by any natural course of adisease.16

As for improving the patients quality of life,neuroleptics have produced a miserable record. Apatient survey found 90% of neuroleptic patients feltdepressed, 88% felt sedated, and 78% complainedof poor concentration. More than 80% of people

diagnosed with schizo-phrenia are chronicallyunemployed.17 In otherwords, despite decades of

promised cures, none haveever materialized.

In the 1980s, with thepatent protection expiredand the drugs becomingavailable in much cheapergeneric forms, the pricesfor the major brandsdropped steeply, makingthem unprofitable.18 Thisall changed in the early1990s, when newly pat-ented neuroleptics known

as atypical antipsychot-ics or atypicals wereintroduced with even morefanfare than their predeces-

sors. The old neuroleptics were suddenly tagged asflawed drugs.19

Expert psychiatric opinion was recruited todisseminate claims that, There is clear scientificevidence that newer classes of medications can better treat the symptoms of schizophrenia anddepression with far fewer side effects. The opinionswere tagged Expert Consensus Guidelines

despite their complete absence of scientific analysis,study reviews or clinical trials.20

The neuroleptic drugs used

since the 1950s worked byhindering normal brain function:

they dimmed psychosis, but

produced pathology often worse

than the condition for which

they have been prescribed

much like physical lobotomy

which psychotropic drugs

replaced.

Vera Sharav writing in theAmerican Journal of Bioethics


13/32

With these guidelines in place, psychia-trists finally saw fit to publicly admit what theyhad always known: that the earlier drugs didnot control delusions or hallucinations; that two-

thirds of the drugged patients had persistentpsychotic symptoms a year after their first psy-chotic break and that 30% of patients didntrespond to the drugs at all a non-responserate that up until the 1980s had hardly ever beenmentioned.

The new antipsychotics have sold at signifi-cantly higher prices, in one case at 30 times the priceof the older drugs.21 Another new neuroleptic costs$3,000 (?2,456) to $9,000 (?7,368) more per patient,

with no benefits as to symptoms, side effects oroverall quality of life. Antipsychotic drug sales inthe United States have increased by 1,500%, fromless than $500 million (?409 million) to more than$10 billion (?7.8 billion). International sales are morethan $12 billion (?9.8 billion).22

Most people prescribed psychiatric drugs arerarely informed that they could suffer crip-

pling facial and body spasms as a permanent

side effect of many of these drugs. The major tranquil-

izers (antipsychotics) damage the extrapyramidal system

(EPS), the extensive complex network of nerve fibers that

moderates motor control, resulting in muscle rigidity,

spasms, various involuntary movements (below right).

The muscles of the face and body contort, drawing the

face into hideous scowls and grimaces and twisting the

body into bizarre contortions.

Psychiatrists are aware of the devastating nerve

damage their drugs cause and the risk of the patient

suffering neuroleptic malignant syndrome, a potentially

fatal toxic reaction where patients break into fevers and

become confused, agitated, and extremely rigid. This can

and has resulted in tens of thousands of deaths.

Something else that psychiatrists do not mention is

that they have diagnosed the drug-induced permanent

damage inflicted upon patients as a mental disorder

for which they can now double bill insurance com-

panies to treat. The disorders include the neuro-

leptic malignant syndrome and neuroleptic-induced

Parkinsonism.

Not surprisingly, these chemicals are capable of

throwing the minds of users into chaos and have along and well-documented history of creating insanity

in persons who take them.

DESTROYING LIVESNeuroleptic-Induced Harm


11


14/32

There is no argumentthat the public must beprotected from violentand psychotic or crazy

behavior. However, theidea that this is the majorrisk we face from severe-ly mentally disturbedpatients, because of theirmental condition, is a liemanufactured by psy-chiatrists themselves. Sois the idea that we shouldminimize this risk bydrugging patients withneuroleptics, against theirwill if necessary. The

truth is that neither theabsence of such drugs, orthe failure to take them,is the problem. The drugsthemselves create violentimpulses.

z Although thepublic may think thatcrazy people are like-ly to behave in violentways, Robert Whitakerfound this was not trueof mental patients prior

to the introduction ofneuroleptics. Before 1955,four studies found thatpatients discharged frommental hospitals commit-ted crimes at either thesame or a lower rate thanthe general population.However, eight stud-ies conducted from 1965to 1979 determined thatdischarged patients were

being arrested at ratesthat exceeded those of

the general population. Akathisia [extreme drug-induced restlessness] wasalso clearly a contributing

factor.23

z Antipsychotic drugsmay temporarily dim psy-chosis but, over the longrun, make patients more

biologically prone to it.24

z A study in The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease on the useof neuroleptics in schizo-phrenics found a markedincrease in violent behav-ior with moderately high

dosages of a neuroleptic.25z Another study

determined that 50% ofall fights in a psychiat-ric ward could be tied toakathisia. Another studyconcluded that moderate-to-high doses of one majortranquilizer made halfof the patients markedlymore aggressive. Patientsdescribed violent urgesto assault anyone near.26

z According to astudy of one minor tran-quilizer, Extreme angerand hostile behavioremerged in eight of the80 patients treated withthe drug. One womanwho had no history ofviolence before taking thetranquilizer erupted withscreams on the fourth day,and held a steak knife to

her mothers throat forseveral minutes.


12

Studies have concluded

that moderate-to-high doses of one

major tranquilizer made half of thepatients markedly more aggressive.

Patients described violent urges

to assault anyone near.

Mamoru Takuma Andrea Yates

Jeremy StrohmeyerEdmund Kemper III

David HawkinsEric Harris

Many medical studies report evidence of psychiatric drugsinducing violent or suicidal behavior. The above murderers,

from the U.S., Australia and Japan, committed brutal

killings while undergoing psychiatric treatmentinvolving psychiatric drugs.


15/32

T

he new miracle neuroleptics (or atypical

antipsychotics) have not lived up to the

media and professional hype.27 Their story

goes far beyond mere false advertising for

the sake of maximizing profits.z Using the U.S. Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA), science writer

Robert Whitaker learned

that the atypical drug

trials did not support

industry claims that the

latest neuroleptics were

safer or more effective

than existing ones. One

in every 145 patients who

entered the trials died,

and yet those deaths were

never mentioned in thescientific literature. One in

every 35 patients in tri-

als for one atypical expe-

rienced a serious adverse

event, defined by the Food

and Drug Administration

(FDA) as a life-threatening

event or one that required

hospitalization.

z The British Medical Journalpublished the results

of a multi-year study by Dr. John Geddes who had

reviewed independent clinical trials involving over

12,000 patients, examining the effectiveness and

dangers of the atypical and typical antipsychotics. The

result: There is no clear evidence that atypical antipsy-

chotics are more effective or are better tolerated than

conventional antipsychotics.28

z A study by Yale researchers published in the

November 2003 edition of theJournal of the American

Medical Association also found no statistically or

clinically significant advantages of these new drugs.29

z The New York Times effectively retracted its

earlier high praise for these antipsychotics, stating,

They were billed as near wonder drugs, much safer

and more effective in treating schizophrenia than any-

thing that had come before. However, now there

is increasing suspicion that they may cause serious

side effects, notably diabetes, in some cases leading

to death.30 More than 45 children have died from

these drugs.

z The FDA ordered makers of six atypicals toadd a caution to their labeling language about

the risk of diabetes and

blood sugar abnormali-

ties and an additional

boxed warning for

elderly patients taking

the drugs that the drugs

increase death rates.z Eli Lilly, the manu-

facturer of the antipsy-

chotic, Zyprexa, agreed

to pay more than $1

billion (#788 million) tosettle more than 28,000

claims against the drug

alleging it can potential-

ly cause life-threatening

diabetes.

z Studies show that

when patients stopped

taking these drugs, they

improved.31

Rather than fewer side effects, the newer antipsy-

chotics have more severe side effects. These include

blindness, fatal blood clots, heart arrhythmia, heat

stroke, swollen and leaking breasts, impotence and

sexual dysfunction, blood disorders, painful skin rashes,

seizures, birth defects, extreme inner-anxiety and rest-

lessness, death from liver failure, suicide rates two

to five times more frequent than for the general

schizophrenic population, and violence and may-

hem, especially in young patients.

Nor are physical effects the extent of the problem.

Many patients complain that the drugs are spiritu-

ally deadening, robbing them of any sense of joy, of

their willpower, and of their sense of being. While the

exact danger and side effect profiles have changed,

the atypical neuroleptics still operate as a chemical

lobotomy.32

FALSE MIRACLESLife-Threatening Therapies


16/32

Every 75 seconds in the United

States someone is committed to a

psychiatric institution.

A U.S. Supreme Court judgment

states: No matter how the

test for insanity is phrased, a

psychiatrist or psychologist is no

more qualified than any other

person to give an opinion about

whether a particular defendants

mental condition satisfies the

legal test for insanity.

Most commitment laws are basedon the concept that a person may

be a danger to himself or others

if not placed in an institution.

However, psychiatrists admit

they cannot predict dangerous

behavior.

The majority of involuntarily

committed individuals have fewer

rights and less legal protections

than a criminal, yet they have not

violated any civil or penal code.

Pharmaceutical companies

funded allof the psychiatrists

that determined so called

schizophrenic and psychotic

disorders for inclusion in

psychiatrys diagnostic, insurance

billing manual.33

2

4

5

3

IMPORTANT FACTS

1


17/32

C H A P T E R T H R E EA r b i t r a r y C o m m i t m e n t s

15

Accompanying the psychiatristspush for expanded communitymental health is their demand forgreater powers to involuntarilycommit individuals.

Currently in the United States, one person isinvoluntarily incarcerated in a psychiatric facil-ity every 1 1/4 minutes. One study found increas-

ing rates of involuntary commitment in Austria,England, Finland, France,Germany and Sweden,with Germany record-ing a 70% increase overeight years.34

Before you finishreading this page, anoth-er person perhaps afriend, a family mem-ber, or a neighbor willhave been committedand, more often than

not, brutally treated.Psychiatrists disin-

genuously argue thatinvoluntary commit-ment in hospitals or thecommunity is an act of kindness, that it is cruel toleave the demented or disturbed in a tormentedstate. However, such claims are based on thedual premises that: 1) psychiatrists have helpfuland workable treatments to begin with, and 2)psychiatrists have some expertise in diagnosingand predicting dangerousness.

Both suppositions are patently false.As already discussed, psychiatric neuroleptic

treatment not only creates the sort of violenceor mental incompetence that would give causefor involuntary incarceration or coercive commu-nity treatment under current laws, it places thepatient at greater risk mentally and physically. Asa result of enforced community mental health treat-ment to date, we now have millions of druggedand incapable individuals roaming homeless on

the streets.Psychiatric detain-

ment can become a lifesentence. Apart from thefact that the committalprocess can keep a personindefinitely in the hospitalfor years, once released,patients may be undermandatory communitytreatment orders.

Robert Whitaker saysthat in this way, States

are asserting the rightto demand that peopleliving in the commu-nity take antipsychoticdrugs, which represents

a profound expansion of state control over thementally ill.35

Most commitment laws are based on theconcept that a person may be a danger to himselfor others if not placed in an institution. However,an American Psychiatric Association (APA) taskforce admitted in a 1979 Brief to the U.S. Supreme

Court that, Psychiatric expertise in the pre-diction of dangerousness is not established.

CHAPTER THREEArbitraryCommitments

The accuracy with which

clinical judgment presents future

events is often little better than

random chance. The accumulated

research literature indicates that errors in

predicting dangerousness range from

54% to 94%, averaging about 85%. Terrence Campbell,

Michigan Bar Journal


18/32


16

Terrence Campbell in an article in the MichiganBar Journal wrote, The accuracy with whichclinical judgment presents future events is oftenlittle better than random chance. The accumulated

research literature indicates that errors in predictingdangerousness range from 54% to 94%, averagingabout 85%.

Kimio Moriyama, vice president of the JapanesePsychiatrists Association, expressed psychiatrys inabil-ity to foresee correctly whata persons future behav-ior might be: A patientsmental disease and crimi-nal tendency are essen-tially different, and it isimpossible for medical sci-ence to tell whether some-

one has a high potential torepeat an offense.36

Another psychiatric ruse is the claim thatinvoluntary commitment protects the persons rightto treatment. Quite aside from the fiction of treat-ment, involuntary commitment laws are totalitarian.

According to Professor Szasz, Whether weadmit it or not, we have a choice between caring forothers by coercing them and caring for them onlywith their consent. At the moment, care withoutcoercion when the ostensible beneficiarys prob-

lem is defined as mentalillness is not an accept-able option in profes-sional deliberations onmental health policy.The conventional expla-nation for shutting outthis option is that the

mental patient suffersfrom a brain disease

As a result of enforced

community mental health

treatment to date, we now have

millions of drugged and incapable

individuals roaming homelesson the streets.


19/32

Mental health courts are facilities established todeal 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. It is another form of coercive community mental health

treatment.

Nancy Wolff, Ph.D., director of the Center for Mental Health

Services and Criminal Justice Research, reports, there is no

evidence to show that mental illness per se is the principal or

proximate cause of offending behavior. Although believing

in treatment as a protective shield is appealing most clients

who were actively involved in assertive community treatmentprograms continued to have frequent contacts with the criminal

justice system those clients who were the most criminally

active were receiving the most expensive set of services.

Wolff says further: This type of special status for offenders

who have mental illness holds the illness responsible for the

behavior, not the individual, and, as such, opens the opportu-

nity for individuals to use illness to excuse behavior.40

In a review of 20 mental health courts, the Bazelon Center

for Mental Health Law found that these courts may function

as a coercive agentin many ways similar to the controversial

intervention, outpatient commitmentcompelling an

individual to participate in treatment under threat of courtsanctions. 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.41

In summary, there are clear indicators 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.

LOST JUSTICEMental Health Courts

that annuls his capacity for rational cooperation.Professor Szasz says this is false. All history

teaches us to beware of benefactors who deprivetheir beneficiaries of liberty.37

Michael McCubbin, Ph.D., associate researcher,and David Cohen, Ph.D., professor of social ser-vices, both of the University of Montreal, say thatthe right to treatment is today more often theright to receive forced treatment.38

Article 5 of the European Convention onHuman Rights guarantees, Everyone whois deprived of his liberty by arrest or detentionshall be entitled to take proceedings by which thelawfulness of his detention shall be decided speedilyby a court and his release ordered if the detentionis not lawful. The United Nations UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights recommends similar

protections.Yet every week, thousands are seized with-

out due process of law as a result of psychiatricinvoluntary commitment laws. The majority ofthese citizens have fewer rights and less legal pro-tections than a criminal, yet they have not violatedany civil or penal code.

George Hoyer, professor of community medi-cine at the University of Tromsoe in Norway, wrote,Seriously mentally disordered patients neither lackinsight, nor is their competency impaired.39

Depriving the liberty of a mentally disorderedperson by involuntary incarceration in a psychiatric

facility and then forcing treatment upon him orher, especially after a persons explicit refusal toundergo potentially dangerous treatment, violatesthe most fundamental freedoms that are enjoyed byall other citizens, including those undergoing medi-cal treatment.

Violating Human RightsHow easy is it to be committed? Very easy.

Consider the following examples:z Seventy-four-year-old William, suffering con-

gestive heart failure and reliant on an oxygen tank to

breathe, said, Yes, when his homecare nurse askedif he felt depressed. Within 30 minutes, an attendant


20/32


18

from a local psychiat-ric hospital arrived andwhen William refused togo with him, the atten-

dant called the police.The officers unhookedthe oxygen tank,searched him for weap-ons, put him into a policecar and drove him to amedical hospital whichtransferred him to a psy-chiatric facility. With noexamination, Williamwas committed as sui-cidal, and held involun-tarily for 72 hours for

observation. The nextday a psychiatrist saidhe needed to be detainedanother 48 hours andpossibly as long as sixmonths. William wassaved only by the onsetof a heart attack. He wastransferred to a generalhospital where a medicaldoctor determined thatWilliam had no need forpsychiatric confinement.

Williams health insur-ance was billed $4,000(?3,275) for four days in the psychiatric facility (eventhough he had only been there two days, and not bychoice), and he was billed $800 (?655) personally.

z Massachusetts parents rushed their8-year-old epileptic son to a hospital for a medica-tion adjustment after he experienced hallucinations.Instead of adjusting his medication, staff committedhim to a psychiatric facility. It took the frantic par-ents an entire day to secure his transfer to a medicalhospital for appropriate care.

z

Psychiatrists in Germany involuntarilycommitted a 79-year-old woman because neighbors

reported she had actedstrangely. Despite herlong-term diabetes andliver, kidney and heart

conditions, she was pre-scribed between 5 and 20times the normal dosageof powerful tranquiliz-ers. Six days later thewoman was rushed toa hospital emergencyroom, where she died.An autopsy determinedthat she died of breathingdifficulties a complica-tion of tranquilizers.

z When 19-year-

old Jo was persuadedto admit herself to apsychiatric hospital inEngland while recover-ing from eating prob-lems, she was told shewould be able to rest,go for walks and receivecounseling. My psy-chiatrists idea of coun-seling was to put meon antipsychotic drugs,and whenever I had a

problem to increase thedose, she told a London

newspaper. There was nothing to do but eat, watchtelevision and smoke. On the drugs, I becameaggressive, and for the first time, I started to cutmy arms, she said. The longer I was in there, theless sane I became. When she ran away, she wasreturned to the hospital and involuntarily commit-ted. A patient raped her. But when she reportedthis to staff they told her the man was just ill. Ittook several months before Jos mother was able tosecure her release. Looking back its hard to believe

what happened to me. I went in for a rest but cameout a total wreck.42

Professor Thomas Szasz has pointed

out that psychiatrists have been

largely responsible for creating the

problems they have ostensibly tried

to solve. They are, therefore, the last

people we should turn to for solving

the problem of our homeless, of

violence and of community

mental health in general.


21/32

INVENTED DISEASESDiagnostic Pseudoscience


19

U

nderlying all of the problems discussed

in this publication and more, is a system of

diagnosis of mental disorders that is

unscientific to the point of being an outright fraud.The psychiatric bible for diagnosing mental

disorders is the APAs Diagnostic and Statistical

Manual of Mental Disordersor DSM. First published

in 1952, the latest edition, the DSM-IV, lists 374

mental disorders. From this manual comes the diag-

nosis with which psy-

chiatry labels a person.

Since psychiatry cannot

cure any mental disorder,

as it doesnt know their

causes, it is also a label

that the person will be

stuck with for the rest ofhis life.

Unlike medical

diagnoses that convey a

probable cause, appro-

priate treatment and

likely prognosis, the dis-

orders listed in DSM-IV

(and ICD-10*) are terms

arrived at through peer

consensus a vote by

APA committee mem-

bers and designed

largely for billing pur-poses, reports Canadian

psychologist, Dr. Tana

Dineen.43 There is no

objective science to it.

Psychiatrists admit

they cannot even define what they are treating.

z On the schizophrenia entry, the authors of

DSM-IIadmitted, Even if it had tried, the Committee

could not establish agreement about what this dis-

order is; it could only agree on what to call it.

z In DSM-III psychiatrists admitted, the

etiology [cause of mental disorders] is unknown.

A variety of theories have been advanced not

always convincing to explain how these disorders

come about.

zDSM-IVstates the term mental disorder con-tinues to appear in the volume because we have

not found an appropriate substitute.

Dr. Sydney Walker, psychiatrist, neurologist

and author ofA Dose of Sanitywarned about the

dangers of relying upon the DSM: Unfortunately,

DSMcan have a serious

impact on your life.

The manuals effects are

felt far outside doctors

o f f i c e s i n h om e s ,

business offices, court-

rooms, and jails. DSM

can be used to deter-mine your fitness as a

parent, your ability to

do a job, even your right

to support a particular

political party.

It can be used to

keep a criminal in jail

or to release a murderer

back into society. It can

be used to invalidate your

will, to break your legal

contracts, or to deny

you the right to marrywithout a courts permis-

sion. If giving that much

power to one book

sounds scary, it is. But

its no exaggeration.

I believe, until the public and psychiatry

itself see that DSM labels are not only useless as

medical diagnoses but also have the potential

to do great harm particularly when they are

used as means to deny individual freedoms, or as

weapons by psychiatrists acting as hired guns for the

legal system.

44

*ICD-10: International Classification of Diseases, section on mental disorders


22/32

Psychiatry has never cured anything.Instead, as a consequence ofits extensive use of dangerousantipsychotic drugs, it has createdmost of the mental ill health thatnow cries out desperately for cures.

Medical studies show that formany patients, what appear to bemental problems are actually causedby an undiagnosed physical illnessor condition. This does not meana chemical imbalance or abrain-based disease, but areal physical condition with realpathology that can be addressedby a competent medical doctor.

A study published in theArchivesof General Psychiatryfound thatseveral diseases closely mimicschizophrenia, including drug-induced psychosis, complete withdelusions of persecution andhallucinations.

A thorough physical exam of apatient, Mrs. J, who wasdiagnosed as schizophrenic after

she began hearing voices in herhead, discovered she was notproperly metabolizing the glucosethat the brain needs for energy.Once treated, she recovered andshowed no lingering trace of herformer mental state.

Dr. Thomas Szasz, professor ofpsychiatry emeritus, advises, Allcriminal behavior should becontrolled by means of the criminallaw, from the administration

of which psychiatrists oughtto be excluded.

3

45

IMPORTANT FACTS

12


23/32

If someone ran amok in the street,grabbing citizens because he disapprovedof their behavior, locking them up and tor-turing them with mind-altering drugs orelectricity, there would be a public outcry.

The perpetrator would be charged with assaultand mayhem and incarcerated for many years.

But because the perpetrator is a psychiatrist

and the brutal acts he commits are obscuredwith terms such as mental health care orthe patients right totreatment, the sys-temic social and men-tal crippling of millionsof people each year isignored. The innocentpatient is locked up; theperpetrator of abuse isallowed to roam freeto repeat his crimes.

When any psy-

chiatrist has full legalpower to cause apersons involuntaryphysical detention by force (kidnapping), tosubject him to physical pain and mental stress(torture) that leaves him permanently mentallydamaged (cruel and unusual punishment), allwithout proving that he has committed a crime(due process of law, trial by jury) then, by defini-tion, a totalitarian state exists.

In his book, Psychiatric Slavery, Dr. Szaszwrote, When people do not know what else to

do with, say, a lethargic, withdrawn adolescent,a petty criminal, an exhibitionist, or a difficult

grandparent our society tells them, in effect,to put the offender in a mental hospital.To overcome this, we shall have to create anincreasing number of humane and rationalalternatives to involuntary mental hospitaliza-tion. Old-age homes, workshops, temporaryhomes for indigent persons whose family tieshave been disintegrated, progressive prison com-

munities these and many other facilities willbe needed to assume the tasks now entrusted to

mental hospitals.Proper medical

screening by non-psychiatric diagnosticspecialists is a vitalpreliminary step inmapping the roadto recovery for anymentally disturbedindividual. Medicalstudies have showntime and again that formany patients, whatappear to be mental

problems are actually caused by an undiag-nosed physical illness or condition. This does notmean a chemical imbalance or a brain-baseddisease, but a real physical condition with realpathology that can be addressed by a competentmedical doctor.

Ordinary medical problems can affect behav-ior and outlook. Former psychiatrist WilliamH. Philpott, now a specialist in nutritional

brain allergies, reports, Symptoms resultingfrom vitamin B12 deficiencies range from poor

CHAPTER FOURImproving MentalHealth

C H A P T E R F O U RI m p r o v i n g M e n t a l H e a l t h

21

A physical disease incorrectly

diagnosed as a mental disease can lead

to a lifetime on psychotropic drugs, loss

of productivity, physical and social

deterioration and shattered dreams. Dr. Sydney Walker III, neurologist and

psychiatrist, author ofA Dose of Sanity


24/32


25/32

C H A P T E R F O U RI m p r o v i n g M e n t a l H e a l t h

23

controlled by means of the criminal law, from theadministration of which psychiatrists ought to beexcluded.

There is no mystery about the increase in gra-

tuitous violence, criminality, youth suicides, armiesof homeless wandering our cities and numerousother negative mental health indices in communi-ties today. But they are not an expanding mentalillness problem demanding more community men-tal health treatments. Rather they represent anexpanding mental health problem created by psy-chiatrists and their treatments.

Psychiatry has never cured anything. Instead,and as a direct consequence of its extensive use ofdangerous antipsychotic drugs, it has created mostof the mental ill health that now cries out desper-

ately for cures.The bottom line, as Dr. Szasz points out, isthat psychiatrists have been largely responsi-ble for creating the problems they have ostensiblytried to solve. They are, therefore, the last peopleto whom we should turn to solve the problemof our homeless, of violence and of communitymental health in general.

results also came at a

much lower cost. Such

programs constitute per-

manent testimony to theexistence of both genuine

answers and hope for the

seriously troubled.

A Haven of HopeThe following was

written by Dr. Loren

Mosher, clinical profes-

sor of psychiatry at the

School of Medicine,

University of California,

San Diego and one-time

chief of the U.S. National

Institute of Mental Healths

Center for Studies of

Schizophrenia.45

I opened Soteria

House. There, young

persons diagnosed as

having schizophrenia

lived medication-free with a nonprofessional staff

trained to listen, to understand them and provide

support, safety and validation of their experience. The

idea was that schizophrenia can often be overcome

with the help of meaningful relationships, rather

than with drugs.

The Soteria project

compared their treatment

method with usual

psychiatric hospital drugtreatment interventions

for persons newly diag-

nosed as having schizo-

phrenia.

The experiment

worked better than

expected. At six weeks

post-admission, both

groups had improved

significantly and com-

parably despite Soteria

clients having not usu-

ally received antipsychoticdrugs! At two years post-

admission, Soteria-treated

subjects were working

at significantly higher

occupational levels, were

significantly more often

living independently or

with peers, and had fewer readmissions. Interestingly,

clients treated at Soteria who received no neurolep-

tic medication or were thought to be destined

to have the worst outcomes, actually did the

best as compared to hospital and drug-treated

control subjects.

Courage could be described as

persistence to overcome all obstacles

and communication as the heart of life.

These two qualities were displayed in

abundance by two remarkable doctors:Dr. Giorgio Antonucci (left) and Dr. Loren

Mosher, who both literally helped to

return life to hundreds of patients lost in

the degradation of psychiatric hospitals.


26/32

RECOMMENDATIONSRecommendations

C O M M U N I T Y R U I NR e c o m m e n d a t i o n s

24

No person should ever be forced to undergo electric shock treatment,psychosurgery, coercive psychiatric treatment, or the enforced administrationof mind-altering drugs. Governments should outlaw such abuses and cut funding tounworkable psychiatric methods.

Insist that community treatment laws that rely upon mandatory and therebycoercive measures be abolished, and dismantle or prevent mental health courtswhich are another conduit for drugging our communities.

Housing and work will do more for the homeless than the life-debilitatingeffects of psychiatric drugs and other psychiatric treatments that destroyresponsibility. Many of them just simply want a chance.

Establish medical facilities without psychiatrists that have a full complement ofdiagnostic equipment to locate underlying and undiagnosed physical conditions thatare most often causing seriously disturbed behavior.

Legal protections should be put in place to ensure that psychiatrists andpsychologists are prohibited from violating the right of every person to exerciseall civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights as recognized in the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rightsand in other relevant instruments.

File a complaint with the police about every incident of psychiatric assault,fraud or illicit drug selling. Send CCHR a copy of your complaint. Once criminalcomplaints have been filed, complaints should also be filed with the state regulatoryagencies, such as state medical and psychologists boards. Such agencies can investigateand revoke or suspend a psychiatrists or psychologists license to practice.

Establish rights for patients and their insurance companies to receive refundsfor mental health treatment which did not achieve the promised result or improvement,or which resulted in proven harm to the individual, thereby ensuring that responsibility

lies with the individual practitioner and psychiatric facility rather than the governmentor its agencies.

1

2345

6

7


27/32

C I T I Z E N S C O M M I S S I O No n H u m a n R i g h t s

25

Citizens Commissionon Human Rights International

he Citizens Commission on HumanRights (CCHR) was established in1969 by the Church of Scientologyto investigate and expose psychiatricviolations of human rights, and toclean up the field of mental heal-

ing. Today, it has more than 250 chapters inover 34 countries. Its board of advisors, calledCommissioners, includes doctors, lawyers, educa-tors, artists, business professionals, and civil andhuman rights representatives.

While it doesnt provide medical or legaladvice, it works closely with and supports medicaldoctors and medical practice. A key CCHRfocus is psychiatrys fraudulent use of subjectivediagnoses that lack any scientific or medicalmerit, but which are used to reap financial benefitsin the billions, mostly from the taxpayers orinsurance carriers. Based on these false diagnoses,psychiatrists justify and prescribe life-damagingtreatments, including mind-altering drugs, whichmask a persons underlying difficulties and prevent

his or her recovery.

CCHRs work aligns with the UN UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights, in particular thefollowing precepts, which psychiatrists violate ona daily basis:

Article 3: Everyone has the right to life,liberty and security of person.

Article 5: No one shall be subjected to tortureor to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or

punishment.Article 7: All are equal before the law and

are entitled without any discrimination to equalprotection of the law.

Through psychiatrists false diagnoses, stig-matizing labels, easy-seizure commitment laws,brutal, depersonalizing treatments, thousands ofindividuals are harmed and denied their inherenthuman rights.

CCHR has inspired and caused many hun-dreds of reforms by testifying before legislativehearings and conducting public hearings into psy-chiatric abuse, as well as working with media, law

enforcement and public officials the world over.

T


28/32

MISSION STATEMENT

Rosa Anna Costa,Piedmont Regional Counsellor,Commission for Health:

We must go on speaking for thosewho cannot. We must take the responsibil-ity, as institutions, to lead the campaign, andI positively acknowledge CCHR for what itis doing in this field. There are situations thateven we dont know about and it is impor-tant that associations like [CCHR] give us the

chance to acquire knowledge about them I believe that [CCHRs work] should beexpanded so that more people can learnwhat kind of abuses are being practiced bynot-so-ethical medical doctors. I wantto thank the CCHR for what it does.

The Hon. Raymond N. Haynes,California State Assembly:

The contributions that the CitizensCommission on Human Rights

International has made to the local,national and international areas on behalfof mental health issues are invaluableand reflect an organization devotedto the highest ideals of mental healthservices.

Johanna Reeve-Alexander,Homeopathic Nutritionist,Tara Health Center, Western Australia:

I have seen within CCHR a committed,caring, humanitarian team of dedicatedprofessional people who are helping to bringto light the appalling truth behind somepsychiatric practices. Without CCHRopening the gates and shining a torch onthese practices via their literature, awarenesscampaigns, intervention at government levelsand continual research, the public would bequite unaware of the malpracticeat this level of medicine.

THE CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

investigates and exposes psychiatric violations of human rights. It works

shoulder-to-shoulder with like-minded groups and individuals who share a

common purpose to clean up the field of mental health. We shall continue to

do so until psychiatrys abusive and coercive practices cease

and human rights and dignity are returned to all.

For further information:CCHR International

6616 Sunset Blvd.Los Angeles, CA, USA 90028


29/32

CCHR AustraliaCitizens Commission onHuman Rights AustraliaP.O. Box 6402North SydneyNew South Wales 2059

AustraliaPhone: 612-9964-9844E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR AustriaCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Austria(Brgerkommission frMenschenrechte sterreich)Postfach 130A-1072 Wien, AustriaPhone: 43-1-877-02-23E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR BelgiumCitizens Commission on

Human Rights Belgium(Belgisch comite voor de rechtenvan de mens)Postbus 3382800 Mechelen 3, BelgiumE-mail: [email protected]

CCHR CanadaCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Canada27 Carlton St., Suite 304Toronto, OntarioM5B 1L2 CanadaPhone: 1-416-971-8555E-mail:[email protected]

CCHR ColombiaCitizens Commission on HumanRights ColombiaP.O. Box 359339Bogota, ColombiaPhone: 57-1-251-0377E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR Czech RepublicCitizens Commission on HumanRights Czech RepublicObcansk komise zalidsk prvaVclavsk nmest 17110 00 Praha 1, Czech Republic

Phone/Fax: 420-224-009-156E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR DenmarkCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Denmark(Medborgernes Menneskerettig-hedskommissionMMK)Faksingevej 9A2700 Brnshj, DenmarkPhone: 45 39 62 90 39E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR FinlandCitizens Commission onHuman Rights FinlandPost Box 14500511 Helsinki, FinlandPhone: 358-9-8594-869

CCHR FranceCitizens Commission onHuman Rights France(Commission des Citoyens pourles Droits de lHommeCCDH)BP 1007675561 Paris Cedex 12 , FrancePhone: 33 1 40 01 09 70Fax: 33 1 40 01 05 20E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR GermanyCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Germany(Kommission fr Verste

der Psychiatrie gegenMenschenrechte e.V.KVPM)Amalienstrae 49a80799 Mnchen, GermanyPhone: 49 89 273 0354Fax: 49 89 28 98 6704E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR GreeceCitizens Commission onHuman Rights GreeceP.O. Box 31268Athens 47, Postal Code 10-035Athens, GreecePhone: 210-3604895

CCHR HollandCitizens Commission onHuman Rights HollandPostbus 360001020 MA, AmsterdamHollandPhone/Fax: 3120-4942510E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR HungaryCitizens Commission onHuman Rights HungaryPf. 1821461 Budapest, HungaryPhone: 36 1 342 6355Fax: 36 1 344 4724

E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR IsraelCitizens Commissionon Human Rights IsraelP.O. Box 3702061369 Tel Aviv, IsraelPhone: 972 3 5660699Fax: 972 3 5663750E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR ItalyCitizens Commissionon Human Rights Italy(Comitato dei Cittadini per iDiritti Umani ONLUS CCDU)Viale Monza 1

20125 Milano, ItalyE-mail: [email protected]

CCHR JapanCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Japan2-11-7-7F KitaotsukaToshima-ku Tokyo170-0004, JapanPhone/Fax: 81 3 3576 1741E-mail:[email protected]

CCHR LatviaCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Latvia

Dzelzavas 80-48Riga, Latvia 1082Phone: 371-758-3940E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR MexicoCitizens Commissionon Human Rights Mexico(Comisin de Ciudadanos porlos Derechos Humanos CCDH)Cordobanes 47, San JoseInsurgentsMxico 03900 D.F.Phone: 55-8596-5030E-mail:[email protected]

CCHR NepalCitizens Commissionon Human Rights NepalP.O. Box 1679Kathmandu, NepalPhone: 977-1-448-6053E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR New ZealandCitizens Commission onHuman Rights New ZealandP.O. Box 5257Wellesley StreetAuckland 1141, New ZealandPhone/Fax: 649 580 0060


CCHR NorwayCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Norway(Medborgernesmenneskerettighets-kommisjon,MMK)Postboks 3084803 Arendal, NorwayPhone:47 40468626E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR RussiaCitizens Commission onHuman Rights RussiaBorisa Galushkina #19A129301, MoscowRussia CIS

Phone: (495) 540-1599E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR South AfricaCitizens Commission onHuman Rights South AfricaP.O. Box 710Johannesburg 2000Republic of South AfricaPhone:011 27 11 624 3538E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR SpainCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Spain(Comisin de Ciudadanos por los

Derechos HumanosCCDH)c/Maestro Arbos No 5 4Oficina 2928045 Madrid, SpainPhone: 34-91-527-35-08E-mail:[email protected]

CCHR SwedenCitizens Commission onHuman Rights Sweden(Kommittn fr MnskligaRttigheterKMR)Box 2124 21 Stockholm, SwedenPhone/Fax: 46 8 83 8518


CCHR SwitzerlandCitizens Commissionon Human Rights Lausanne(Commission des Citoyens pourles droits de lHommeCCDH)Case postale 57731002 Lausanne, SwitzerlandPhone: 41 21 646 6226E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR TaiwanCitizens Commission onHuman Rights TaiwanTaichung P.O. Box 36-127

Taiwan, R.O.C.Phone: 42-471-2072E-mail: [email protected]

CCHR United KingdomCitizens Commission onHuman Rights United KingdomP.O. Box 188East Grinstead, West SussexRH19 4RB, United KingdomPhone: 44 1342 31 3926Fax: 44 1342 32 5559E-mail: [email protected].

CCHR National Offices


30/32

1. Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental HealthCare in America, The Presidents New FreedomCommission on Mental Health Report,22 July 2003, p. 68.

2. Paper written by Allen Jones, Investigator in the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office of InspectorGeneral (OIG), Bureau of Special Investigations, LawProject for Psychiatric Rights, Internet address:http://www.psychrights.org, 20 Jan. 2004, p. 31.

3. Robert Whitaker,Mad in America: Bad Science, BadMedicine, and the Enduring Mistreatment of the MentallyIll (Perseus Publishing, Cambridge, Massachusetts,2002), pp. 227228, citing L. Jeff, The International PilotStudy of Schizophrenia: Five-Year Follow-Up Findings,

Psychological Medicine vol. 22 1992,pp. 131145; Assen Jablensky, Schizophrenia:Manifestations, Incidence and Course in Different Cultures,a World Health Organization Ten-Country Study,

Psychological Medicine, Supplement 1992, pp. 195.

4. J.R. Ewalt, Foreword in Gryenebaum (ed.), The Practiceof Community Mental Health (Little, Brown & Co., Boston,1970).

5. Peter Schrag,Mind Control (Pantheon Books, New York,1978), p. 45.

6. Thomas Szasz, M.D., Cruel Compassion (John Wiley& Sons, Inc., New York, 1994), p. 160.

7. Steven Foley and Steven Sharfstein,Madness andGovernment(American Psychiatric Association Press,Washington, D.C., 1983), p. 25.

8. Dr. Dorine Baudin, Ethical Aspects ofDeinstitutionalization in Mental Health Care, FinalReport, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health andAddiction, Program No. BMH 5-98-3793, July 2001,p. 14.

9. Franklin Chu and Sharland Trotter, The MadnessEstablishment(Grossman Publishers, New York, 1974), pp.xi, xiii, 203204.

10. Tony Jones and Adrian Bradley, Sane Reaction,Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 10 June 1999.

11. Rael Issac and Virginia Armat,Madness in the Streets(The Free Press, New York, 1990), p. 98.

12. Op. cit., Foley and Sharfstein, p. 165.

13. Vera Hassner Sharav, MLS, Children in ClinicalResearch: A Conflict of Moral Values, The American

Journal of Bioethics, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2003.

14. Psychiatric DrugsThe Need to Be Informed, Reporton the Public Hearing on Psychiatric Drugs, presentedby the NSW Committee on Mental Health Advocacy,Nov. 1981, p. 22, quoting Pam Gorring,Mental Disorderor Madness? (University of Queensland Press, Australia,1979).

15. Op. cit., Robert Whitaker,Mad in America, p. 144.

16.Ibid., p. 164.

17.Ibid., p. 256.

18.Ibid., pp. 257258.

19.Ibid., pp. 253254.

20. Op. cit., Allen Jones, p. 6.


22. Leading Therapy Classes by Global PharmaceuticalSales, 2003,IMSHealth.com, 2004.


24.Ibid., pp. 183, 186.

25. John H. Herrera, Ph.D., et al., High PotencyNeuroleptics and Violence in Schizophrenics,The Journalof Nervous and Mental Disease, Vol. 176, No. 9, 1988, p. 558.

26.Ibid.

27. Erica Goode, Leading Drugs for Psychosis ComeUnder New Scrutiny, The New York Times, 20 May 2003.


29. Rosei Mestel, New Schizophrenia Treatment at Issue,Los Angeles Times, 26 Nov. 2003.

30. Op. cit., Erica Goode.

31.Ibid.

32. Robert Whitaker, Forced Medication is

Inhumane. The Boston Globe, 9 June 2002.33. Michael McCubbin and David Cohen, The Rightsof Users of the Mental Health System: The Tight Knotof Power, Law, and Ethics, Presented to the XXIVthInternational Congress on Law and Mental Health,Toronto, June 1999.

34. Compulsory Admission and Involuntary Treatment ofMentally Ill PatientsLegislation and Practice inEU-Member States, Final Report, Mannheim, Germany,15 May 2002, Introduction, pp. 28.

35. Op. cit., Robert Whitaker, Forced Medication isInhumane.

36. Diet Mulls Fate of Mentally Ill Criminals,The Japan Times, 8 June 2002.

37. Op. cit., Thomas Szasz, M.D., Cruel Compassion,p. 205.

38. Op. cit., Michael McCubbin and David Cohen.

39. Thomas Szasz, M.D., Liberation By Oppression(Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, New Jersey2002), p. 127.

40. Nancy Wolff, Ph.D., Courts as Therapeutic Agents:Thinking Past the Novelty of Mental Health Courts,

Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and Law, Vol.30, 2002, pp. 431437.

41. The Role of Mental Health Courts is System Reform,Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law,

Washington, D.C., Jan. 2003.42. Sam Hart, Mind Control, The Shocking Truth aboutBritains Mental Hospitals, Exclusive Survey,The Big

Issue, No. 412, 1319 Nov. 2000.

43. Dr. Tana Dineen, Ph.D.,Manufacturing Victims, ThirdEdition (Robert Davies Multimedia Publishing, Canada,2001), p. 86.

44. Sydney Walker,A Dose of Sanity: Mind, Medicine andMisdiagnosis (John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York, 1996), pp.207, 225.

45. Loren Mosher, Soteria and Other Alternatives to AcutePsychiatric Hospitalization: A Personal and ProfessionalReview, The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, Vol.187, 1999, pp. 142149.

REFERENCESReferences


31/32

PHOTO CREDITS: Cover: Mark Peterson/Corbis; page 4: Wally McNamee/Corbis; page 6: Reuters/Corbis; page 7: Bettmann/Corbis;page 10: Peter Turnley/Corbis; page 13: The Sankei Shiimbun; page 12: Corbis; same page: Reuters News Media Inc./Corbis; same page:

NewsPix (NZ); same page: AP Wide World Photos; page 14: Peter Turnley/Corbis; page 16: Doug Menuez/Getty; page 17: Bill Ross/Corbis.

Citizens Commission on Human RightsRAISING PUBLIC AWARENESS

Education is a vital part of any initiative to reversesocial decline. CCHR takes this responsibility veryseriously. Through the broad dissemination of

CCHRs Internet site, books, newsletters and other

publications, more and more patients, families,professionals, lawmakers and countless others are

becoming educated on the truth about psychiatry, andthat something effective can and should be done about it.

CCHRs publicationsavailable in 15 languagesshow the harmful impact of psychiatry on racism, education,

women, justice, drug rehabilitation, morals, the elderly,religion, and many other areas. A list of these includes:

WARNING: No one should stop taking any psychiatric drug without the

advice and assistance of a competent, non-psychiatric, medical doctor.

THE REAL CRISISIn Mental Health TodayReport and recommendations on the lack of scienceand results within the mental health industry

MASSIVE FRAUDPsychiatrys Corrupt IndustryReport and recommendations on a criminal mentalhealth monopoly

PSYCHIATRIC MALPR ACTICEThe Subversion of Medicin eReport and recommendations on psychiatrysdestructive impact on health care

INVENTING DISORDERSFor Drug ProfitsReport and recommendations on the unscientificfraud perpetrated by psychiatry

SCHIZOPHRENIAPsychiatrys For Profit DiseaseReport and recommendations on psychiatric lies andfalse diagnoses

BRUTAL THERAPIESHarmful Psychiatric TreatmentsReport and recommendations on the destructivepractices of electroshock and psychosurgery

PSYCHIATRIC RAPEAssaulting Women and ChildrenReport and recommendations on widespread sex crimesagainst patients within the mental health system

DEADLY RESTRAINTSPsychiatrys Therapeutic AssaultReport and recommendations on the violent anddangerous use of restraints in mental health facilities

PSYCHIATRYHooking Your World on DrugsReport and recommendations on psychiatry creatingtodays drug crisis

REHAB FRAUDPsychiatrys Drug ScamReport and recommendations on methadone and otherdisastrous psychiatric drug rehabilitation programs

CHILD DRUGGINGPsychiatry Destroying LivesReport and recommendations on fraudulent psychiatricdiagnoses and the enforced drugging of youth

HARMING YOUTHScreening and Drugs Ruin Young MindsReport and recommendations on harmful mental healthassessments, evaluations and programs within our schools

COMMUNITY RUINPsychiatrys Coerci ve CareReport and recommendations on the failure of communitymental health and other coercive psychiatric programs

HARMING ARTISTSPsychiatry Ruins CreativityReport and recommendations on psychiatry assaultingthe arts

UNHOLY ASSAULTPsychiatry versus ReligionReport and recommendations on psychiatrys subversionof religious belief and practice

ERODING JUSTICEPsychiatrys Corruption of LawReport and recommendations on psychiatry subvertingthe courts and corrective services

ELDERLY ABUSECruel Me ntal Health P rogramsReport and recommendations on psychiatry abusing seniors

BEHIND TERRORISMPsychiatry Manipulating MindsReport and recommendations on the role of psychiatryin international terrorism

CREATING RACISMPsychiatrys BetrayalReport and recommendations on psychiatry causingracial conflict and genocide

CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTSThe International Mental Health Watchdog

CCHR in the United States is a non-profit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) public benefit corporation recognized by the Internal Revenue Service.

2008 CCHR. All Rights Reserved. CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, CCHR and the CCHR logo are trademarks and service

marks owned by Citizens Commission on Human Rights. Printed in the U.S.A. Item #18905

Published as a public service by theCitizens Commission on Human Rights


32/32

Documents

Psychiatry's Coercive "Care"