Psychiatric Drug Facts via breggin.com :

“Most psychiatric drugs can cause withdrawal reactions, sometimes including life-threatening emotional and physical withdrawal problems… Withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done carefully under experienced clinical supervision.” Dr. Peter Breggin

Nov 5, 2011

It's More Than Enough For Me

one day old

I am a single parent of two adult sons; my youngest son spent more than half of his childhood from the age of six until the age of seventeen in locked psychiatric wards; there are times to this day that the grief takes all of the wind from me, and I struggle to even stand upright.  I find myself holding my breath; because I'm afraid that if I breathe, I will start to cry, and once I cry----how will I ever stop?  There was and is so very much to grieve...The experiences themselves have not so much knocked me down; as they have beat any confidence I have in my fellow man out of me.  I am grateful beyond belief to have my son at all.  I voiced for the first time aloud at the beginning of April,  a precious truth for me: Every Day is Mother's Day.  I know I'm lucky my son has survived.  It is, I believe, a miracle and a blessing he is alive at all.

I cannot describe how humbled I have been by the last several months, nor can I describe to anyone how truly horrifying it has been to discover that the practice of psychiatry is as corrupt and unethical as it is.  The publicly funded mental health system, which includes the federally funded child welfare system, (CPS and foster care) violate the Constitutional Rights of the children and families it 'serves' as a matter of course.  I am more than horrified, I am disgusted.  At one time, I believed that my son's mistreatment by psychiatric and social services professionals who treated him as if he is "less than" human; and used him in drug trials was some kind of fluke, accident, travesty, or anomaly.  I now know it is common.  Knowing this makes it so much worse...

The primary purpose appears to be to expand the market for psychiatric drugs to ensure pharmaceutical industry profits.  Whether or not those "treated" are harmed by the psychiatric drugs, in real world practice, these negative outcomes of psychiatric patients is not a story that is told with accuracy; if told at all.  Only the biased story which supports the biological disease model is put forth.  I know it is the way things are done.  I am painfully aware that psychiatric drugs have caused my son grievous harm; have traumatized and disabled him.  I am at a loss to understand how the psychiatric profession has gotten away with this...


The drugs used are teratogenic.  Psychiatric drugs in all classes can cause iatrogenic illnesses and physiological dysfunction; decreasing the quality of life, and increasing risk of fatality---How was a profession built on fraud, corruption and outright lies about the safety and efficacy of it's "treatments" be given so much unearned trust and absolute power? Power to obtain Court Orders and to use the Police as agents who deliver their unwilling patients to locked facilities?  Civil Commitment investigators/petitioners are not required to conform to the Rules of Evidence when seeking to detain and involuntarily commit individuals they target; Standard Court Procedures are not followed; Effective Assistance of Counsel is not provided.  The Police, whose duty is to protect and to serve, become agents of psychiatry compelled by Court Order to deliver unwilling patients to locked facilities.

Antidepressants and neuroleptic drugs are two classes of psychiatric drugs that are now some of the most prescribed drugs.  These drugs are widely prescribed "off-label;" in spite of the overwhelming evidence that neither of these classes of drugs was therapeutic for the majority of people who took them in drug trials conducted to gain their FDA approval. Antidepressants and neurolelptics can cause dependence; and both have serious risks, including disability and early or sudden death.  Adults who take neuroleptic drugs long term, die an average of  25-30 years early; from drug induced illnesses; although the deaths are usually classified as natural.  Neuroleptics and antidepressants can cause debilitating illnesses, heart damage, brain damage, neurological impaiments, all obviously, horrifying traumatic iatrogenic injuries.

I was told by a psychiatrist in response to posting a psychiatric summary documenting the drugs and dosages given to my son in a two month period that, "No psychiatrist would see anything wrong" with how my son was 'treated;' he further stated that, "any parent who objected would at best be perceived as 'ill-informed' and at worst, as 'impaired' themselves."    In effect, using my boy as a guinea pig in drug trials while housing him in a disgusting and filthy environment for over $600. a day, and there's nothing wrong with it. I assure you, that the effects the drugs had were terrifying to him---I know when my son is terrified.  I saw his terror-filled look; I am haunted by the memory of it to this day.  I can still hear the echo of my son begging me to rescue him.   I remember being treated like I was crazy when I protested.  How dare I question the Quack Master Jack.


There was no questioning "Quack Master Jack's Authority."   While participating as an  investigator in the TEOSS drug trials, this "lead researcher" drugged my son into a state of profound disability.   Jon McClellan was one of the investigators funded by the  NIMH trialing neuroleptic drugs not approved for pediatric use.   Quack Master Jack needed no one's consent but his own--he had no one's consent but his own.


I remember thinking, "why does it look like my son is going die?"

I knew then, and I know now the 'treatment' has more in common with Science Fiction, than it does with medicine in the Hippocratic tradition.  The 'treatment' was ineffective, which is really no surprise.  Neuroleptic drugs have repeatedly been shown to be ineffective for the majority of people with symptoms of psychosis.  The neuroleptic drugs cause iatrogenic illnesses, disability and early death.  Nevertheless, psychiatry insists that these drugs are 'necessary medical treatment' and must be used by force for those who refuse. The drugs are what psychiatry uses; patient safety and drug efficacy do not matter; what matters is that one never question or doubt psychiatric authority.

The 'treatment' did nothing but cause my son physical illness, and further traumatize him. The drugs used in psychiatric "treatment" are known to be ineffective, the "treatment" is not based on Science--it is not Evidenced-Based Medicine; it is not supported by or derived from accurately reported clinical trial data.


In reality, psychiatric drug treatment protocols, like the psychiatric diagnoses themselves, are developed by consensus which is a pseudo-democratic political process. Psychiatrists vote diagnoses and treatment protocols into existence. Ultimately, the drugs used for a particular psychiatric diagnosis and the "Practice Parameters" psychiatry develops for each diagnosis are not derived from or supported by scientific data; but are based on subjective opinions voted on in a quasi-democratic political process know as consensus.  Why would psychiatry develop treatment protocols based on a consensus of subjective opinions and not the Clinical Trial data?  Psychiatry uses subjective opinions as a substitute for empirical data because the data does not support the use of psychiatric drugs.


Neuroleptic drugs have very serious, even fatal risks.  The drugs are "effective" for only a minority of people to whom they are prescribed.   Psychiatry ignores the Science, and the existing evidence-base and proclaims the drugs to be safe and effective; in spite of the scientific record not supporting this conclusion.  Students of psychiatry are taught a false history of psychiatry.  Students are not taught what is known, but what is believed, assumed or hoped to be true about the diagnoses themselves.   Students are not taught about what is known about the actual  effects of the drugs either.   The use of psychiatric drugs is not based on ethically conducted research with an unbiased reporting of the results.  As a result, psychiatric treatment using drugs is not scientifically valid, and is not therapeutic for many. Drugging of psychiatric symptoms is the only "medical treatment" that is carried out whether it's effects are therapeutic for an individual patient, or not.  Psychiatry claims to be a medical specialty, yet does not adhere to the scientific method and does not seem to even pay lip service to the Ethical Guidelines of the Medical profession.  Psychiatry ignores altogether the Nuremberg Code; with impunity.

I know that the statement that no psychiatrist would see anything wrong made by the psychiatrist in reference to my son's treatment is wrong.  l am grateful to know there are psychiatrists who do not "treat" humans in distress this way.  It is particularly disappointing this statement was made by a psychiatrist who apparently does not believe that a parent's duty and Constitutional Right to act on a child or adolescent's behalf should only be diminished or infringed upon to prevent abuse or neglect.


I know there are psychiatrists who would not agree with his statement, and would in fact see a whole lot wrong with how my son was treated.  Just because fraud and corruption are rampant and widespread in psychiatric research and practice, does not make the distortion of ethical medical  principles acceptable. Standard Practices used in psychiatry rely on consensus, seem to use consensus instead of data. Consensus is no substitute for factual data and information; and an opinion is not magically transformed into "evidence" because the opinion is shared by one's peers. Consensus is evidence of agreement; it is not evidence of medical validity.  
six years old
The lack of insight psychiatry has into the bind they put their patients in is truly frightening; to say the very least.  Psychiatry has convinced society that people with psychiatric diagnoses are not aware of reality and somehow, this erroneous belief justifies psychiatry treating them with dangerous and ineffective drugs as if they are not worthy of being treated with dignity or respect.  Our Nation's Institutions of Higher Learning doing psychiatric research have been funded by the pharmaceutical industry; psychiatry has somehow deluded it's practitioners into believing the people who are diagnosed with "mental illness" are incapable of recognizing when they are disrespected and invalidated.  Real concerns about the negative effects of psychiatric drugs from the patient or family members are attributed to sypmtoms of the diagnosis, are minimized, declared to be 'tolerable side effects,' or are ignored altogether.  


The attitude seems to be those who are labeled with a psychiatric diagnosis don't know what's 'good' for them; so what they experience, is not important.  How the treatment impacts the person, whether it is perceived as helpful or not; is considered to be unimportant. How can it be that a patient's perceptions and experiences are  not ever considered to be valid if the patient disagrees with the treating psychiatrist?  Nonetheless, a patient's perception is never as important as the patient's agreement to take the drugs exactly as prescribed; regardless of any actual benefit, or harm experienced.  The adverse effects and the potential for disability and death are not important; as long as compliance in taking drugs as prescribed is maintained.   How is it this is not recognized for what it is?  Using coercion and manipulation are an abuse of power and authority; the nature of these acts do not become 'therapeutic' because "it's for the patient's own good," and it is done under the guise of beneficence to provide "necessary medical treatment" Under Color of Law. 

My son is now a young man valiantly struggling to overcome the effects of outrageous abuse  and trauma his "medical treatment" has caused him; the 'treatment' amounted to repeated psychiatric assault and resulted in traumatic iatrogenic injuries from neuroleptic and other psychiatric drugs.  He is struggling to come to terms with the loss of cognitive and intellectual abilities.  He asked me in agony, "How could they take so much from me, Mom?"  There is no good or sufficient answer to this question; and the pain is, at times unbearable.  The damage caused to his spirit, is heartbreaking.  The damage done to his physical health and his continuing cognitive decline are in fact evidence of the criminal nature of his psychiatric treatment, and evidence of medical malpractice.  My son's "treatment" consisted of the law being repeatedly violated by the lead researcher in the State of Washington who was funded by the NIMH, and who works for the State of Washington as the Medical Director of the State's only psychiatric facility for children; and a professor of psychiatry at the University of Washington.  Not once have any of my complaints to the appropriate authorities in Washington State ever been investigated. 

I have no doubt that this is because it is the State of Washington that is ultimately liable. In my experience, the State of Washington protects the State of Washington; it does not act in defense of any victim unless forced to do so--even if the victim is a child or vulnerable adult.   The psychiatrist who did this to my son is still employed by the State of Washington, continues in his dual role as Medical Director of Child Study and Treatment Center and professor at University of Washington to this day.

People need to understand it is not an accurate or complete depiction in public service ads to "Bust the Stigma" of mental illness of how individuals given a psychiatric diagnosis experience life in the real world. More, people need to know it is not accurate to say the drugs are "safe and effective."  The anti-stigma efforts are not so much wrong, as they are biased, incomplete and inaccurate.  They neglect to even acknowledge there is a "potential" down side to getting a psychiatric diagnosis, and to treating symptoms associated with psychiatric diagnoses with psychiatric drugs.  The mainstream advocacy and anti-stigma activists fail to advocate for those with psychiatric diagnoses who are not served well by the psychopharmacology treatment paradigm, and/or those who have been harmed or otherwise victimized by unethical treatment providers in mental health service systems.  


Mainstream mental health advocates do not advocate for my son, or offer support to our family.  It is insulting to read in education and advocacy literature and hear in "public service" announcements that these advocates speak for all those with a psychiatric diagnosis and their families.   These advocates do not represent me, or my son.  The mental health professionals and social workers in the local public mental health system have no interest in helping my son in the slightest.  Psychiatry's victims are not acknowledged, they are effectively de-voiced, invalidated, and ignored.  Advocacy groups who claim to be speaking for everyone with a psychiatric diagnosis are not.  It is not possible to be advocating for the people with a psychiatric diagnosis while ignoring victims; psychiatric survivors who have recovered; parents who are taking care of disabled adult children; and parents who are grieving a child's early death from so-called "necessary medical treatment" with "safe and effective" drugs.  

The advocacy groups are funded and advised by the pharmaceutical industry and are intentionally not questioning  psychiatry's inexplicable devotion to the disease model.  These pharmaceutically-funded groups do not seem to question the alliances between the drug industry and the American Psychiatric Association and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.  The obvious Conflicts of Interest have, in no small part, not only allowed but have perpetuated and even increased the harm done to real people; the devotion to the disease hypothesis and biological treatment paradigm have caused stigma to become deeply entrenched.  These advocacy groups do not advocate for victims, or for the grieving family members they leave behind.  The only people who are celebrated and advocated for are those who conform to the disease model, who are "treatment compliant."  This type of advocacy invalidates my son's lived experience; which was and is abusive.  My son's experiences were horrifying, and all too real.

What angers me the most is professionals and advocates who effectively deny the entirety of my son's history of trauma and subsequent psychiatric mistreatment.  My son has been consistently invalidated by virtually everyone who made decisions about how he would be treated and by whom.  I was also treated in this way, but my anger is for what was done to my son.


It is said that everything happens for a reason, and the only reason I can think of is so that I could see what I saw, and come to know what I know.  Some, if not most of the children who are Wards of the State do not have family involved at all and as such, are  children--who are left without protection.  Knowing these children do in fact exist, and are in need of protection, is what  motivates me more than anything else.  It is for these children in State Custody who are given no voice and no choice, that I share my family's story.   


I know the children who are in State Custody deserve better than to be given unsafe and ineffective drugs; I know that they should not be told that they have defective brains when their problems are caused by being neglected, abused and not having had basic needs consistently met.  These children deserve to be safe from unethical research, protected from being used as guinea pigs in Drug Trials, and "medically treated" using unethical "standard practices" which are not safe, effective or grounded in ethical research, or the ethical practice of medicine. The primary focus in medicine is to do what is in a patient's best interest, we fail far too often to maintain this focus when we allow children in foster care to be drugged instead of effectively helped.  Children must have their individual rights under the US Constitution preserved and defended---even if they are unaware of exactly what these rights are.  


I believe all of us have a duty to the children in State Custody.
Do you?

August 6, 2011
 post is inspired by two sentences of a commereader and was initially posted on April 8, 2011 titled, "It is More Than Enough" 

"It's enough to make anyone go insane.  Whs precisely what happens in those environments..."   Duane Sherry




In my own experience, it's more than enough to cause overwhelming grief...

2 comments:

Heroditus Huxley said...

Your son's story is so like my own that it's not funny. Court mandated counseling? Check. Psychiatrist trying medication after medication? Check. No meds doing good, many doing harm? Check. Nobody protecting me in my childhood? Check, check, and check.

It's one of the main reasons I trust my husband but pretty much no one else, why I am prepared to cut off any family member that even threatens to report us to child illfare, and why I am prepared to move from the state I live in to remove myself from the jurisdiction of the first level of the bureaucracy. (Often, if you do that right at the first steps toward the government taking over your child, they forget about you entirely.)

I live in fear of social workers. I fear them more than I fear my past abuser.

yobluemama said...

Heroditus,

I am grateful for you that you have a husband you can trust, and totally understand the fact you have no trust in child "illfare," as it is more than plain it is a system that has way too much power and NO accountability.

I trust few myself, as a natural consequence of the experiences I have had with "the system."

Thank you so much for sharing your experiences.
Blessings to you and your family.

Becky

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted
(C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.