It is not something one can forget or forgive in the absence of Justice.

"If we should perish, the ruthlessness of the foe would be only the secondary cause of the disaster. The primary cause would be that the strength of a giant nation was directed by eyes too blind to see all the hazards of the struggle; and the blindness would be induced not by some accident of nature or history but by hatred and vainglory."  Reinhold Nieghbuhr in The Irony of American History  

I'm a MadMother.  

I was stripped of my inalienable rights without Due Process of Law. 

I was prevented from performing a sacred duty: 

to protect my own precious child from harm.

It is not something one can forget or forgive in the absence of Justice.

June 30, 2011, Robert Whitaker posted an article in Psychology Today titled, "Now Antidepressant-Induced Chronic Depression Has a Name: Tardive Dysphoria" six months later, he left this  comment:

"This is a very important issue, and it goes to how our society (and researchers) are willing to think of illegal drugs as harmful, but avoid such thoughts when the drugs are prescription drugs. There is evidence of cognitive impairment in many long-term users of SSRIs (researchers called this impairment "quite common"). And Grace Jackson, a psychiatrist, has written a book on this risk, called "Drug-Induced Dementia."

a couple of excerpts from the article:

"El-Mallakh detailed how tardive dysphoria may develop in patients who initially respond to an antidepressant and then stay on antidepressants long term. But what if patients respond well to an antidepressant and then stop taking the drug?  Their brains have been modified by exposure to the antidepressant (i.e. oppositional tolerance has developed), and thus, upon withdrawal of the drug, are they more likely to relapse than if they hadn’t been exposed to an antidepressant in the first place?"

"This same basic mechanism—oppositional tolerance to a psychiatric drug—has been proposed to be a cause of tardive dyskinesia (TD), which develops with some frequency in long-term users of antipsychotic medications. TD is characterized by repetitive, purposeless movements, such as a constant licking of the lips, which is evidence that the basal ganglia has been damaged by the drugs."

"But now here we are 40 years later, with perhaps ten percent of American adults taking an antidepressant, and researchers are writing about “oppositional tolerance,” and drug-induced “tardive dysphoria.” That is surely a health outcomes story that needs to investigated, and if we want to put this into an even sharper moral context, we need only consider this: Many teenagers are now being prescribed an antidepressant, and when they take the drug, their brains will develop “oppositional tolerance” to it. What percentage of these youth will end up with drug-induced tardive dysphoria, and thus suffer a lifetime of chronic depression?" read here.

Robert Whitaker makes a very important point in the last paragraph questioning the morality of the bio-medical paradigm of psychiatric treatment.  In all reality the abuse of power which underlies standard practice for treating symptoms associated with psychological distress whether the care is provided by a psychiatrist, by a pediatrician, a general practitioner or other medical professional: the prescription is invariably accompanied by a claim that the drug prescribed will treat an underlying condition in the brain which is causing the symptoms.  The cruel reality is the drugs used actually  alter brain function, causing normally functioning neurological processes to become dysfunctional.  The end result is cognitive impairment, which can be permanent.  

It is realistic and logical to think illegal drugs are harmful--the evidence is abundant and definitive. The same is also true for FDA approved mind and mood altering drugs used to treat psychiatric symptoms.  The evidence is being obscured by the direct-to-consumer marketing of the drugs; the "patient advocacy" groups with their campaigns to decrease the stigma of mental illness; the regulatory failure of the FDA; and the blind devotion to the idea that a revolutionary neuro-biological translational discovery is "right around the corner" of Thomas Insel, Director of the NIMH.  What is abundantly clear is that Conflicts of Interest have apparently prevented each of these "stake holders" from serving the best interests of the people given a psychiatric diagnosis ethically or altruistically. 

Each of these entitites has betrayed the trust of the American people.  I don't believe it's a conspiracy, nor do I think it's necessarily done with ill intent---with the exception of the drug industry and the research psychiatrists who ignored medical ethics and the harmful consequences of illegally marketing dangerous drugs as a panacea to "treat" emotional and behavioral problems caused by societal and environmental deficits. The drug industry has in all reality, been aided and abetted in a criminal enterprise, reliant on fraudulent claims about the diagnoses treated and the drugs used due to a successful albeit illegal marketing strategy. Federal authorities and "patient" advocacy groups remain silent about the pervasive fraud and corruption ans continue to benefit from the largess of their Big Pharma benefactors. Silence in effect is complicity in an ongoing criminal enterprise; the FDA and "patient advocacy" groups financially benefit by remaining silently complicit...

Each has colluded with the drug makers in perpetrating fraud.  These drug manufacturers have been found guilty several times of criminally marketing psychotropic drugs; the NIMH, the FDA and the patient advocacy groups have not warned the American people about the fraudulent claims used by the manufacturers to gain expedited FDA approval of the drugs; or about pHARMa's illegal marketing schemes. Drug Makers fail to perform the after market testing supposedly "required" by the FDA, while the FDA turns a blind eye to the failure.  In the illegally marketing phase of this criminal enterprise, it is clear that government regulatory authorities are utterly and completely worthless; it is also abundantly clear that advocacy groups have been willing participants. It is in this phase that the collusion comes clearly into focus:  each and every regulatory authority and patient advocacy group who receives funds from the drug industry has either actively participated and/or passively allowed this ongoing fraud, remaining silent and denying the horrific impact on the people with a psychiatric diagnosis who are disabled or killed the drugs. It is an egregious breach of the American people's trust that belies the self-proclaimed altruistic intent to advocate for the best interests of patients. It is made worse by the fact this collaboration relies on defrauding the American people whose tax dollars fund "patient" advocacy groups and the FDA, who approves the drugs and theoretically provides after-market regulatory enforcement on behalf of the American people. Relying on assurances of the safety and effectiveness of pharmaceutical drugs, without reliable evidence, could be hazardous to your health; it may even be fatal.     

Each government entity whose primary purpose is to serve the interests of the American people has utterly failed to do so; the failure has put our most vulnerable loved ones at risk.  Each has purposely lied about and/or concealed the results of federally funded research.  Each has lied to the American people about the safety and efficacy of psychotropic drugs, as well as the subjective nature of the diagnoses themselves.  Each has purposely misinformed the general public, the people diagnosed, and their families members with a fraudulent claim that was developed in an effort to lessen the stigma of a psychiatric diagnosis; but which has no basis in fact.  The claim that psychiatric diagnoses are caused by a genetic, neuro-biological, chemical imbalances or brain defects, is an idea that some had hoped would encourage the general public to be nicer to people with "mental illness;" that it would increase psychiatric patients inclusion into mainstream society.  

Ten years after this massive media campaign to inform Americans about how to help people with a psychiatric diagnosis, using this ill-conceived strategy, essentially, propaganda; it is discovered this "anti-stigma" campaign had the opposite effect. Now that the general public believe that mental illnesses are caused by brain diseases, people with psychiatric diagnoses are shunned and excluded even more by the general public than they were before this "anti-stigma" campaign.  Despite this failure, and in spite of the claim being a ploy with no scientific validity, it is still stated as if it is a fact by mental health professionals---including NIMH Director, Thomas Insel.   

The vast majority of NIMH research funding is directed towards searching for evidence to substantiate the disease hypothesis; the vast majority of public funds are expended for pharmaceutical drugs as if the disease hypothesis has been validated and is a medical certainty.

We have a publicly funded treatment system which is based on medically treating people with a psychiatric diagnosis as if psychiatric diagnoses are evidence of a biological defect in the absence of definitive evidence.  We pay for the prescription drugs prescribed to psychiatric patients and treat them under color of law by force if they are not cooperative.   A psychiatric diagnosis is now adjudicated in Courts of Law; a psychiatric diagnosis is a legal determination of one's social, political and legal status. The scientific evidence is insufficient, so a legal determination is substituted. It's not constitutional, nonetheless, it is legal in most states.  The laws passed do not require that evidence offered need not comply with the Rules of Evidence applicable in any and every other criminal and civil Court proceeding, nor do Standard court Procedures need to be followed---this is a separate, not equal, lower standard for the "mentally ill."

Under the guise of public service and benevolent assistance and advocacy, mental health practitioners and volunteer "advocates for the mentally ill" have, with the drug industry's help, misinformed millions of patients and families and have violated many individuals Substantive and Procedural Due Process Rights, to force "treatment" that violates a patient's Human Rights. These people are the primary victims, their families are also primary victims---the secondary  victims, are the taxpayers who pay for the Court Proceedings, and pay for the drugs, pay the subsistence disability payments made to those who are iatrogenically disabled.   The secondary victims are also passive perpetrators. This may harsh, but there are injustices that once one knows about them a failure to protest them and the refusal to act in defense of the victims becomes complicity. Human Rights crimes carried out under the Color of Law, would definitely qualify as a circumstance in which one's failure to act would make one complicit.

Every Federal Authority and patient advocacy group that has failed to inform, and has denied the deleterious negative effects of psychotropic drugs while simultaneously reassuring people in crisis and their family members, of the the safety and efficacy of the drugs; is guilty of fraud. They are using the same tainted inaccurate misinformation used to illegally market the drugs, and in effect, are aiding and abetting in an ongoing criminal enterprise.   People relied on this information have been disabled and have died, yet we are supposed to believe this is for their "benefit" and it is in their , "best interest."  Others have been forced to take drugs after being stripped of their dignity, deprived of their Human Rights and devoiced. Some can no longer speak up in their own defense, because they are traumatized and afraid, or the "necessary medical treatment" disabled and killed them.  

This is the worst Human Rights disaster in Human History. Who cares? Society has been trained not to care for or about "the mentally ill" by psychiatrists who are proponents of  biological reductive explanations for symptoms of distress, and it is propounded by unethical  government authorities and "patient" advocates. All are recipients of public funding from We the People, but also from pHARMa. It's apparent that pHARMA, the primary beneficiary of this ongoing fraud, is getting an excellent return on it's investment--and We the People are being royally screwed...Psychiatrists and "patient" advocates will tell you that the victims lack insight and have a disease that is genetic.  I fail to see how believing psychiatric symptoms are caused by a disease or defect would justify inhumane treatment. The fact is psychiatrists and self-appointed advocates who are devoted to the disease hypothesis, are advocating a perspective and a treatment agenda; this is NOT the same thing as advocating for an individual or an entire class of people.

Criminal mistreatment of the "mentally ill" is widely accepted and standard practice. I am haunted by memories and living an ongoing nightmare. We were traumatized by the inhumane manner both of us were treated by "professionals." It is the deleterious, traumatic impact the drugs have had on my brilliant, precious son that make it difficult to stand;   and  almost impossible to breathe because being forced to choke back my outrage and denied the right to defend my own child against those who tortured him, have made me a different person.  My spirit is altered in profound ways by the trauma of witnessing the torture that was  inflicted upon my child, and knowing that the harm is not yet, finished. Grieving parents can be ignored---after all, just like their "mentally ill" children just don't know what's "good for them," the parents can't possibly be right to protest the manner in which their children are mistreated and harmed by "professionals." (the obvious, but unspoken implication is that family members who object or protest about how a loved one is treated, mistreated or flat out tortured can be ignored. After all, the parents are probably genetically inferior don't you know...they probably just don't know...they have a lack of insight!) I was told by one psychiatrist, "in psychiatry, curing symptoms reigns suppreme(sic) over a collaborative approach. Parents who objected to medical treatment they would see as at best ill informed and at worst impaired themselves."

People in distress are getting "medical treatment" that is in fact not based on Ethical Medical principles, nor is it developed from ethically conducted or honestly reported research. This means it is treatment that is neither therapeutic or medical in nature; it is political in nature with psychiatry functioning as a social control authority. This fraud is still used in Standard Clinical Practice. Doctors are not supposed to lie to patients, and nobody is supposed to lie to the Police or in testimony offered in a Court of Law. Nonetheless, in Courts of Law around the Country, psychiatric diagnoses are adjudicated and become in effect, a legal sentence requiring psychiatric treatment compliance without needing to be supported on an evidentiary basis. How to "legally" justify forced psychiatric treatment: Abrogate the Rules of Evidence, Standard Court Procedures and Individual Rights under the Constitution.  

Gee, I think I know what the source of the stigma is!  The psychiatric diagnostic label itself is the stigma, always has been.  The very way that some advocacy is carried out is perpetuating stigma, yet claiming it's done to, "bust the stigma."  Worse than this, it is used as a justification for the grossly unethical treatment provided by “professionals” both in clinical research and clinical practice.

Driven by a small number of "psychiatric researchers" who are Key Opinion Leaders who minimize or dismiss the relevance of subjective experiences and minimize and dismiss the impact of political, environmental and societal causal factors, these psychiatrists are hell bent on finding the evidence to validate the disease hypothesis; dismissing as irrelevant any information which does not support the hypothesis.

Clinical trials are structured in a way that is biased, in a deliberate attempt to gather the data which will validate what is and has been Standard Practice in the provision of psychiatric treatment----This is BACKWARDS; the effort has been unsuccessful, yet it persists.  Psychiatrists are seeking definitive evidence for a hypothesis that they have been using to gain treatment compliance by telling patients and family members that it is brain disease that is the cause of mental illness, as if it is an objective fact, not merely a hypothesis. A hypothesis, that is not even validated isn't even a theory, let alone a medical certainty!    Psychiatric researchers have been saying that the discovery of the elusive definitive proof is right around the corner for decades now. People who hope it's true state the claim as if it is a fact, those who are advocates for the mentally ill, spread this misinformation and the safety and efficacy of the drugs.

It is a cruel deception, and it is fraud.  How could it be seen as anything else?  Medical professionals are telling people that they have a disease when they have not found one.  Why is psychiatry even considered a Medical Specialty?  Doctors who lie and say there is a disease, then treat this mythical disease with drugs that cause actual diseases; many frequently do not warn patients of the risks.  Many will deny the reported negative effects for what they are--early warning signs for neurological damage, frequently will be dismissed as "tolerable side effects."  This is abuse, and it is medical neglect of their patients who end up permanently impaired.  This is what is and has been happening to children in foster care, and at home with their parents---for decades.

Psychiatrists refuse to treat the iatrogenic diseases they cause; it is criminal medical neglect. The bio-medical model of psychiatry depends on deception, coercion and corruption of the scientific method, and necessitates ignoring the Ethical Guidelines of Informed Consent.  It also relies on the blind trust of a deceived populace: the public is informed that the people do not want  "help" and refuse this “medical care” ONLY due a lack of insight which they claim is another symptom. Psychiatrists and other medical professionals have been given the police powers, the Courts and the Police are psychiatry’s agents, Under Color of Law.

Psychiatry practiced in this way, is not therapeutic, and is not medicine.  Psychiatry has encouraged parents of minor and adult children to emotionally abandon them; stating that their child's pleas for help, protection and rescue are symptoms of their "disease."  It is one of the many things that I find utterly and completely despicable.  These "doctors" have managed to convince some parents to emotionally and physically abandon their own flesh and blood; denying them unconditional love and emotional support needed for them to recover.  Psychiatrists encourage parents to deny their victimized children protection "for their own good;" how is this not seen for the evil that it is?

It is immoral.  It is inhumane.  It is also clear that there is no intent to ameliorate the damage done to primary victims who are still living.  The Justice Department's Office of Civil Rights, Criminal Division has denied it has a duty to investigate Federal Crimes committed against my son---claiming it is not their "department" that deals with Civil Rights complaints when a mentally ill person's Civil Rights are violated Under Color of Law, even if the felony crimes were committed by Mental Health Professionals, acting under State Authority, paid with Federal funds.  I was informed that it is NOT their job...

The DOJ's Office of Civil Rights Criminal Division expects me to believe that the criminal complaint I filed on my son’s behalf remained for over a year in it's office, is in the wrong place. (12-2011)  I sent the complaint where I was told to send it by overnight mail, return receipt requested.  When it was received, I was assured it was in the right place, and told to call if I had additional information.  I wanted to inform them that Jon McClellan, who testified in a Senate Hearing, is the psychiatrist who disabled my son when he used him in Drug Trials without Informed Consent, and inspite of my vehement protests. The clerk asked me what was my new information, THEN told me The Depratment of Justice Office of Civil Rights Criminal Division doesn’t investigate crimes committed under color of law which violate the civil rights of people diagnosed mentally ill.

I may not have perfect insight--who the hell does?!  From the top of my head to soles of my feet, to the tips of my fingers and with every fiber of my being I know this: My right to perform my duty as a mother was denied by a federally funded psychiatric researcher who tortured and disabled my son.  

photo credit

Portions of this post first published December 21,2011 "Not Something One Can Forget or Forgive in the Absence of Justice"

A doctor of psychiatry and his medical instruments

When one realizes that Human Rights crimes are legally mandated but it's called providing "effective medical treatment" to people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, who don't know what's good for them (because they supposedly have a lack of insight) it's truly stunning.  I realized this was happening when I was a kid---I have been aware way too long to be polite sometimes...The fact that a minority of people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia actually benefit from taking the neuroleptic drugs; but that everyone who takes them faces serious risks to their overall health is not relevant, and neither is determining if the person Court Ordered is among the minority of people the drugs help. The Nation's top psychiatrists, and grassroots mental health advocates for the "seriously mentally ill" lobby for public policies and Legislation so that more people can benefit from psychiatric treatment "for their own good." (and 'protect' society)

The fact that psychiatric treatment commonly results in iatrogenic illness and disability and leads to a decades earlier death is a well established; an obviously accepted, if not intended, outcome. It's plain that disability and early death is the most commonly achieved Real World Outcome for people treated by psychiatry; particularly for people who are diagnosed with schizophrenia. Obviously, words like "safe" "effective" and "treatment" had to be re-defined for psychiatry's clinical standards of care; the terms, "clinical care standards," "best practices" and "off label prescribing priveledges" have also been redefined by psychiatry. Psychiatrists who write, recommend, and use drug based treatment protocols and algorithms and who teach students and other medical professionals to use them, must believe that disability and early death are beneficial to patients; acceptable, desirable treatment outcomes and perhaps even deluded enough to believe that consensus is a substitute for ethical medical research. Doctors of psychiatry, leading psychiatric researchers and public mental health policy makers are providing a standard of care with consistent, reliable results; unfortunately, the most probable outcome is death. This bewing the case, one can understand how perjury and forgery have simply been re-defined, they are now part of psychiatry's standard of care which are supported by the specious claim that teratogenic drugs treat undefined "chemical imbalances" and unidentified "brain diseases" which psychiatrists believe may be causing "mental illnesses;" more accurately described as, psychiatric diagnoses. Unsubstantiated claims are the so-called "evidence" that standard clinical practices are based upon. The neuro-biological disease and/or chemical imbalance hypotheses are, at best, slurs which stigmatize; at worst, they are fraudulent claims made in order to deprive people of their human rights based on eugenic theory repackaged then marketed to the masses as valid, ethical "medical science."

People with a psychiatric diagnosis have their Human Rights violated as a matter of course; the rights most people take for granted. Mental health professionals have a moral and an ethical duty to preserve the fundamental human rights of people whom they give a psychiatric diagnosis. Instead, mental health professionals and 'patient advocates' support legally diminishing what are inalienable rights---but what the hell, safe and effective treatment is not actually safe or effective so what is a little deprivation of one's human rights in order to medically treat the diseases psychiatrists voted into existence! Even clinical care standards are determined by pseudo-democratic political process. The standards are not based on ethical, scientific research; or any ethical medical standards used by any other field of science based medicine. Psychiatry uses the Courts to strip patients of their human rights, psychiatry does not conform to legal standards i.e. Rules of Evidence, and Standard Court Procedures, that are required for for every other type of Court Proceeding, whether civil or criminal.

The nature of psychiatric diagnoses and the effects of the drugs is not relevant in commitment proceedings. No where in our society is psychiatry held to the ethical standards other medical specialties are; not even the ethical standards which are legally mandated by International Law for Clinical Research conducted by Medical Doctors on human subjects. Psychiatry is practiced in a dishonest, unethical manner. There is no evidence that the psychiatric profession values the ethical standards of science, medicine or the law. There is no evidence of psychiatry being compelled by an altruistic intent or that it values or is even aware of a primary ethical duty to psychiatric patients. Patients are disabled and killed at alarming rates by teratogenic drugs and shock treatments prescribed "for their own good."

What psychiatrists do not explain is why the ethical standards of science, medicine or the law do not apply to the practice of psychiatry. What psychiatrists do not explain is why fraud, corruption, and lying in professional journals, textbooks, classrooms and to students and professionals is acceptable. What psychiatry needs to explain is why outright lying and using analogies to explain psychiatric symptoms and coercing "treatment compliance" is ethically acceptable. Dishonesty is not honorable, defense of dishonesty shows an utter lack of ethical integrity.

Why does a group of professionals that is so dishonest and unethical have Police Powers? Courts of Law have lowered all of the ethical legal standards for psychiatry so that the Courts and Police have in effect, become medical instruments used to strip patients of their inalienable rights to force compliance with psychiatric treatment. Rules of evidence do not apply to the "evidence" used against psychiatry's patients, and the lowered legal standard is claimed to be necessary for the patient/victim's "benefit."

It is patently obvious that the lower standards in scientific medical and legal arenas serve primarily to keep facts hidden. Lowered Court standards serve to protect psychiatry while failing to protect psychiatric patients or serve the Justice interests of society as a whole. The same patient can be seen by 3 psychiatrists and get 3 distinctly different diagnoses. Psychiatric diagnoses cannot truthfully be called "diseases." Teratogenic drugs and electrical shocks, both of which cause iatrogenic damage and dysfunction, cannot be truthfully called "safe and effective medical treatments."  Without lowered legal standards, a psychiatrist would not be able to offer "evidence" that a person has a "brain disease" requiring "safe and effective medical treatment." If the Rules of Evidence applied, a psychiatrist could offer little, if any, evidence that would support a petition forcing involuntary psychiatric "treatment."

Lowering scientific, medical and legal standards is necessary, but it is not done to provide "necessary medical treatment" that is "safe and effective." I suspect if any of psychiatry's claims were supported by scientific findings, or grounded in ethical medical principles, i.e. based on facts instead of  subjective opinions, innate biases, errors of attribution, and distorted research; psychiatry would not need to pervert and distort the truth. Police Officers have an ethical duty, an Honor Code, "To Protect and To Serve."  Courts of Law have an ethical duty to apply the law equally to all, as if the Courts were blind to special interests; not biased in favor of predetermined outcomes. In effect, to be blind to subjective biases; basing legal rulings on objective evidence offered in compliance with the rules of evidence, adhering to standard legal procedures. Why has human society allowed psychiatry to subjugate the role of Police Officers and Courts of Law to that of serving the interests of psychiatry? Police Officers and Courts of Law now are performing their jobs as if their ethical duty has become primarily to serve psychiatry as "medical instruments."  Police Officers and Courts of Law serve all of society by enforcing the Law, and preserving individual rights. Service in preservation of Blind Justice is honorable when done with integrity. It is a shameful disgrace; a blight on all humanity when it is not.

via Leonord Roy Frank


A SIGN FOR CAIN
An Exploration of Human Violence
FREDRIC WERTHAM, M.D.



The Geranium in the Window
THE "EUTHANASIA" MURDERS
If the physician presumes to take into consideration in his work whether a life has value or not. The consequences are boundless and the physician becomes the most dangerous man  in the state.

DR. CURISTOPH HUPELAND

(1762-1836)

IF we want to understand violence as a whole, we cannot leave any of its major manifestations in a fog of half-knowledge. But this is exactly what has happened with an unprecedented occurrence of mass violence, tile deliberate killing of large numbers of mental patients, for which psychiatrists were directly responsible. To both the general public and the psychiatric profession, the details and the background are still imperfectly known. This is not only a chapter in the history of violence; it is also a chapter in the history of psychiatry. Silence does not wipe it out, minimizing it does not expunge it. It must be faced. We must try to understand and resolve it. read here

Picture Credit: Just Ducks

Thank You For The Ominous Long-Term Health Risks

Quack Master Jack McClellan

"Whenever a doctor cannot do good, he must be kept from doing harm."  Hippocrates

Jon McClellan, the lead researcher for childhood schizophrenia in Washington State, is a doctor who should be stopped.  He is the psychiatrist who gave my son neuroleptic and other  psychotropic drugs without consent. He repeatedly told me I had no say in treatment decisions; no say about what drugs he gave my son.  He drugged my son without consent, much less, Informed Consent; while trialing neuroleptic drugs for FDA approval; so the drugs he used were not approved for use on children.  Drugged my son over my objections, into a state of profound disability. He told me I had no say in what drugs were given to my boy, who had an IQ of 146.  It is frightening that this man is still the Medical Director of the State-run psychiatric facility for children.

Schizophrenia is a diagnosis of exclusion.  What that means is that any and all other explanations for the symptoms must be excluded.  Until this researcher got a hold of him, my son was diagnosed with Temporal Lobe Epilepsy and PTSD, the latter due to having been severely traumatized, in foster care.  Both of these can cause the symptoms which Dr. McClellan concluded were symptoms of schizophrenia.  When I asked him if he was going to do an EEG to rule out the Temporal Lobe Epilepsy; he said it was not necessary.  My protests were labeled denial, my input was dismissed; I was told I had no say.

Ultimately, McClellan put my son on Clozapine which between 1998 and 2005 was linked to 3,277 deaths in the U.S. and over 4,300 events that resulted in disability or required medical intervention, according to the data in the FDA Medwatch adverse events reporting system.  Dr. McClellan lied to me and said that since the drugs was  put back on market in the US, with mandatory blood draws, no one had died from it's use. He also told me that it was only over in Europe that anyone died at all.  This conversation happened only after he had put my son on the drug, as did all the conversations about what drugs he was using to treat my son. Like all of the drugs used by Jon McClellan, on my son, it was not approved for pediatric use for the reason McClellan prescribed them.

The reality is, no matter the diagnosis or the symptoms; this doctor had no right to use my son as a guinea pig---and he had no legal authority to drug him without my consent.  He did not have my son's consent---or his mother's permission; he did not comply with the Hippocratic oath, the ethics guidelines of the medical profession, the laws of the State of Washington, Federal Medicaid guidelines, the U.S. Constitution, or the Nuremberg Code.  There is no way in hell I would have given consent, had I been given the opportunity and actually been informed, which he did not think was necessary. Quack Master Jack, Jon McClellan, a "lead researcher" funded by NIMH, played God.

What is known and has been know about this class of drugs for decades, is that they cause iatrogenic, i.e. physician caused; diseases, neurological impairments, disability, and sudden, and early death.  These are know risks, and as such, should be information discussed prior to administration.  I found these facts out on my own, not in any conversation I had with "Dr. Jack," as he told the kids to call him.  My son, who still takes Clozapine, is unaware of these risks; no psychiatrist has discussed them with him.  McClellan used many anti-psychotics, on my son without adhering to any ethical, moral, or legal standard; knowing this, I am disgusted that this man never loses an opportunity to decry their over-use.  He had no problem using them to drug my son; without warning either my son or myself about the "Ominous Long-Term Health Risks."

It didn't matter to Quack Master Jack that he didn't have 
Informed Consent from the patient or his MadMother.

I was never asked if I wanted to sacrifice my son on the altar of corporate greed and have my son used in Drug Trials. Had I been asked, there's no way in hell I would have given consent. The TEOSS Drug Trial was a "seeding trial," the purpose of a "seeding trial" is gain FDA approval for a drug to treat a new condition, or a different population; to expand the drug market and ensure that BigPharma continues to make a killing

figuratively and literally...

It matters to this MadMother.

Does it matter to you?

Link to The Belmont Report and Nuremberg Code:


Originally published on December 17, 2010

unaddressed "concerns" or cause for criminal investigation and prosecution?

Washington State Capitol

I write about my son's case in specific with the intent of bringing attention to the the larger issue of psychiatric mistreatment and psychiatric oppression; because they are Human Rights crimes that destroy lives all over the globe. My son is one of far too many victims who have been abused and used in drug trials.  My son was, in effect, tortured for the majority of his childhood by psychiatrists who used drugs "off-label." Ultimately, my son was used as a guinea pig without consent in Federally-funded drug trials at the state-run psychiatric facility for children by the Medical Director of the facility, Jon McClellan, one of the investigators in the TEOSS drug trials.

via Psychiatric Times:

Some Concerns Regarding Diagnosis

By Joseph Friedman, PhD, and Robert E. Kay, MD | October 21, 2011

Dr Friedman is a clinical psychologist with 50-plus years of experience. He has worked in military and private psychiatric hospitals, and outpatient clinics. Formerly, he was Adjunct Assistant Professor at Temple University, lecturer at St. Joseph’s University and Special Lecturer, and Senior Clinician at University of Pennsylvania Medical School. Dr Kay is a retired psychiatrist who worked with both adults and children in various outpatient and inpatient settings, mostly as part of the community health system in Philadelphia.

The mental health professions are currently awaiting the American Psychiatric Association’s newest version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. The need for a fifth revision underscores the lack of satisfaction within the professions with our diagnostic schema. In this article we address several issues that have troubled us in the past versions and seem likely to do so in the forthcoming edition.

In modern medicine, there has been what is labeled as the laboratory revolution.1 This stresses that verifiable biologic and chemical finds in the laboratory contribute greatly to diagnosis and treatment.

However, it is abundantly clear that no such markers exist in the sphere of emotional disorders.2,3

My hopeful prayer is to:

The article in the Psychiatric Times, "Some Concerns Regarding Diagnosis" very succinctly states concerns about validity and reliability of psychiatric diagnosis which should alarm anyone who has a conscience. I am biased; biased by my horrifying experiences parenting a child with emotional and behavioral issues and seeking help for the complex PTSD he had after being traumatized by violent crime when he was three. At age seven, he was diagnosed with Left Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Left Temporal Lobe Epilepsy is one of the neurological conditions which can be mistaken for schizophrenia; it is thought to be the result of brain injury.

Ultimately, the 'mental health care' he received from six years of age to his present age of twenty-three, has never addressed his initial trauma. The fact is, not only was his initial trauma ignored, the so-called 'professionals' refuse to acknowledge it, much less the traumatic effects of the 'treatment,' i.e. psychiatric drugs, which have NEVER helped. Professionals who are his current "treatment providers" refuse to even acknowledge the harm caused by the callous disregard shown to my son; apparently, believing he has some disease or defect makes this abusive attitude justifiable. I still cannot fathom the twisted logic of blaming a victim for the harm caused from being victimized. It has long been my perception that many 'professionals' blamed and shamed my son for the behaviors and emotional difficulties he had no control over, and did not understand. His symptoms were treated as if the BELIEF that the symptoms were the result of a disease or defect, was a medical reality---so apparently his severe PTSD had nothing to do with getting beat up and locked in a closet...or the subsequent traumas inflicted by 'professionals.'

Based on this belief, the State of Washington's employees and contracted 'service providers' repeatedly traumatized, stigmatized and discriminated against my son for the effects of being severely traumatized by violent abuse in Foster Care; and repeatedly retraumatized him with callous disregard in the manner the State provided, 'mental health and social services.' The initial traumatic abuse in foster care was an obvious case in which the Child Welfare system was negligent. In an attempt to cover up this crime; State employees committed further crimes.

The State of Washington has continuously committed Medicaid fraud for over 17 years in my son's case; including using my son as research fodder in the State-run psychiatric facility for children without Informed Consent. My son is handicapped as a result. The State of Washington allowed a State employee to give my son massive amounts of dangerous drugs not FDA approved or even tested on children. Worse there is no concern that the doctor who did this is still in a position to harm other children. There is no interest in holding him accountable for the crimes he committed as an agent of the State of Washington, when he drugged my son into a state of profound disability, Under Color of Law. The State of Washington is not interested in complying with Federal Medicaid Law; or in preventing fraudulent claims from being submitted; and continues to commit Medicaid fraud to this day in my son's case.

In providing my son's 'mental health care' State, Federal and International Laws were violated: The State of Washington repeatedly violated my rights as a parent, and my son's Human Rights by allowing fraud, perjury, assault, cruel and unusual punishment, undue restraint, and loss of Liberty without Substantive or Procedural Due Process of Law. At one point, as a teenager, my son was held in a locked facility for close to two years with the facility telling one County's Superior Court he no longer needed to be there; while obtaining a Court Order in another county for Involuntary Commitment. It is my belief the Involuntary Commitment court order was obtained to prevent me from rescuing him, as I had suggested I would.

Not once has a crime that I have reported to appropriate State authorities been investigated by Law Enforcement. What seems to matter to child and adult protective services is protecting the State of Washington; and maintaining control over individuals once a psychiatric diagnosis is attached. The actual effects of treatment, even if lacking any benefit to the patient, is never as important as maintaining 'treatment compliance' through any means necessary. The patient's outcome is never as important as the maintenance of State-Sanctioned, psychiatric authority and control; it is the primary goal and the purpose of Washington State's public Mental Health system.

And that is why in Washington State my son can be ordered by a Court of Law to take drugs that have caused him illness and serious disability----NOT because they are effective or safe, not because they are of therapeutic value, and/or that the drugs 'help' him. He can be, and has been Court Ordered to take teratogenic drugs, "to maintain the ethical integrity of the medical profession." Psychiatric diagnosis and authority is not to be questioned. Last summer, the psychiatrist who sought the order and cited the aforementioned reason the order was necessary, showed no professional or ethical integrity in the 'care' he provided my son. He even put false information in my son's medical record--another crime. This psychiatrist and another 'designated mental health professional' committed felony perjury and forgery, to obtain the Court Order.

The Yakima County Deputy Prosecutor knew he was submitting perjured testimony to the Yakima County Superior Court. The defense counsel knew, yet failed to mount any defense whatsoever for my son. NO investigation occurred in response to filing complaints with State of Washington's "authorities." The Community Mental Health Center that employs the two criminals who started the proceedings, shredded all of the Original Court Documents and the CEO told me, "We do it all the time." The County Prosecutor told me I would hear from him when I spoke to him. I have yet to hear from him despite leaving numerous messages with his receptionist in person. I have been told the Deputy Prosecutor is 'no longer working in this office.' I have also heard that the psychiatrist no longer works for the local clinic.

If the criminal mistreatment and repeated victimization of my traumatized son is not evidence that the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric conditions have nothing to do with the patient's needs or the outcome for the patient; I don't know what does. Seems to me the fact that all of the crimes committed in my son's case were committed Under Color of Law, and have yet to be investigated by Law Enforcement or  prosecuted; should cause a hell of a lot more than 'concern.' But like I said, I am biased.

The rest of the Psychiatic Times article in it's entirety:

"Lacking such markers, past diagnostic manuals have consisted of lists of symptoms grouped into syndromes with the groupings done by committees that were far from unanimous. In past editions, diagnoses have been shifted from one axis to another and definitions have changed. Therefore, there is good reason to question the validity and reliability of the resultant coding.

Specific diagnostic codes imply that these are discrete and separate entities. In practice, the boundaries are fuzzy and allow for much overlap and results in the listing of comorbid conditions. In physical medicine, comorbidity refers to conditions (diseases) existing at the same time but that are independent of the primary diagnosis.

Consider a patient presenting with strong compulsive behaviors who periodically experiences marked anxiety and bouts of depression. Most clinicians, even of differing theoretical orientation, would consider these to be intimately related. In the mental health field, comorbidity does not mean discrete separate issues but is a way of including mention of related aspects of the patient’s distress. Some view comorbidity as an artifact of the diagnostic system.4

A third troubling issue is what we describe as fluidity. People change over time in their modes of adaptation. A diagnosis is akin to a photograph. It may be accurate but it is also static. The very next frame would show a somewhat different picture. It is not uncommon to consult with a patient who has seen other therapists. The patient may currently show all the requirements for a diagnosis of depression. A report from the first practitioner offered the diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder.

It is not usually a matter of one professional or another being right or wrong. Possibly both correctly categorized the patient as he/she was at that time. Presenting symptoms often change over time as part of the patient’s continuing efforts at adaptation and defense.

Concerns about the variability (weak reliability) and essential validity have inclined some to favor abandoning the concept of diagnosis. But, to be replaced with what? It is on this issue that the current authors differ. One of us (J.F.) believes that even with these constraints, diagnoses have utility. They enable practitioners to communicate some shared ideas about patients. They are used in research and in relation to insurers and governmental agencies. The task is to refine our schemes.

While a complete explication of the etiology of emotional disorders seems quite distant, it remains a worthy goal. As the professions make progress toward understanding the genetic predispositions and the impact of psychological trauma at various developmental stages, it might be possible to conceive of a more tailored therapy for these disorders. One such effort is the Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual.5 Similar efforts from other viewpoints6 might provide commonalities upon which to build a richer diagnostic approach.

The other of us (R.E.K.) feels that while diagnoses have utility, there will probably never be clear “markers” as found in general medicine and that the idea of “chemical imbalances” or “neurotransmitter problems” is highly speculative.7,8 The mental health field establishes so-called diseases out of patient behavior and reports; both are prone to conscious and unconscious distortions. Thus, it would be better to give on establishing etiology and deal with what the patient presents.

We reunite on the important notion that the combination of psychotherapy, carefully used medication, and environmental manipulation stands a very good chance of helping people (not disease entities) lead more satisfying and effective lives.

References

1. Cunningham A, Williams P (Eds). The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1992.

2. Kendall R, Jablensky A. distinguishing between the validity and utility of psychiatric diagnosis. Am J Psychiatry 2003;160:4-12.

3. Sobo S. A Reevaluation of the Relationship Between Psychiatric Diagnoses and Chemical Imbalance. 1999 Grand Rounds of University of Alabama Medical School.

4. Maj M. Psychiatric comorbidity: an artifact of current diagnostic systems. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;186:182-184.

5. Greenspan SI (Chair). Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual. Silver Springs, Md; Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organizations: 2006.

6. Oken D. Multiaxial diagnosis in the psychosomatic model of disease. Psychosom Med. 2000;62:171-175.

7. Kirsch I. The Emperor’s New Drugs: Exploding the Anti-Depressant Myth. Philadelphia: Basic Books; 2010.

8. Angell M. The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What To Do About It. New York: Random House; 2004.