Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Public Sector Gulags
You make the call ...
Deborah:
--- Quote ---On 2006-02-05 20:03:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Here it is, algorithyms and all:
http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/mhprograms/Disclaimer.shtm"
--- End quote ---
And here's the investigative reports on the TMAP scam in Texas, and 'how well' it helped those forced into 'treatment'.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... 120#122792
Anonymous:
What the heck does that link have to do with TMAP?
Gotta go, help out the mom I just posted about ...
Deborah:
Oh course it?s true. Written by a psych survivor.
Ben Hansen- Member of the Department of Community Health Recipient Rights Advisory Committee, submitted this report concerning Michigan law. Michigan law states that a person may not receive involuntary ECT if s/he has no guardian, but probate judges in the state are ignoring the law. This report details cases where the probate judge violated state law in issuing orders that would allow involuntary ECT. Says the author, "Consent laws are made a mockery by judges who rule that individuals are competent when they consent to treatment, but incompetent when they refuse treatment."
http://www.ect.org/news/forced.shtml
He also wrote this:
Excerpt: To determine if these drugs are worth their outrageous price, the National Institute of Mental Health conducted one of the largest and longest independent studies ever, the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness, or CATIE. Four years and $44 million later, the CATIE study, published in September 2005, reached a startling conclusion: the new drugs "have no substantial advantage" over the old ones.
Atypical antipsychotics, it turns out, are a massive rip-off. They're no better than old drugs which weren't very good to begin with.
Government programs like Medicaid pay for over 90 percent of all antipsychotic prescriptions. Across the nation, state budgets are being squeezed by Medicaid, and Medicaid is being squeezed by the high cost of prescription drugs. Atypical antipsychotics are among the most expensive.
http://www.raggededgemagazine.com/depar ... 00666.html
And this informative piece on ?insidious, life-long, psychiatric disease?
http://www.adhdfraud.org/commentary/11-30-00-2.htm
He works with and advocates for the ?SMI?, just in a different way than you do. Very bright and articulate.
If you?re looking for info on ?forced treatment?, you?re not going to find it in TMAP documents. Those guidelines are for direct care, whether voluntary or involuntary. And, the link has everything to do with the scam around how TMAP was created and how it affected Texas citizens used as guinea pigs.
From another "SMI" survivor
How do We Recover? An Analysis of Psychiatric Survivor Oral Histories, by Oryx Cohen, in Journal of Humanistic Psychology, Vol . 45 No. 3, Summer 2005 333-354
Excerpt:
Recovery has only recently become a word used in relation to the experience of psychiatric symptoms. Those of us who experience psychiatric symptoms are commonly told that these symptoms are incurable, that we will have to live with them for the rest of our lives, that the medications, if they (health care professionals) can find the right ones or the right combination, may help, and that we will always have to take the medications. Many of us have even been told that these symptoms will worsen as we get older. Nothing about recovery was ever mentioned. Nothing about hope. Nothing about anything we can do to help ourselves. Nothing about empowerment.
Nothing about wellness. (p. 315)
Most consumers/survivors/ex-patients involved in the modern movement reject the "medical model" of biopsychiatry and argue that "mental illnesses" are an emotional/behavioral/biological/spiritual manifestation of a complex interplay of social, emotional, and cultural stressors (Bassman, 2001; Breggin, 1991, 2003; Chamberlin, 1990; Fisher, 1998, 2003; Fisher & Ahern, 1999; McLean, 1995; Neugeboren, 1999). We view "mental illnesses" as temporary crises as opposed to physical diseases. We stress empowerment and recovery versus maintenance, hope versus resignation
(Bassman, 2001; Fisher, 1998, 2003).
Evidence for Recovery
Under the medical model, in which "mental illnesses "are viewed as "brain diseases," complete recovery is not a possibility. However, research and experience show that many of us labeled as "severely mentally ill" do recover over time, especially when involved in programs that emphasize hope, optimism, and potential (Fisher, 2003; Fisher & Ahern, 1999). Courtney Harding's longitudinal study that tracked more than 1,300 subjects originally diagnosed with schizophrenia during several decades found that one half to two thirds "had achieved considerable improvement or recovered" (Harding, Brooks, Ashikaga, Strauss, & Breier, 1987, p. 727).
Other studies have compared traditional hospital environments to nontraditional community programs such as residential lodges and clubhouse settings. None of these studies has found traditional models to be more effective. In fact, the bulk of this research points to the superiority of nontraditional alternatives, especially in terms of cost and the promotion of independent living (Mowbray & Freddolino, 1986).
http://akmhcweb.org/recovery/oryx_journ ... _psych.pdf
Anonymous:
--- Quote ---On 2006-02-05 20:36:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Yup, Irvin, Thomas Szasz buddy:
http://www.szasz.com/SymposiumProgram.html
Enough said.
How about reading, just the posts here,
of those that are being treated for
SMI, and what they have tried to tell
you time, after time.
Why is it so important to ignore your
peers and quote the fringe niche anti
psychiatry money makers in all your
obsessive negatives posts about anything
to do with psychiatry, meds, light therapy
you name it, your twist is negative.
Now, again, why is it so important to you,
someone who avoids finding out something
about the serious mentally ill first hand
to be so obsessed on this issue.
You have nothing to do with mental illness
except to cut and paste any negative story
you can find in the nice anti market out
there.
But you are obsessed?
Why?
On the issue of treating those that are sick ...
Why would you want to spread your biased info
around and even ignore your peers on this forum
who have tried with really well written testimonials to help you to understand, until
you drive them away.
Why?
"
--- End quote ---
Please answer this post, I prefer that you stop
being evasive. Be honest, thank you.
Deborah:
Who are the 'peers' that I have ignored, Paul?
Are you suggesting that I defer to your and Julie's bias?
I have not once suggested that either of your flush your drugs and seek alternative treatment. What exactly do you need from me?
The only obsession that I can see, is your ongoing lame, slanderous, attacks on me for posting information contrary to your beliefs.
I was posting here long before you descended upon the forum with your pro-drug, pro-program attitude. Get over it. We are having discussion/ debate here. If that's uncomfortable for you, then spread your propoganda elsewhere. It's that simple.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version