1
CAN ~ Collective Action Network / Re: Activist groups?
« on: September 10, 2009, 07:58:12 PM »
thanks.
Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
http://http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-shocking-ray
Ray is a 55-year-old Minnesota resident who is regularly receiving "Involuntary Outpatient Maintenance Electroshock."
Involuntary outpatient electroshock (IOE) is part of a trend to bring the power of forced psychiatric procedures out into the community.
Your home is no longer your castle... it can become your ward. For example, most USA states have quietly passed laws allowing individuals living at home to be court ordered to take powerful psychiatric drugs against their will. It was only a matter of time until such outpatient coercion included electroshock.
Electroshock itself has made a comeback throughout the USA, and internationally, without adequate human rights protection.
Ray is receiving so-called "maintenance" ongoing weekly electroshock over his expressed wishes while living at home. Falsely believing "new improved" electroshock is safe, the mental health system is at times administering more than 100 "maintenance" electroshocks to a single individual over months and years.
This could happen to Ray. Even his mother, who is a retired nurse who used to administer involuntary electroshocks back in the 1950's, is concerned by the sheer number of forced shocks he has received.
This could happen to anyone.
This could happen to you or a loved one.
The mental health system today has a lot of "buzz words" like empowerment, self-determination, advocacy, recovery, peer support, transformation, consumer-run, trauma-informed care.
How real are buzz words, when Ray Sandford gets forced outpatient electroshock each week :suicide:
http://http://www.mindfreedom.org/ray
This quick fix is also strikingly similar to the philosophies of programming that are myopically fixated on the short term appearance of change without regard for the damage incurred by the individual.
Basically I'm just saying (in a long winded way) that in certain patients, ECT has quite a bit of therapeutic value.
Please elaborate on this
Please expand on this last part for me, specifically these differences. (I’m sure that it’s not like Ken Kesey’s representation of the procedure.)
Again:
If it came up in another thread’s discussion, I missed it. What kind of facility do you work in, and in what capacity?
I was walking home yesterday, went around a corner, and got to see a 2 year old Chinese kid taking a shit on the sidewalk. Rather common, though disturbing, sight here in China to see young children crapping and pissing on the sidewalk with their parent's encouragement.
My problem with this (a treatment I had at one point considered) is that this ”treatment” is administered with the logic that a trauma team might aptly use to justify extreme life saving measures in physical injuries. The flaws are that all too often the patients who receive ECT are not in an immediate endangered condition that requires an intervention of “last resort” rather they are despondent persons who are desperate to not feel the way they do at that time. Doctors who advocate this treatment are all too willing to accommodate their patient’s need for relief without considering or advising what of their patient will be lost to the treatment. Patients in severely depressed states may not consider the fact that follow up shocks are required to maintain the short term relief (This also perpetuates the side effects).
That might be your definition, but others have a right to seek happiness as they see fit so long as it doesnt' directly affect others. You might look at a person shooting smack as a junkie and a loser. I see a person who has made certain choices and should neither be condemned or made excuses for if he harms somebody. Freedom and personal responsibility.