Blogs

There will, of course, be those with pre-existing experiences of severe mental distress, and those who develop severe distress during the COVID-19 outbreak, and it is essential that they are able to access the professional care they need. But the narrative in much of the media that huge numbers of us will need access to these same services only serves to increase the anxiety in all of us, and cast doubt on our ability to cope.

Why do we keep treating 'mental health problems' like diagnosable medical conditions instead of the complex existential phenomena they obviously are? Why do we submit to the false authority and doctrinal absurdities of hubristic 'mind doctors', when a holistic, humane, preventative perspective is clearly required?

An interview with John Read and Irving Kirsch to discuss their paper which calls to prohibit ECT. This is because the negative effects of ECT are so strong, the evidence supporting it is so weak (especially in the long-term and beyond the improvement due to placebo) and there are other means of addressing the difficulties that the person is struggling with.

My view is ECT should be treated as an experimental, unproven procedure (because it is) and stopped nationally pending rigorous controlled research which monitors whether it works better than placebo 6 months or years after the final session has stopped.

For those who have experienced harm the abuse starts by not being believed by GPs and psychiatrists when in withdrawal.  To then have abuse levelled at them on social media seems to confirm that psychiatry is not interested in learning from its mistakes, only about its preservation.