Rants, Raves and Resources


 
 
 
 
 

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the individual writers on Rants, Raves, and Resources do not necessarily represent those of the Site Owner. This page is dedicated to the free expression of personal experience within the parameters of my Mission Statement. This page is to be taken as the opinions of others, many of them based on each ones personal experience. It is not recommended by me to be taken as advice, or direction, on whch anyone should act without questioning the content. If you make the choice to act on the opinions of others, please proceed with the utmost of caution and be prepared to accept responsibility for your own actions.
I repeat again; I am NOT a medical professional or mental health expert. I am an ex mental patient and psychiatric survivour, one who believes also from experience that 'bio-psych' is the wrong way to go.


 


You See, the Mental Illness System KNOWS What it Causes Even While it is Causing it. They just see it as a 'lesser' of 'Two Evils.'

 

PSEUDOPATIENTS AND THEIR SETTINGS

(From On Being Sane in Insane Places by David Rosenhan, M.D.)


The eight pseudo patients were a varied group. One was a psychology graduate student in his 20’s. The remaining seven were older and “established.” Among them were three psychologists, a pediatrician, a psychiatrist, a painter, and a housewife. Three pseudo patients were women, five were men. All of them employed pseudonyms, lest their alleged diagnoses embarrass them later.

Restated by Me:  When you real name is connected to a psychiatric label, it is going to be 'embarrassing' at the very least. You and I know of course that it is going to be a whole lot MORE than  just 'embarrassing. it is going to change your life forever.
 
• Posting Opinions in the First Person Singular
To save any of these files on your computer, right-click and choose "Save target as" from the menu that pops up

An Experienced First Person Perspective

By, and For, the Psychiatrized

 

This page is, as it suggests, is for the participation of the Dissatisfied Psychiatric Survivor and is for the purposes of venting, offering alternatives/ideas that seemed to work for the individual writer who is contributing,  and any resources on line or otherwise, that he or she found helpful.

Individuals may contribute their own work to this page no more than two or three times a year, so if you have a lot to say, make it a long post. The reason for this limitation is that I do not want to end up editing an online newspaper while ignoring my own work on the website for which I created it in the first place.

To post here, you are required to register your e-mail to my site. You do not need to accept a newsletter or involve yourself in the CounterPsych Forum when you do, although you can if you want to do so, and you can also refuse delivery of any mail when you register. I require this for identification purposes only as it tends to keep the harassers away if they think they are known.

 

All writing must be submitted to me in it's final form, along with your name and e-mail address. I will not accept it for posting here unless the following conditions are met:

 

1. No foul language, cursing etc.

2, Do not name specifically your psychiatrist(s) or the institutions in which you were incarcerated. I am taking care of my, and your, liability problems by keeping the names out.

3. Do not suggest any form of violence against self or others, including threats of suicide and/or murder.
 

I reserve the right to refuse to post any submission, without reasons given, other than that this is my website and I will keep it directed in the way I want it to go.

 

If the above conditions are met, I will do nothing more than run a spell check through it, so be sure it is in the form you want it to be in before you send it.  You may request to have your own essay/post accepted and/or removed at any time by notifying me at:

Patricia-CounterpsychSPAMAWAY@live.ca

 

 Patricia@SPAMAWAYCounterPsych.com

 

(In both cases remove the word SPAMAWAY and close the space.)

 

This is a PUBLIC Page so please keep that in mind at all times and be aware that you can use this space to help, or to harm, yourself and all other psychiatrized persons, depending upon what you say, and HOW you say it, so speak from the wisdom of your own personal experience as best you can and help to change the world for the better.

 

Disclaimer:

 

The opinions, experiences and feelings expressed by the writers contributing to this page of my Website, are his or her own, and do not necessarily reflect my own experience, opinions or feelings. Though I am very often in agreement with many of the ideas of other psychiatrized persons, that is not always the case just as it is not always the case with 'experts' or the yet to BE psychiatrized, who just may sometimes now be working as professionals in the mental illness system.

(Just as has been said about me from four feet away, "you never know "...)

 

That stated, this page is for the purpose defined by its own name.

The Right to Be Heard 08/17/2010

As Well as the Right to Privacy

By Patricia Lefave and Charles Hughes

 

The following is out of a letter sent to a Consumer/Survivour Group by a long time online friend and one of the Consumer/Survivour advocates. It is on a topic well understood by those of us who have had our lives taken over by 'story' tellers, (whether fabricated stories or true stories or a bit of both) often including family members who see nothing wrong with this, since it is not them being discussed, or them whose right to privacy or self definition is being destroyed.
 

One of the common responses to the objections of the psychiatrized is to proclaim the identified patient to be “too sensitive.” That way, those who are violating the personal boundaries of others won't be “too insensitive”' and they can continue to 'correct' the I.P. from a long established 'them and us' position, so necessary to the maintenance of normal group dysfunctional relating and projected splitting.

 

As always, what this is really about is the principle of mutual respect for personal boundaries and the common lack thereof.

 

Chuck's comments:

 

About Family members revealing their "loved ones" diagnoses and personal information about their symptoms at public meetings and to the news media.

 

I've been in stakeholder meetings where both mother and daughter were stakeholders for their respective stakeholder groups. In both cases; where the mothers were Family representatives and the Adult daughters where Consumers, each of these mothers on numerous occasions would personalize the discussion at hand and give examples that invariably include their loved ones diagnoses and an episode or two.

The Daughters in both cases where devastated to have their personal lives brought up for discussion. These consumers where two adult women with aspirations and goals in life and their mothers where destroying any possibilities of them being taken seriously in the meeting which undermined them as advocates. There have been other family members who give personal stories that include their loved one's, who are known by others present in the meeting, of diagnoses and episodes. I have seen the look of terror on the faces of consumers that have learned of such instances of breech of confidentiality. I have also known of individuals that have had there whole life in a particular city destroyed by someone hanging on them a Mental Health jacket, hung on them because of a family member who advertised that the person has been in treatment.
In a small town rumours fly fast and one does not have to even be a consumer to get a Mental Health jacket. It is hard enough for anyone to have to leave all of their supports to start a new life in a strange city. My heart goes out to those that are tormented by family members revealing personal information about them.

 

Chuck_Hughes  

Advocates in Action

California

 

 

Pat L: In fact, there really is no Con-fidentiality. It is just another one of the illusions promoted by the system and it is not at all hard to understand that. We all see it around us every day.

I have been discussed almost non stop locally by those supposedly keeping all my 'confidences' for me, including several family members engaged once again in the 'covert' ops, misdirection and disinformation. I must not of course, SAY this right out loud, as it will be defined once again as my perception problem, or reaction problem for which I may get more 'treatment' once defined as a little “something to reduce your awareness for you.” This, in fact, is exactly what is wanted.

My perception of them is indeed their problem. My awareness of the behaviour of others who can never be blamed for anything has to be 'reduced,' preferably, I think, to the level of near brain dead zombie if possible, since my awareness must be made to be 'less than' the awareness of those who would 'save' me from my odd and surprising perception of them and of the reality which exists all around us. We must all pretend we cannot see or hear it, no matter how obvious it gets and how hard it is to ignore, if we wish to be embraced and welcomed by a definition of social normality that the majority have declared to be 'healthy.'
 
< Older Entry Newer Entry >
 
Post a Comment  |  Register For Email Updates

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape
• Mel O'Dea, Psychiatric Survivour, Ireland
To save any of these files on your computer, right-click and choose "Save target as" from the menu that pops up

THE  CHURCH  OF

SCHIZOPHRENIA

ORGANIZATION  GUIDE

INTRODUCTION

When  people  go to a church and start talking in tongues, they don't have any idea what they are saying and neither does anyone else.  However, such behavior and other bizarre acts as talking to and seeing Angels that no one else can see or hear is both acceptable and desirable within a religious setting.

Should someone have similar experiences outside of a religious setting, however, they could easily be called schizophrenic and locked away indefinitely.

The key difference is in the write up or the nomenclature used to describe the experience.  While humans have had access to alternative states of consciousness for countless thousands of years, it is only in relatively recent times that scientists have sought to limit the ability of humans to experience other states of awareness by specifying what they feel is normal and what is not and by setting up an enforcement system backed by the force of law to hunt down people whose state of consciousness they disagree with and lock them away.

Click Title for more...



Although some of the CCHR/Scientology videos against psychiatry and its practices ring true in parts, I think this organization has some problems of its own so I present the opposing viewpoint here as well. 

Refund and Reparation


Lecture: Handling Psychotics
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
00013020
 

A Little Help from Our David Suzuki

                                                                                   Enter here
 
 
 
© 2012 CounterPsych Log In