The FDA is currently weighing
whether to ban “electrical
stimulation devices” used by mental health professionals to modify
aggressive or self-injurious behavior in patients suffering from severe
emotional problems or developmental disorders such as autism. Critics of these
devices have compared them with shock collars used on dogs. The devices are
applied to the arms or legs and deliver a two-second shock that has been
compared to a “hard pinch.” These devices are rarely used, but they have been
widely employed at the Judge Rotenberg
Educational Center
in Canton, Massachusetts—a
residential facility which treats children and adults with severe developmental
disabilities. Former Rotenberg students have likened
this “aversion therapy” to “torture, in the plainest sense of the word.” One
former student said
it feels “like a thousand bees stinging you in the same place for a few
seconds.” Rotenberg students have claimed that these devices have burned them
and caused them to feel anxiety, fear, and depression and that the devices were
employed
to give shocks “for things like noncompliance with staff direction, talking too
much and being disruptive in class.”
The most troubling thing here is
the very idea that punishment someone constitutes therapeutic treatment.
Punishment is meant to do harm, so how can such practitioners honor the Hippocratic Oath?
Forms of aversion therapy have been employed in the past in the dubious effort
to treat
homosexuals. Such treatment will forever be associated with the Kubrick
film A Clockwork Orange based upon
the Anthony Burgess novel. The iconic image of Malcolm McDowell’s Alex being
forced to look at violent images while being sickened by drugs and forced to
listen to his beloved Beethoven will forever be burned into the public
consciousness.
Psychiatry seems to be alarmingly
becoming more a tool of social control than a therapeutic discipline. Psychiatry
was widely
abused in the Soviet Union and used as a means of
stifling dissent. Political dissent was defined arbitrarily as a form of mental
illness and treated as such. As the United
States becomes increasingly authoritarian,
it is alarming to see how the psychiatric profession is becoming more like that
of Soviet psychiatry.
An astounding 19% of American
boys between the ages of 14–17 have been diagnosed
with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and about 10% are taking
medications such as Ritalin for it. Ten percent of high school girls have been
likewise diagnosed. Between 2007–2012 sales of stimulants such as Ritalin to
treat ADHD have more than doubled from $4 billion to $9 billion. At some point,
the public education system transformed overly energetic and fidgety students
into mentally ill patients. If students are not “normal”—e.g. they will not sit
quietly and do exactly as they are told—then they are sick and need to be
medicated. There is no telling what effect generations of Ritalin zombies will
have as they enter adulthood in greater numbers. Judging by the increasingly poor
academic performance of American public school students, this treatment of
ADHD as if it is an epidemic has not been particularly helpful.
A symbol of American psychiatry’s
move away from medicine and toward political control can be seen in the
disorder Oppositional
Defiant Disorder (ODD). ODD is a personality disorder defined by a
persistent and disruptive pattern of negativity,
hostility, disobedience, and hostility by children toward adult authority
figures. What is even more troubling is that there is some movement within the
psychiatric establishment to characterize ODD as an adult
affliction as well as a childhood personality disorder. If Adult ODD
manages to gain acceptance as a legitimate disorder, it will only be a matter
of time before it is used in Soviet-fashion to label dissidents, protesters,
and government critics as mentally ill. One wonders what forms of psychiatric
medications or “aversion therapy” might be used upon such individuals.
The Department of Homeland
Security seems intent on categorizing difficult school students not just as
mentally ill, but as terrorists. On April
15, 2014, Lisa
O. Monaco, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and
Counterterrorism, delivered a speech entitled “Countering Violent Extremism and
the Power of Community” at the Harvard Kennedy School Forum. Ms. Monaco
spoke of American youth as if they were a gang of ticking time bombs or Al
Qaeda sleeper agents. She claimed that 80% of cases involving “homegrown
violent extremists” involved “warning signs” that had been observed by members
of the community. These “warning signs” were allegedly subtle:
What kinds of
behaviors are we talking about? For the most part, they’re not related directly
to plotting attacks. They’re more subtle. For instance, parents might see
sudden personality changes in their children at home—becoming confrontational.
Religious leaders might notice unexpected clashes over ideological differences.
Teachers might hear a student expressing an interest in traveling to a conflict
zone overseas. Or friends might notice a new interest in watching or sharing
violent material.
Despite the best unconstitutional
efforts of the NSA, FBI, and CIA:
The government is
rarely in a position to observe these early signals, so we need to do more to
help communities understand the warning signs, and then work together to
intervene before an incident can occur, while always respecting our core
commitment to protecting privacy and civil liberties. During the past several
years, that’s what we’ve attempted to do.
So, the government not only may
wishes to declare difficult adolescents mentally ill, but now it wishes to
suggest that moody teens may be future bin Ladens.
Ultimately, the more Americans
that the federal government can stigmatize as being “mentally ill,” the more
Americans whose rights it can take away. The government will attempt to violate
rights such as the Second Amendment right to bear arms from such individuals.
It will not be a shock if one day the growing numbers of American students
diagnosed with ADHD will be placed on lists which prohibits them from legally
owning firearms. When any part of the medical profession is coming so
perilously close to becoming a cadre of social engineers instead of a community
of healers, it is time for conscientious practitioners to champion reforms to
get the field back on track. Such reform in the psychiatric profession is long
overdue.
No comments:
Post a Comment