Mental Health Reform - Call For Action - Part 2

[Willy]

....Continued from Part 1

The Underlying Problem - Ignorance and False Beliefs about Mental Health

I believe that the underlying problem with our mental health services is ignorance, which in turn is based on fear. I suggest that this ignorance has evolved in part because of the deliberate cultivation of false beliefs by vested interest groups over at least the last 70 years. This ignorance does not just apply to the general public. I believe it is deeply seated within the mental health community throughout the world. I further contend that any attempt at reform without first dealing with this issue is akin to moving the deck chairs around on the Titanic

Chibam mentions the gap between the textbook version of psychosis and what the average man in the street sees as psychotic behaviour. I would consider this to be an understatement.

The way that the biomedical model of mental health and specifically the current view of psychosis has evolved since the discovery of a commonly known, now generic drug, that I am not allowed to mention on this forum,  in the 1950’s. This is an intriguing study of the way in which vested interests can push their agenda’s and influence the world with little or no evidence to support their claims. This drug was first viewed as a tranquilliser and a medical or pharmaceutical solution to many if not all mental health problems. As time went on this drug and its derivatives magically acquired “amazing” new powers which had more to do with creative marketing than any science, undoubtedly helped by billions of dollars spent by the drug companies on advertising and infomercials targeting medical and psychiatric practitioners and consumers wherever it was legal to do so.

Little by little these drugs morphed into the disease-specific drugs that are claimed to work by “balancing the chemicals found naturally in the brain” (Eli Lilly, 2011). This has led to the idea that mental illness is a number of discreet and specific brain diseases all caused by chemical imbalances which can be cured or at least managed by the appropriate medical treatment. When looked at critically, this view is such a joke that it is seems unbelievable that people ever accepted it as “true” but that is exactly what has happened. (Ref 5)

During the last couple of decades there has been a lot of significant new insights into mental health based on evidence from extensive research. Most textbooks however remain outdated with information that today is considered incorrect by the vast majority of researchers. This is due to the promotion of and prevalent belief that the biomedical model of mental health is the correct and valid one. Unless something happens to change these deep seated beliefs (and the text books) , they will have significant impact on training, treatment and mental health services well into the future. (Ref 6 ,7)

The other textbooks that have come under critical review are the manuals used to diagnose mental illness. The two main ones are the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD). DSM5-TR is the current and probably the most frequently quoted manual. It has come under intense criticism.

A comprehensive study, by researchers from the University of Liverpool in the UK , involved a detailed analysis of five key chapters of DSM, on ‘schizophrenia’, ‘bipolar disorder’, ‘depressive disorders’, ‘anxiety disorders’ and ‘trauma-related disorders (Ref 😎 .

Lead researcher Dr Kate Allsopp, University of Liverpool, said: “Although diagnostic labels create the illusion of an explanation they are scientifically meaningless and can create stigma and prejudice. I hope these findings will encourage mental health professionals to think beyond diagnoses and consider other explanations of mental distress, such as trauma and other adverse life experiences.”

Professor Peter Kinderman, University of Liverpool, said: “This study provides yet more evidence that the biomedical diagnostic approach in psychiatry is not fit for purpose. Diagnoses frequently and uncritically reported as ‘real illnesses’ are in fact made on the basis of internally inconsistent, confused and contradictory patterns of largely arbitrary criteria. The diagnostic system wrongly assumes that all distress results from disorder, and relies heavily on subjective judgements about what is normal.”

Professor John Read, University of East London, said: “Perhaps it is time we stopped pretending that medical-sounding labels contribute anything to our understanding of the complex causes of human distress or of what kind of help we need when distressed.”

Allen Frances, MD was the chairman of the group that created the DSM-4 manual. If anyone could be expected to understand the problems and limitations of the DSM approach, you would expect it to be him. Writing in the Annals of Internal Medicine journal he had, among other criticisms. this to say. (Ref 9)

"Drug companies take marketing advantage of the loose DSM definitions by promoting the misleading idea that everyday life problems are actually un-diagnosed psychiatric illness caused by a chemical imbalance and requiring a solution in pill form."

Despite widespread criticism and evidence against its use, the mental health diagnostic system and manuals continue to be used world wide. They form the predominant basis for understanding and treating mental health by both medical practitioners and government services. This approach is commonly referred to as the Biomedical model.

The drug companies and psychiatric fraternity did not take the criticism of their precious and lucrative system kindly. Here is just one example of how they attempted to counter it.

Around 2006, concerns started being raised about neuroleptics, otherwise known as anti psychotics, having a negative impact on the life expectancy of users . Shortly after, Finnish investigators concluded that neuroleptics actually increased the life expectancy of people diagnosed with schizophrenia. These investigators led by Jari Tiihonen have published a number of studies with claims to that effect. Tiihonen has admitted that he has ties with numerous pharmaceutical companies and manufacturers of anti-psychotics as a consultant.

These Finnish research efforts soon led to headlines like the following appearing in pop science publications.

“Use of Antipsychotic Drugs Improves Life Expectancy for Individuals with Schizophrenia”

 Evidence from multiple sources indicates the opposite to be true and there is substantial evidence that the research process was seriously flawed.  (Ref 10)

Today the “official” view about the affect of anti-psychotics on mortality is that it is a “controversial” subject. This view is not based on research but on which side has the most money and influence to generate media headlines. It is often possible to draw invalid headline conclusions from obscure academic reports. (Ref 11 a typical example). Most people read headlines, not research reports.

It is no secret that since the introduction of The Unmentionable Drug in the 1950’s, pharmaceutical companies have spent billions of dollars “educating” both consumers and mental health professionals.

By contrast all new genuine mental health research is published almost exclusively in academic journals which are difficult to read and often difficult to even get hold of if you don't have academic connections to a university. It is also interesting that a lot of the research seems to have come out of the UK where the drug companies probably have less financial and political leverage over the universities than they do elsewhere such as in the US. There has also been some credible mental health research from some Australian universities.

For the last few months I have been talking to people online around the world with mental health issues ranging from trivial to very serious.

The majority appear to believe that mental illness is a brain disease that needs to be diagnosed and treated with drugs. The discussions on the online forums that I visit is inevitably about medication diagnosis and symptoms together with a fair bit of venting and frustration. Even those who have had experience with psychological therapies and claim that it has helped them still seem to be firmly attached to these beliefs. I have found very little interest from most people in even talking about alternative views of mental health. Most seem unable to conceive of any other explanation or approach.

Most of these people that I have been talking to are quite young. They are typically under 30 and have grown up with the biomedical model. Many, but not all of them are Americans where consumer advertising of psychiatric medication is legal and inevitably supports this view. My experience of talking to older Australians with a significant amount of lived experience has been somewhat more positive in recognising the limitations and problems of this current approach. (Ref 12)

A Proposed Solution

Tackling deep seated beliefs like those just mentioned is not a trivial job. People tend to hold on tenaciously to their beliefs.

At the moment people are running around talking about new legislation and spending public money on more or new facilities. While better facilities and resources would undoubtedly be worthwhile and welcome they cost money and are subject to budget constraints. Given the economic state of Australia and the world at the moment it is difficult to see a lot happening in the near future.

My more immediate concern is the new legislation proposals. From what I have seen so far, these efforts appear to mostly be going around in circles. I would suggest that one of the main reasons for this is that a lot of the thinking seems to be based on the flawed foundation of the Biomedical model of mental health. As far as I can see, all this will produce is an even bigger mess than the one we currently have.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) support the BioPsychoSocial model of mental health which is substantially more accommodating of the reforms that I believe many of us are looking for. (Ref 13,14)

Unfortunately these reforms seem likely to be aggressively opposed by vested interests including some influential individuals within government mental health authorities. (Ref 15,16)

As chibam suggested, we need a group of people with lived experience who are willing to stand up and be counted. What I am envisaging at the moment is a lean and keen group who can easily communicate with each other, probably through social media, and judiciously make use of media, legal and political means to try and achieve the reforms that we all seem to want.

There is a lot more that can and needs to be said about all this but I think this is enough for the time being.

Perhaps a “show of hands” from interested parties would be a good next step.

Regards

Willy

References

1. Royal Commission into Victoria’s Mental Health system. Final Report. Summary and recommendations. ISBN 978-1-925789-63-8 (Print) Published February 2021

2. Daya I, Hamilton B, Roper C. Authentic Engagement :A conceptual model for welcoming diverse and challenging consumer and survivor views in mental health research policy and practice. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing 29, 299–311 2020.

3. Coid J, Ullrich S, Kallis C, Keers R, Barker D, Cowden F, Stamps R. The Relationship Between Delusions and Violence. JAMA Psychiatry. 2013;70(5):465-471.

4. Fazel S, Gulati G, Linsell L, Geddes JR, Grann M. Schizophrenia and Violence: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. McGrath J, ed. PLoS Medicine. Volume 6(8) 2009.

5. Moncreif J. Magic Bullets for Mental Disorders: The Emergence of the Concept of an “Antipsychotic” Drug - - Journal of the History of the Neurosciences, 22:30–46, 2013

6. Johannessen 0, Joa I. Modern understanding of psychosis: from brain disease to stress disorder. And some other important aspects of psychosis. Psychosis, 13:4, 289-301, DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2021.1985162

7. McGrath J etc ; Psychotic Experiences in the General Population. A Cross-National Analysis Based on 31 261 Respondents From 18 Countries Queensland Brain Institute University Of Queensland May 2015

8. Alsopp K, Read J, Corcoran R, Kinderman P. Heterogeneity in psychiatric diagnostic classification. Psychiatry Research 279 (2019) 15–22

9. Frances A. The new crisis of confidence in psychiatric diagnosis. Annual Internal Medicine 2013:720.

10.Whitaker R. Viewpoint: do antipsychotics protect against early death? A critical view. Psychological Medicine , Volume 50 , Issue 16 , December 2020 , pp. 2643 - 2652

11. Chen Y etc, Antipsychotics and risk of natural death in patients with schizophrenia: Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment. Sichuan University, Chengdu, People’s

Republic of China (2019)

12. Deacon, B. The biomedical model of mental disorder: A critical analysis of its

validity, utility, and effects on psychotherapy research. Clinical Psychology Review 33 (2013)

13. Carey T , Mansell W, Tai S. A biopsychosocial model based on negative feedback and control. Frontiers in Human Neurosciemce, 28 February 2014. Sec. Cognitive Neuroscience.

14. By Lila P. Vrklevski, Kathy Eljiz, and David Greenfield : The Evolution and Devolution of Mental Health Services in Australia. University Of Tasmania Inquiries Journal, 2017, VOL. 9

15. Beder S, Gosdon R. Pig Pharma:Psychiatric Agenda Setting by Drug Companies. Universality Of Woolongong 2003.

16. Palmer M, Ross D. Tracing the maddening effects of abuses of authority: Rationalities gone violent in mental health services and universities; Edith Cowan University Western Australia 2014

[Former-Member]

Well what are you asking for @Willy ?

jump on social media and start talking about why mental health should be discussed more?

I’ve been experiencing bullying from the general public as I appear somewhat odd to them for the past year.

I want to be more open about my mental health and have started taking steps at work to curb this. But don’t know how well that will go… 

I know you worked till your late 50s and I want to do the same, but I can’t just jump on social media cause it will come up at work, just saying.

I from lived experience know mental health is nothing to be feared, unless the individual is not stable and off meds or something.

it’s great you put some references together and cited some articles you found. That could mean your on to something…

but as far as I can see the minority can’t really make a big difference in how the majority see life. If you know a way I’m happy to support you but it’s really difficult to see from the others point of view when I got issues going on myself.

I found this really well put together and informative from your point of view and surprised that many people haven’t supported this… don’t know what else to add but hope to see you around 

[chibam]

A lot to process there, @Willy , and too much to adequately comment on the individual points.

I can only say that I agree with the vast majority of your points there.

The part about how "everyday life problems" have widely become misconstrued as "mental illness" cut especially deep for me. This is where, I believe, our society is riddled with its greatest misconceptions.

Once upon a time, people with an "everyday life problem" used to be able to count on family, friends & acquaintances to sort that out for them. But we seem to have lost that culture. So now, all that's left for people with an everybody life problem is to turn to a therapist; except therapists refuse to actually help with said problems, instead seeking to mutilate the sufferer's brain to "cope" with said problem better!

So we really need a new class of therapist that specifically and explicitly focusses solely upon fixing "everyday life problems." (And yes, I do know I sound like a broken record repeating that over and over again on these forums! 😉)

There's all this ambiguous talk about "person-focussed" therapists, "psychosocial support" therapists, and "missing middle" therapists. I'm getting sick of it. I spend a considderable portion of my time wading through these discussions, and even *I* have only the loosest grasp of what some of these terms mean. How the hell is the average suffering person supposed to know how to navigate this rubbish when they've only just begun to admit that they need help with their life's woes?

We just need a flat-out, plain-english "problem solver" therapist industry, to set up shop in every town and suburb big enough to warrant the existance of a traditional "mental health" therapist. Because you can bet your life that in every town that big, you will find scores of people with real-life problems they need solved. And yes, to be clear, I am saying that we need to insure their job title is something that simple and straightforward, that any given layperson will be able to immediately understand clearly. I'm sick to death of trying to figure out what the hell "psychosocial" - let alone "biopsychosocial" - means.😡

[Patchworks]

I don't want to come across the wrong way and I think a healthy discussion is a good thing.  I so wish I could believe in what you are saying but when I'm in a psychotic episode immersed in delusions backed up by hallucinations it's really scary. I have tried life without antipsychotic meds and inevitably I end up in hospital or unwell at home. I know my life expectancy is about 20yrs less, I know my brain matter is shrinking but anything to avoid another episode please medicate me. I never want to go through that ever again,  horrifying experience. 

I agree some people are medicated when they shouldn't and many others are over-medicated but I see a place for medication in psychiatry.

I wish you well on your path

[Willy]

@chibam, @Zoe, @Appleblossom, @wellwellwellnez, @FloatingFeather,

@hanami, @moxi, @tyme, @Jynx, @Gwynn, @Shaz, @Former-Member, @Patchworks   

What the hell does "psychosocial" - let alone ""biopsychosocial"  mean?
I didn't invent these terms. I just try to use the same jargon that all the pro's use so that I am not quite so easily labelled as a deluded idiot which has been something of a problem throughout my life.

Breaking down into laymen's terms bio-psycho-social basically means

1. Bio - biomedical. This is the system we have now based on formal diagnosis and medication which I have already spoken about at length. It apparently works quite well for about 20% of people so if people are happy with their diagnosis and their meds, they are welcome to them. The biopsychosocial is not about taking things away from people but giving those who need it a much wider range of choices.

2. Psycho - psychology in all its forms. This whole "industry" however needs a big shake up and as you pointed out in a previous post, there are many industry advocates, who are  essentially unions, running around trying to figure out how to screw more money out of the government for their members rather than effectively trying to work out better ways to help people. I have come across small pockets of much more cost effective and better solutions than the traditional and expensive one hour consultation with a "qualified" psychologist approach. There has been some small federal government moves in this direction but they appear to be discouraged or at least not supported at state level, at least in Victoria where I live but probably in other states also. Interestingly, some but not all psychologist are dropping the diagnosis stuff so I guess we could finish up with diagnosing and non diagnosing psychologists because some people absolutely love and want their diagnoses.
3. Social. As you say, many of life's difficulties that used to be managed with the help of family and friends are now regarded as "mental illness" and according to the current system usually require a diagnosis and medication or maybe in a minority of cases, some "psychology". If you contact your general medical practitioner and they are not all for medication which in my experience at least a few of them aren't they may help you  skirt around the state government system and get set up with a qualified psychologist subsidised by medicare.  When a person loses their job, can't pay the bills, experiences the death or serious illness of a loved one etc etc they are not "mentally ill". They are distressed, sometimes horribly so. The reality is that normal life can be very difficult at times for many people. Facilities like the SANE forum try to act as a substitute or perhaps supplement for family and friends but imo, it is done in an incompetent, cumbersome and often arrogant way that often severely limits its usefulness. Again I have seen and even participated in much better community based approaches. Do the words "A caring and sharing community" mean anything to you?

How the hell is the average suffering person supposed to know how to navigate this rubbish when they've only just begun to admit that they need help with their life's woes?
In my experience with extreme difficulty. Trying to navigate the existing system has for me, on many occasions, substantially added to the underlying distress and trauma.

As you can see there are a lot of changes needed at a very fundamental cultural level. This is the story that I believe has to be put out there loudly enough for people to start hearing it and thinking about it. As I said previously there will be fierce opposition to this story from vested interests in both the private and public areas. What is taking place at the moment which is being labelled as mental health reform is in my opinion mostly BS. 

Regards

Willy

[Former-Member]

This open discussion is so important to have, especially on the services that are needed to meet the hugely different needs of everyone. Thank you for starting it!

I think in big discussions like this, it’s important to remember that a massive part of peer work is learning about and being open to the different experiences and world-views of others. This also means not discouraging other people from their own journey and treatment.

Like any system, there is a whole heap of power in the MH system which means it has failed a lot of people, but there are also a number of people who the system has helped and supported. Thank you for sharing part of your story Patchworks, it’s nice to see you!

Also tagging our CGs because this is a super important convo ❤️ @Anastasia  @AussieRecharger  @BPDSurvivor  @Faith-and-Hope  @HenryX  @jem80  @Judi9877  @NatureLover  @outlander  @Shaz51  @ShiningStar  @Snowie  @Hams  @wellwellwellnez  @Zoe7  @Aniela  @Boo13  @maddison  @pinklollipop15  @Eve7 

PS. I just wanted to send a link to the Respect guideline for a refresher because I know this topic is BIG and will hit close to home for a lot of us https://saneforums.org/t5/help/faqpage/title/respect

[Willy]

@chibam, @Zoe, @Appleblossom, @wellwellwellnez, @FloatingFeather,

@hanami, @moxi, @tyme, @Jynx, @Gwynn, @Shaz, @Itsjustme1, @Patchworks

Well what are you asking for @Willy ?

Step 1. A "show of hands" from people who are interested in trying to do something to improve our mental health system

Step 2. Organise some sort of online space where we can communicate confidentially with each other.

Step 3. Discuss and plan a campaign.

I want to be more open about my mental health and have started taking steps at work to curb this. But don’t know how well that will go?

Based on my own experiences and discussions with others on this and other forums, probably not well. Things are slowly improving in this regard but there is still a huge amount of stigma around mental health, particularly for the so called "serious" psychotic illnesses.

As far as I can see the minority can’t really make a big difference in how the majority see life.

Some people seem to have a different point of view about this

• "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has" - Margaret Mead
• "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" - Mahatma Gandhi
• "Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future" - John F. Kennedy
• "Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time" - Barack Obama
• "To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often" - Winston Churchill
• "Some people don't like change, but you need to embrace change if the alternative is disaster." - Elon Musk

I know you worked till your late 50s and I want to do the same, but I can’t just jump on social media cause it will come up at work, just saying.

Confidentiality is still important to me to. I also feel very uncomfortable with "going public". This is something we will need to talk about. Also, I don't have much experience with social media. Maybe someone will turn up who knows more about it than me. Otherwise we muddle through.

If you know a way I’m happy to support you but it’s really difficult to see from the others point of view when I got issues going on myself.

I agree it is difficult when you are trying to deal with your own issues but there is strength in numbers and you don't necessarily need large numbers of people to achieve worthwhile things. I have a few ideas that I think are worth discussing but I certainly don't have all the answers at this stage. That is why I am suggesting a group of people with genuine lived experience.

Regards

Willy

[Willy]

@chibam, @Zoe7, @Appleblossom, @wellwellwellnez, @FloatingFeather,@hanami, @moxi, @tyme, @Jynx, @Gwynn, @Shaz, @Itsjustme1, @Patchworks @Former-Member@Anastasia @AussieRecharger @BPDSurvivor @Faith-and-Hope @HenryX @jem80 @Judi9877 @NatureLover @outlander @Shaz51 @ShiningStar @Snowie @Hams, @Aniela, @Boo13, @maddison, @pinklollipop15,@Eve7

I think in big discussions like this, it’s important to remember that a massive part of peer work is learning about and being open to the different experiences and world-views of others. This also means not discouraging other people from their own journey and treatment.

Like any system, there is a whole heap of power in the MH system which means it has failed a lot of people, but there are also a number of people who the system has helped and supported.

I agree completely with this view. I have never seen the need for or supported reform ideas that take things away from people. For me it is all about providing additional options and choices, particularly for the many of us for whom the MH system has failed and continues to fail, to this day.

The tricky part is where different belief systems have evolved and the enforcement of those belief systems by some imposes considerable misery, suffering and trauma on others.

I think the appropriate approach is acceptance and tolerance of conflicting views which is not always easy for some people to do, particularly for those who have a strong vested interest or involvement in those beliefs.

I pointed out in an earlier post that the CEO of the Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council (VMIAC) saw conflicting views as stifling the current attempts at MH reform.

Regards

Willy

[Willy]

@chibam, @Zoe7, @Appleblossom, @wellwellwellnez, @FloatingFeather,@hanami, @moxi, @tyme, @Jynx, @Gwynn, @Shaz, @Itsjustme1, @Patchworks, @Former-Member@Anastasia @AussieRecharger @BPDSurvivor @Faith-and-Hope @HenryX @jem80 @Judi9877 @NatureLover @outlander @Shaz51 @ShiningStar @Snowie @MDT@Aneila, @Boo13, @maddison, @pinklollipop15,@Eve7

I wish I could believe in what you are saying but when I'm in a psychotic episode immersed in delusions backed up by hallucinations it's really scary. I have tried life with[out] antipsychotic meds and inevitably I end up in hospital or unwell at home. I know my life expectancy is about 20yrs less, I know my brain matter is shrinking but anything to avoid another episode please. I never want to go through that ever again, horrifying experience.

Hi Patchworks
Yes psychosis certainly can be a horrific experience. Having suffered from it for most of my adult life and been hospitalised many times as a consequence it is not an experience I would wish on anyone. There is also all the social consequences such as being beaten to near unconsciousness by police not to mention the embarrassment and vilification by people who happen to witness you in that state.

You say you have found something that works for you. You have looked at it and excepted the trades offs for your chosen treatment. To my mind that is good. I fully understand and support your choice and agree that there is a very definite place for medication in mental health treatment. My understanding is that antipsychotic medication unfortunately only works well for about 20% of people. The figures vary a bit but seem to suggest that it doesn't work at all for about 30% of people and doesn't work so well, to varying degrees for the remaining 50% of people. Unfortunately I am one of those people on the extreme of antipsychotic medication not working.

I won't go into all the trials and tribulations of my experiences with medication other than to say that despite the horrific side effects, I still use antipsychotics, but only take them when necessary using a complex self monitoring technique that a senior consultant psychiatrist at a major Melbourne hospital worked out for me more than twenty years ago. This sort of self management is not easy to do but it has kept me out of hospital for more than twenty years except for one stuff up about 3 years ago when I voluntarily admitted myself to hospital for one night. Unfortunately this triggered an alert with the state mental health authorities who ever since have insisted that my use of antipsychotics is "inappropriate" . They claim that because I don't agree with and comply with their advice I am a danger to myself and the public. This of course is utter BS. They have tried on multiple occasions to coerce me into agreeing to Long Term Injections of antipsychotics (LTI's) which given my current age and health are strongly contra-indicated. I have also been threatened with Involuntary Treatment Orders (ITO's) and an Involuntary Confinement Order (ICO) for not agreeing and complying with their demands. A recent complaint to the Victorian Mental Health Complaints Commission (MHCC) about all this was just fobbed off after months of being given the run around.

In order to try and help myself I have done a lot of reading and research on mental health methods and practices. A few years back I became aware of evolving psychological techniques for psychosis that were claimed to be "at least as good as medication". I was keen to at least give it a try but when I started making enquiries I was just given the run around. It took me more than three years to find someone. That person incidentally is employed in the state mental health system but takes on the occasional private client. She has also been a useful source of information about some of the malpractices that take place within the system.

Has the psychological treatment completely cured me? Unfortunately not but at this stage it appears to have helped considerably. I am well aware that many people are not interested in a psychological approach to dealing with psychosis as it can be very emotionally challenging but I can see no reason why this sort of treatment should not be available to anyone who wants to try it or why honest and accurate information about it shouldn't be readily available from the public mental health system.

There is an organisation known as the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) who are connected with the Church of Scientology. They appear to have an agenda to have psychiatry and psychiatric medication abolished. I have nothing to do with either of these organisations and never have. Nor do I in any way support their agenda.

The things that have happened to me are also happening to many others apparently on quite a significant scale. People have written about their experiences of these sorts of abuses on this forum but some people are too scared to even talk about them out of fear of what the mental health authorities may do to them. In the world of hospital psych wards one quickly learns that in order to survive you have to comply with authority.

These are the sorts of issues that I believe need to be reformed.

Regards

Willy

[Patchworks]

Hi @Willy 

Thank you for explaining what you believe and the context from which it comes. I'm deeply sorry to read of your abuse under the MH system which included the police. I'm also thankful of your support for people's differences in how we navigate life as a mentally ill person, such as me.

I've done a good deal of research on the treatment of mental illness and read several books by MH professionals and I too have learned how people can recover from psychosis with talking, psychological support. What it sounds like is necessary,  however, is intensive and regular sessions with the treating practitioner and the cost of that makes it out of reach for most of us. That saddens me and the abuse of the human rights of people with mental illness saddens me more

But mostly I am angry about it. So I agree the way the MH system is structured and legislated takes away our rights at the first hurdle and on top of that you have the long entrenched stigma leading to discrimination against us, including by the MH profession. I feel the power imbalance between me and my treatment team and I tread very carefully to avoid the nasty actions they can take to remove my right to choose and control of my life and how I lead it. I'm talking here about the involuntary aspects of the system and treatment approaches. 

I also agree that peer-to-peer support is one solution as the power imbalance is gone, or lessened and importantly these peer workers get it and they get the system. I am an educated person who has worked in the social services sector and I still struggle to get the support I need sometimes. 

The short reply to you after all this is that I'm on board with what you want to do. Count me in although I am interested in the implications for being involved. I work and tend to keep my mental illness hidden from everyone except close family and friends. Is there a way we can communicate privately as a group? I'm not sure about disclosing my illness even though I would really like to share my story to help others, I'm ever conscious of the massive stigma.  Not to mention discrimination by individuals, and industries eg insurance- that's another topic for another day that really annoys me

Thanks for raising this. We need a royal commission or inquiry into this really. What outcomes do you want to achieve?