Opinions on Psychiatry?

[L951788]

I think it is gaslighting and only used as a compliance mechanism. It is also used as an arm of the state similar to the criminal justice system. There is no scan. No diagnostics. No imaging. No science. Any psychiatrist touting any of that is lying. All any of them are are a revolving wheel of medication.

The side effects and dependence are not worth it in any regard.

My mom made me psychiatry's bitch. It ruined my life.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

Yes, most therapists must receive post-graduate education and certification. The education they receive is functionally like that of a priest; e.g. they are taught to view things through a very particular scope - whereas the priest is taught the lens of their particular religion, the therapist-to-be is taught the lens of contemporary psychology and its endless pathologies. Therapy in-and-of itself, is like a confessional in a church, the therapist is the priest and the patient the confessor. The patient confesses their worries and problems much like a would-be blasphemer would confess their "sins".

The sad thing is, "just put your head in the sand" is probably a pretty common response to the OPs concerns not only at mental health resources across the world, but from peers and colleagues; the patient lives in a world where being open about such things in the dehumanized, hyperindividualized public sphere typically only invites scrutiny and further alienation (likely from individuals who are just as alienated and scared as them), which increases their reliance on the therapist as much as it increases their sense of cognitive dissonance, as though they are caught between two realities in a depersonalized limbo. Of course, there's only the one reality as far as we know, but to this patient their inner world has become an enigma and its workings thoroughly mystified by an industry that portends one must go through many years of schooling and certification before they can make sense of the human mind; which is as absurd and circular claim to make as "God works in mysterious ways." - as if that explains why your toaster catching on fire this morning and the delay that caused made you miss your train commute derailing, killing everyone on board. Likewise, it is just as circular to tell someone they have a disease called "depression", which can only be treated by "trained professionals" - trained, of course, in "psychology", an invention of the human mind as much as the phrase "mental illness" with all it's implicit meanings. But the backbone of the entire practice is to be a truthclaim, much like any religion - they suppose "mental illness" to be as sacrosanct as religions hold their Gods; that is, as self-evident and infallible as a physicist would consider thermodynamics.

Perhaps it would be too radical to admit "depression" is an entirely normal reaction to a world in which one exists as a dehumanized, chronically hollowed-out wage slave whose life has been reduced to a series of empty, mindless labor and emptier consumption rituals, comforted only by addictive drugs pushed on them at every turn, and vacuous social ties of similarly hollowed out wageslaves who only know how to monologue and compete; who breathes, eats and shits microplastic, pollution and pesticides, and can't remember the last time they felt somebody actually cared if they lived or died. It'd be far too radical to admit we're living through the slow-motion collapse of the living super organism we call 'civilization' and every case of "depression" is like one little support column showing signs of giving out under the weight of a monstrosity that has become too bloated and labyrinthine for its own good. Then we'd be engaging in reality, giving the "illness" the scope it deserves, and psychology cares not for this.

The reality is, contemporary psychology functions much like a religion or a cult does, in that what one receives from it depends very much on what one puts into it - the power wielded by such organizations are directly correlate to belief of their followers. This is the power of placebo, confirmation bias, and magical thinking. If one considers their reaction to, say, climate change to be "abnormal", they merely have to walk into a therapist's office and their belief will be confirmed - their conscious experience will become a list of "symptoms" of "illness", for which they'll receive "medication". The words, the labels, the pills, they're all momentarily comforting, but none actually deal with the original problem any more than popping an Aspirin cures a raging influenza infection. That's because the entire "mental health industry" is palliative at best - worse yet, it serves at the behest of the state, which benefits massively from an industry that teaches individuals to view their life's problems through a scope that is not only decidedly apolitical but atomized as well.

Take an issue like climate change and this scope fails almost entirely - its sufficiently large-scale enough that the therapist's individualizing lens has no real answer to it. One who is trained in end-of-life therapy may have some more substantial answers that verge into decidedly philosophical territory, but most "by the book" therapists will preach willful ignorance; their role is not to create independent-thinking individuals, community leaders, politically-minded citizens or would-be revolutionaries, because they don't operate in this paradigm; an office vending machine is more communalistic than a therapist's office could ever claim to be. No, their role is to keep people complicit and complacent in the consume/work false dichotomy lifestyle for they are part of the very same paradigm, this being their work as much as preaching is a priests'. The "mental health" industry is obliged to meet the absurdity of the world it exists in and profits off of, and so existential terror becomes "eco-anxiety", another cutesy label which can be "treated" with the right combination of benzodiazepines and willful ignorance, just as a village witch doctor may have once treated "spiritual possession" with a concoction of ayahuasca and a ceremony. Now this ceremony only takes 45 minutes and $200 a week and a monthly trip to the pharmacy. Who ever said capitalism wasn't efficient?! -Suicidal stranger from the internet

Psychiatry has little credibility towards finding genuine solutions and even less credibility when it comes to morality.

Will the therapist (despite the fact that not even a single provider in my area has a slide scale pay program for extremely low income people like me and even a coworker i know who got hurt on the job is still financially broken by medical bills even with health insurance which did not pay enough) ignore the inability of a person to afford their expensive service?

Will the therapist change the economy to stop poverty wages/unaffordable housing/unsustainably high rent/boring miserable shit jobs/unsustainably long work hours/work and school stress/political and economic and social issues that divide people and cause constant conflict and isolation and loneliness?/etc

Why recommend a therapist or try to fix people if after therapy people will just be thrown back into the same situation that destroys them again?

A therapist may be helpful for people who literally just want/need to talk about feelings, but it does nothing for people whose lives are being destroyed by situational stressors and a variety of political/economic issues that neither the therapist or the person can control. -Suicidal stranger from the internet

What, then, are psychotherapists and what do they sell to or impose on their clients? Insofar as they use force, psychotherapists are judges and jailers, inquisitors and torturers; insofar as they eschew it, they are secular priests and pseudomedical rhetoricians. Their services consist of coercions and constraints imposed on individuals on behalf of other persons or social groups, or they consist of contracts and conversations entered into by individuals on their own behalf." ― Thomas Szasz, The Myth of Psychotherapy

 

[Fragile]

Even though I think that there is some science behind it, and a small minority of people get good results from some psychiatric treatments, my opinion about it is that modern psychiatry does far more damage than it helps.

My main criticism of it are the despicable, corrupt and money hungry corporations that are behind it, big pharma is one of the most openly evil industries that exists, and that's saying a lot.

I could go on a rant that goes through many paragraphs about the abuses of these corporations, like their monetary influence in academia and research, I could talk for hours about how most of their drugs have effects that can be replicated with placebos with no horrible side effects, and I could tell you about my personal experience with addiction, long lasting side effects and a history of at least 12 different drugs that did nothing more than exacerbate my symptoms in the long run.

But none of this will matter, most people will blindly trust them and call you a conspiracy theorist no matter what you say and how easy it is to do quick google searches about their abuses, court settlements and concern from experts about the corrupt DSM 5 and it's unethical backing.

Long live big pharma and their bottomless pockets, I guess.

 

[Deleted member 23885]

It's a scam. I've been on dozens of anti-depressants & none of them have curbed my suicidal thinking.

 

[Amumu]

It depends on your psychiatrist. Overall psychiatry is positive but only one psychiatrist can ruin your life. Entirely. Not to mention psych wards.
As for the big pharma stuff, that's a conspiracy theory, as usual.

 

[EmptyManForever]

Fuck psychiatry it ruined my life

 

[Wrennie]

A med that I was put on as a small child permanently chemically castrated me before I hit puberty. A purportedly 'safe' drug recently made me become afflicted with Tardive Dyskinesia (which is like having Parkinson's of the face). Another drug I was put on last year put me in a trance and lead to me jumping off of a building (I was so 'out of it' that my muscles didn't even tense up before hitting the ground).

 

[262653]

If my arm would get torn off in the accident, then, if I could, I would call an ambulance. I would trust health system to take care of me, and treat my wounds. I'm not going to entrust psychiatry with my body, behavior, thoughts, or feelings. Or at least not voluntarily. My consent still counts, right?

There are no defined borders in patient-/client-psychiatrist relationship. No defined variables. When I go to a prostitute, me and a prostitute both know what to expect, kind of. We both know what we are giving and getting. I give money and want sex, she gives sex and wants money. We can define in more detail what kind of sex it's going to be, what is allowed and what isn't. Relatively simple. The only thing I know that is defined in psychiatry is money. I'm assuming a client wants to feel better, and pays the therapist expecting him figure out how.

I have a few issues with psychiatry (I'm theorizing here, I have no practice with it) that I want to share and see what you guys think.
1. There are important undefined variables in client-psychiatrist relationship.
It's not clear whether the therapist (T) has what his client (C) wants.
It's not clear what C wants in the context of therapy.
(I'm assuming the C wants to feel better but it's not clear to C how the therapy is going to help him, and what it would take to get what C wants.)
T knows what he gets (money gain from sessions and drugs and how much), and has an idea of what it takes (loss of time and effort, and how much) to secure them.
C has only expectations, hopes of what he might get from therapy, or how much of therapy is needed to get what he wants (feel better), and only knows how much it would cost (in money and time).

2. Potential conflict of interest. Kind of rises from the previous point.
The best outcome for C is to get the most utility from therapy, which is to feel the best (feel good minus feel bad) and spent the lowest amount of money and time.
The best outcome for T is to get the most utility from therapy, which is to feel good for being helpful to your clients and/or get the highest amount of money from sessions and drugs with the least amount of time and effort spent.
It wouldn't be much of a problem if, for example, the usefulness of therapy for C would be defined (good feelings and problems solved, per therapy sessions), but it's not, so T, as far as I know, has no obligation (nor incentive, if T doesn't care about being helpful) to provide even a modicum of that. The more useful your therapy without resorting to drugs, the more problems are solved and feel-better levels restored, the less juicy dollars C will spend on sessions and drugs.

On the other hand. The better the quality of T's therapy, the better T's reputation is going to be maybe, and maybe T will get more clients, and more clients will be willing to pay more.
And if T's reputation is bad, then maybe he will have less clients, or maybe they would be more willing to abandon his therapy.
It's not clear to me how quality of T's therapy affects T's reputation. It's easier with positive comments because they're good for both clients and T, but if it's a negative response? T wouldn't want those to show up. Maybe there should be a place where therapists can't influence what responses show up and what don't, and where people wouldn't be able to smear therapists undeservedly. Something like: this comment is coming from someone who has been in therapy of this dude, and spent that much time or so.

3. Wide prospects for abuse.
С comes to seek psychological help that C can't seem to provide for oneself, so C comes from a position of psychological vulnerability.
T is trained at influencing the perception of his clients, so T is likely to be proficient at manipulation. It is part of T's job to affect the minds, and C expects it will be used in good faith, with the intention to help, and not harm.

It pertains to the nature of covert manipulation to be subtle, artful, evading the eye. The damaging effects of such manipulation are difficult-to-impossible to trace back to whoever inflicted them, let alone bring the manipulator to responsibility for said damage, or even to prove the malicious intent of the manipulator.

Putting pieces together, I see the environment where a psychologically vulnerable person can be exploited by a person skilled in manipulation, with remote risk of being caught red-handed.

(Turned out longer than I expected. At this point, I'm not sure if I should respond here or start another thread. But I'm not a big fan of starting threads, so I guess I'll leave it here for the time being.)

 

[Fragile]

It depends on your psychiatrist. Overall psychiatry is positive but only one psychiatrist can ruin your life. Entirely. Not to mention psych wards.
As for the big pharma stuff, that's a conspiracy theory, as usual.

Then, I invite you to tell me why are you dismissing my concerns about big pharma as mere baseless conspiracy theories, when all I'm saying is that this industry is known for its shitty practices and they have a long and verifiable list of scandals.

I'm not saying that there is a world domination scheme or some other deranged statement, all I'm saying is that they prioritize monetary gain in some unethical ways, not unlike most other big industries.

 

[user667]

it's bullshit. these people have no fucking idea what they're talking about. they just try to brainwash you. they're main goal is to make you a "functioning member of society" so you can fit in and not bother anyone. they don't care if you are happy. i feel like the meds have melted my brain. oh and the "antidepressants" they put you on are really just placebos. there's no biology behind them, just mindset.

 

[L951788]

it's bullshit. these people have no fucking idea what they're talking about. they just try to brainwash you. they're main goal is to make you a "functioning member of society" so you can fit in and not bother anyone. they don't care if you are happy. i feel like the meds have melted my brain. oh and the "antidepressants" they put you on are really just placebos. there's no biology behind them, just mindset.

I'm stuck on Cymbalta and I feel like it actually makes me more depressed. But, yeah. Antidepressants, benzodiazepines, and antipsychotics have melted my brain. And the latter has destroyed my body.

My whole life was ruined just to give psychiatry some profit.

 

[EmbraceOfTheVoid]

it's bullshit. these people have no fucking idea what they're talking about. they just try to brainwash you. they're main goal is to make you a "functioning member of society" so you can fit in and not bother anyone. they don't care if you are happy. i feel like the meds have melted my brain. oh and the "antidepressants" they put you on are really just placebos. there's no biology behind them, just mindset.

I'd agree that most of them have the goal of trying to force you into becoming "functional" and not addressing the underlying problems that make you feel like committing suicide in the first place. Unfortunately many of those problems are far outside the scope of therapy and even the ones that shouldn't be such as trauma are still left unaddressed.

As critical as I am of antidepressants and the like, they still have an affect on your mood. The issue being that they often cause worse side affects than the symptoms they are trying to suppress and they don't solve why the person is feeling a certain way in the first place. Shoving pills down your throat because your father beat you as a child doesn't actually fix the emotional toll that took on your mental state; it only masks your real feelings to the detriment of your long-term health.

I'm stuck on Cymbalta and I feel like it actually makes me more depressed. But, yeah. Antidepressants, benzodiazepines, and antipsychotics have melted my brain. And the latter has destroyed my body.

My whole life was ruined just to give psychiatry some profit.

Cymbalta is what I take for my Fibromyalgia and it's helped immensely for dealing with the pain. It also lowered my anxiety significantly so I stopped being completely housebound but I still know that it's dangerous, that's why I've lowered my dose twice.

Antipsychotics are the most dangerous of all and long term use causes brain damage. I find it ridiculous that people think psychiatrists know what they're doing when tinkering with people's brain chemistry when we know so little about it.

 

[wishicouldgoback]

It's the only part of healthcare that uses no diagnostic tests to treat what it claims the patient is suffering from. Science can prove ninety percent of serotonin is produced inside of our stomachs. The fact that psychiatry doesn't focus on nutrition before the use of toxic drugs should be an alarm to anyone considering this treatment. It seems that there are a lot of people on this forum who will defend it though.

 

[Symbiote]

The beatings must continue in order to improve morale.

 

[262653]

The fact that psychiatry doesn't focus on nutrition before the use of toxic drugs should be an alarm to anyone considering this treatment.

Aye, that concerns me too. Nutrition helped me to some degree with brain fog, muscle cramps, twitches, and sharping pain. Somewhat improved my appearance too.

I'm getting the impression that the pharmaceutical industry and government work together to profit of human distress and misfortunes, in the same way arms industry could work with government to make profits from war.