Discussion Would you change your stance on psychotherapy and psychiatry if they no longer had paternalistic teeth with regards to CTB?

[TAW122]

While I've generally had an anti-psychiatry and anti-psychotherapy stance (which is also based on personal experiences as well as my own research) throughout my life, there is an interesting though I had. The title is written in such a manner that illustrates and reflects the current state of the mental health system's paternalistic approach towards CTB ideation, attempts, and such, similar to how religion was back in the earlier part of human history (several centuries ago).

To answer the question, "Would I change my stance on psychotherapy and psychiatry (part of the mental health system) if they no longer had the legal means or ability to actively impinge on one's civil liberties, personal bodily autonomy, and freedom?", the answer is simply "yes, but only marginally." In such a scenario where the mental health system loses it's paternalistic and authoritarian powers towards those with CTB ideation or attempts, it would make it similar to modern day religion. This is because after the Church (and it's dark history associated with it, especially during "The Inquisition" period) lost it's power on governance and yielded to the modern governments, as well as over the last century or so when civil rights became a thing and citizens of various nations throughout the world, over the last few centuries started to have more inalienable rights (not just limited to the US but in general, in the US). It was throughout the last few centuries that instead of the church and religion having a strong hold on civilians and citizens in society, it was then the State (the government) that gained more authority.

When I mentioned that I would change my stance "only marginally", I am referring to the fact that I would still hold views against the practice as a whole (seeing it as nothing more than like 'modern day religion' rather than when religion used to be very powerful and dictated peoples' lives), but I would be less vocal and less antagonistic towards the practice itself, compared to present day reality. In other words, I would still find the system to be nothing more than a waste of time at best and choose not to interact with it, though I would not have this notion of "risk of saying the wrong things and losing one's freedom". I may even be more expressive without fear of temporary detainment, holds, sectioning, or any custodial action taken against me.

However, back in our present day reality, especially with the ever growing paternalistic practices of psychiatry and the mental health system in general, it's more oppressive and invasive than it was decades ago even, especially under the guise of 'help' and other things. Would your views and attitudes towards psychiatry, the mental health system, and psychotherapy in general shift or change if such systems and policies no longer had the same authoritarian and paternalistic powers to detain, take away (even forcibly) one's civil liberties and freedom?

 

[kabuto43]

Well if psychotherapy is going to be implemented without the paternalistic and authoritarian attitude like u mentioned then i think that can only happen in a society that has come to terms with allowing ppl the freedom to legally ctb when they want to and places like Switzerland for example come to mind where the society has prioritized quality of life first (their system still needs wirk to become more liberalized) but yeah only in that type of setting would i feel freedom to want to work on fixing my ideations or not because only then would it feel worth it

 

[_Gollum_]

I don't think I would have a problem with psychotherapy if the paternalistic aspect was removed. Therapy genuinely does do wonders for a certain subset of people. However, I'd still have a problem with psychiatry due to their insistence on using medication for "treating" issues that are often circumstantial in nature, especially given how hard it is to get off the meds and all the side effects--sometimes permanent--that people suffer from them.

 

[TAW122]

@kabuto43 That makes sense as our current society does not have the prerequisite for such a measure to be a reality since the attitudes and moral values of society are still heavily pro-life, anti-choice. As for Switzerland, yes they are in the right direction but still have a long way to go (as many other nations, even Canada too). I also agree with your other point that if people no longer feared or worried about the risk of incarceration, detainment, or potentially (temporarily) losing their freedom and civil rights, then they may be more willing to open up, potentially fixing their CTB ideation and problems that lead to it (due to no risk).

@_Gollum_ Good points and yes, with both systems, taking away the paternalistic aspect would go a long way and help people who may otherwise not seek out such services to possibly be more open, if not at least less apprehensive about trying them. As for psychiatry, yes, there may still be the problem of using medication and drugs to treat issues that are circumstantial than clinical and pathological, but taking away the paternalism and authoritarian teeth of the field and institution will make it where people are at least a bit more willing to try medications (at their own risk and after informed consent). I think that yes, while drugs and medications can cause many side effects and even permanent harm, the biggest change would be the lack of being forced such medications and drugs in such a world where psychiatry is no longer forced on people who have CTB ideation and are not a danger to others (only to oneself).

 

[KuriGohan&Kamehameha]

I would have a lot more respect for the ones making policies and regulations relating to these fields if they were willing to admit how much we truly don't know about the human mind, and that we don't always have the answers.

I believe the paternalistic attitude is an unfortunate, but natural reaction stemming from that mindset, that every single person can always be cured or have their issues managed by the current standards of treatment. There are just far too many professionals in this field who think they know better than the patients when it comes to what the patient is feeling and experiencing.

The sad reality is one can suffer almost eternally, and then be tossed the same classes of medications and modalities of therapy that haven't worked the other times they've been tried ad naseum, and when this inevitably doesn't work for these cases, the patient is blamed, not the approach itself.

So until those working in this field can admit their methods are fallible and imperfect, like most things in this life, it's really hard for me to change my mind about how I feel about these disciplines.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I also think that it should be more accurately presented. Especially when it comes to prescribing drugs. If they don't fully understand how something works- they should be honest about that.

And, people should be made aware of the side effects- not just in the small print. Plenty of people here are suffering the side effects of long- term SSRI usage. More should be done to research and prevent things like that.

Doctors are usually cautious not to over prescribe opiods, sleeping pills and antibiotics. They know about the negatives of addiction and herd immunity regarding those drugs. I get the sense that the knowledge around psyche drugs is more patchy. Patients should be aware if they are being used as a guinea pig. They may still choose to be but- they should have that knowledge and choice.

But yes, I also think I would have a more positive opinion of the 'profession' if it respected people's autonomy more. Not only that. By being less heavy handed with say- involuntary sectioning, I imagine more people would feel able to be honest about their ideation to begin with. I actually think the current state of affairs is ridiculous. What's the benefit of going to a health 'professional' and not feeling able to describe all your symptoms?