(No subject)

[Guest guest]

http://www.redflagsweekly.com/extra/2003_aug29.html

 

 

August 29, 2003

 

SECOND OPINION

 

A FAST FOR FREEDOM IN MENTAL HEALTH

 

A hunger strike challenges international domination by biopsychiatry and the

forced drugging of patients

 

MEDIA MINDLESSNESS

 

Eighth In A Series (Seventh HERE)

 

By RFD Editor, Nicholas Regush

 

Day Thirteen. The MindFreedom hunger strikers are getting the cold shoulder from

U.S. print and broadcast organizations. Only a few reports have been filed. One

national print piece has been promised. One television TV news anchor has

indicated mild interest. But there are certainly no TV vans and reporters camped

out at hunger strike headquarters in Pasadena, California.

 

Apparently, the issue of whether psychiatry is really capable of delivering

viable treatments for most patients based on the theory that chemical imbalances

in the brain can be corrected with drugs is not on the radar of too many health

reporters and their editors and producers. MindFreedom thinks this is a huge

issue and that the well-being of hundreds of thousands of patients is at stake.

Particularly when there is forced drugging on the increase across the U.S. and

neglect of other community-based treatments not requiring drugs. What they are

fighting for is choice. Well, they are correct in their concerns but that’s not

quite the type of agenda that is most likely to mobilize much media attention.

 

We live in a television culture that is glued to high sensation. I imagine the

hunger strikers would get far more attention if they should show signs of

physical damage. That’s when someone on the " rim " in the TV newsroom would more

likely think about this event in Pasadena with some interest, probably for the

first time. It’s the drama that attracts the most attention, not so much the

content.

 

I worked in television news for ten years (At ABC News) and I know how the

process works. It can be very difficult to convince a senior producer at the

networks to do a piece on a hunger strike when there is not much gut-wrenching

physical drama unfolding. Why? Because the networks are copy-cats. They tend to

wait for the excitement to build. They follow. They often do not lead. One

question I would often hear at ABC was " Is anyone else doing this? " And no, this

did not mean, " We need an exclusive story. " What it usually meant was, " If no

one else is doing it, why should we do it? " This is the way it often works.

 

The one hope that the hunger strikers have is that someone at the networks or in

cable news will take a moment to figure out that there is indeed a lot of drama

surrounding this hunger strike. But you have to use your brain to put some of

the pieces together. For one thing, there is the powerful issue of freedom.

After September 11, 2001, there has been growing concern about the decline of

privacy and individual rights in the U.S. Forced drugging of psychiatric

patients adds to the climate of fear. And then you have the American Psychiatric

Association (APA), which supports forced drugging on the basis of a biological

theory that is full of holes. Essentially, the APA promotes a deception that is

used to plump up pharmaceutical drug traffic, which in turn helps plump up the

APA and other organizations, including the National Alliance For The Mentally

Ill (NAMI). NAMI offers its services to help the mentally ill, but is also

engaged in helping to rip away a psychiatric patient’s

freedom to choose whether or not to take drugs.

 

Meanwhile, the hunger strikers, who are primarily focusing their attention on

getting the APA, NAMI and the U.S. Surgeon General to respond to their demand

for evidence supporting the biological psychiatry model, are also keenly aware

that their fast for freedom is also representative of a much wider and deep

concern running its course across the U.S. about the authoritarian culture that

is further unfolding.