Is telepathy undiagnosed schizophrenia?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


>if schizophrenics didn't have the habit of leaving dead, mutilated bodies in their wake (because they think aliens are going to kidnap them, or something), there would be little need to lock them up.

that's the lie pushed via hollywood and psychiatry to the world.
by far most schizos are not violent, and certainly not deadly violent.
and don't dare to ask me to "prove that", the burden of evidence is on your side, when you want to use discrimination to put many people in a double prison.

>but, if you have acute psychosis presented to you, and you know that you could lose your job, life, liberty....would you not make the decision that was safest?

i've detailed previously how i think schizos can be much better helped.

>If you don't understand how the chemicals in pills can alter the minds ability to achieve lucidity, then you need to research the neurochemical and electrochemical processes of the human brain. The entire body communicates with itself via chemicals.

keep your ridiculous psychiatric propaganda to yourself.
my previous account of what the pills actually do (as opposed to what you're advertising they should do) is an honest one.

>The fact that you live in Europe, and not the US, makes your assessment of the work i did at a State of Texas mental hospital meaningless. You have no idea the processes and policies that we practiced under.

bullzhit, psychiatry is a Global Business with much the same if not completely the same practices all over the 1st-world. The emphasis may differ; some lock 'm up longer, some are quicker to force heavy doses of pills, but the basis of treatment is always the same: lockup and pills, no psychology.
2nd and 3rd world have similar but even worse policies and practices.

i may not have spent time in texan "hospitals", but i have talked to patients that were in US psychiatric wards, and they confirm the policies are much the same compared to nw-europe and australia (where i was incarcerated after merely coming to them for help).

go ahead, big fat texan, sprout more of your lies taken straight from propaganda.
i love to debunk them.


[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[forum software test]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

edit

[edit on 4-3-2010 by Zerra]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


>if schizophrenics didn't have the habit of leaving dead, mutilated bodies in their wake (because they think aliens are going to kidnap them, or something), there would be little need to lock them up.

that's the lie pushed via hollywood and psychiatry to the world.
by far most schizos are not violent, and certainly not deadly violent.

************************************************
Not all are violent, but most all can't function in society without medication and they suffer without it. There's a high rate of suicide amongs the mentally ill because they don't get the help they need and are off medication. My friend lost her father b.c he was too paranoid to take his meds ( a symptom) and he heard so many voices telling him to commit suicide that he did. That is not a psychic or spiritual ability at all. That is sadnness and a tragedy. Near my city a person went off his meds and stabbed a person on a greyhound bus, cut off his head, and ate his organs.


Clearly there is a reason for medicating when someone is not high functioning or is unable to function in society.

The problem isn't medications in my opinion. It is the stigma that mental illness has. People need to get away from this notion that it's creepy or 'crazy' or 'evil'. Most people that are against medicating the mentally ill probably aren't against blood transfusions. how come? If someone needs help they should have the option of taking it without people creating paranoia about it.

Most homeless people are mentally ill who can't afford treatment and can't get into a facility where they will be cared for. Most homeless are not lazy people, but people who were sick. It's vital that people donate more time , resources, and money into finding more solutions and more homes to care for them. Mental insititutions are far from pleasant. Many are abusive! and many have their own agendas...but that just means we need to make ethical changes and start getting people to take it seriously. Nobody will take paranoia seriously. It needs to be approached by an intelligent arguement and non-anecdotal information.

Does society medicate too much? yes. It's a seperate issue-and probably the real problem..b.c there are a lot of symptoms to meds and people need to make sure those symptoms are worth it! Do certain people actually NEED medication. yes-as shown through examples above.


That being said. There's psychic ability and then there's schizophrenia- The two are not the same. You can be misdiagnosed which would create the problem where meds aren't needed and making a problem. psychic ability/telepathy can be validated and confirmed- it also spreads positivity , joy, and hope to other people..and it doesn't create distress or paranoia. Schizophrenia can be seen using brain imaging scans and causes distress and hallucinations that make no sense to the rest of the world. It's a sad thing and I HOPE people stop stigmatizing it and we can find a real cure in the future.

[edit on 4-3-2010 by Zerra]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by Zerra]

I was thinking about that 1 to 5% of schizos who can indeed become violent at some point;

I now think it's quite masochistic of the human race to betray and alienate those in mental distress so profoundly, causing them to become (more) dangerous.

Masochism is (subconciously) loving to hurt yourself.

Or it could be just a form of laziness resulting in much suffering for many people, and monetary profit for a small group of people.

Or even a form of stupidity, the same kind that once made all humans believe the world is flat.

Probably it's all of the above.

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

A few facts:


Where are the People with Schizophrenia?

Approximately:

6% are homeless or live in shelters
6% live in jails or prisons
5% to 6% live in Hospitals
10% live in Nursing homes
25% live with a family member
28% are living independently
20% live in Supervised Housing (group homes, etc.)



People with the condition have a 50 times higher risk of attempting suicide than the general population; the risk of suicide is very serious in people with schizophrenia. Suicide is the number one cause of premature death among people with schizophrenia, with an estimated 10 percent to 13 percent killing themselves and approximately 40% attempting suicide at least once




What Percentage of Individuals with sever mental illnesses are untreated, and why?

Recent American studies report that approximately half of all individuals with severe mental illnesses have received no treatment for their illnesses in the previous 12 months. These findings are consistent with other studies of medication compliance for individuals with schizophrenia and manic-depressive illness (bipolar disorder). The majority (55 percent) of those not receiving treatment have no awareness of their illness (anosognosia) and thus do not seek treatment. Stigma and dissatisfaction with services are relatively unimportant reasons why individuals with severe mental illnesses do not seek treatment.

The 45 percent who acknowledged that they needed treatment (and thus had awareness of their illness) but still were not receiving treatment cited many reasons for this. These included (respondent could check several reasons):

32% "wanted to solve problem on own"
27% "thought the problem would get better by itself"
20% "too expensive"
18% "unsure about where to go for help"
17% "help probably would not do any good"
16% "health insurance would not cover treatment"



www.schizophrenia.com...

reply to post by Zerra


>There's a high rate of suicide amongs the mentally ill because they don't get the help they need and are off medication

the first time i seriously considered suicide was about 3 months after starting to take haldol at 5mg/day.
i obviously stopped taking it..
Quitting "the meds" is the reason i can bitch about it today.

the closed wards are all so depressing and small and filled with confused people and nurses and docters that don't give a damn, that i suspect many of the suicides use that as a reason for their action too:
it's not much of a life, being a total outcast with everybody secretly very afraid of you, and getting locked up, quite possibly with false and hidden reasons, every year.

i consider myself lucky to have been able to go it alone without becoming revengeful against other humans. i do web-coding, which allows me to make a buck, possibly many bucks one day, without having to interact face-to-face with many other humans.
but not everyone is in a profession with those odds for happiness in the future

i say the depression caused by psychiatry is deep enough and chronic enough to push many of the suicides over the edge.

surely, with several humans to talk to without fear of being locked up and drugged against your will, there's more chance of preventing someone from letting those voices win.

>Near my city a person went off his meds and stabbed a person on a greyhound bus, cut off his head, and ate his organs.

I hope you're not implying that this is a capacity for evil that all schizos have..
Compare the number of "treated" to the number of "treated that have injured or killed another human". I'll stake all my bitching about pills against that percentage being under 3%.
Problem is, i looked for those numbers, and they're nowhere to be found.
Neither are the number of deaths _in_ (closed) psych wards.
I believe that is for "political" reasons that benefit the quacks.

>Clearly there is a reason for medicating when someone is not high functioning or is unable to function in society.

That's a wide range of people you want on meds...
meds that are detrimental, not benefitial.

did you miss the little remark i made earlier in this thread about "the meds almost never make the voices stop, instead by weakening you they give 'the voices' more chance to mess with you?".
That's not just my experience, but that of many of my fellow patients aswell.

Newer meds are no better because they're given in "effective" (read: very high) doses.




[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

reply to post by jk197x


It doesn't matter if it is 100%, 60%, 10%...the fact of the matter is that a lot of people have died at the hands of untreated schizophrenics. A lot.

The ones that don't actually kill people do other things, like show up in business places like stores, shouting about religiously preoccupied babble. Or you find them sitting in the back of your pickup truck, eating your dog, refusing to get out because it is their truck (they think).

I don't have to listen to the "establishment". I worked in an acute care admissions unit in a state run mental hospital. We recieved, as a majority of our clients at that time, people that Mexican authorites dumped on our side of the border so we could just "deal with it" for them. Nowadays, that hospital treats almost exclusively forensic patients (i.e.: people who were psychotic, killed someone like their own mother, and then ate them).

Your account of what the pills do is tainted by not only the paranoia of a schizophrenic, but also your ignorance of the clinical trials. I agree that the "cure" is about as bad as the disease. But the "cure" makes the schizophrenic bearable for society.

It seems that what you are saying is that because someone is ill, they have a right to be treated in a specific way. It would be nice if this were so, but in truth such a person is at the whims of the society that must tolerate their illness. In Sparta, it would be death. In the EU, you get the crappy socialized medicine. In the US, it is only somewhat better.

It is a crappy situation all the way around. The schizophrenic definitely got the short end of the stick, what with a malfunctioning brain and all. But we all have our disabilities. Since medicine is the only PROVEN way to effect an improvement, that is what we got. What you are recommending is based on the daydreams of a mentally ill person. What makes you think it is going to be effective?

Edit to add: to debunk something you have to offer more than opinion and personal accounts. And you have to realize that the thought processes of a schizophrenic are not of an order that lends credibility to such opinions.

[edit on 4-3-2010 by bigfatfurrytexan]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


>It doesn't matter if it is 100%, 60%, 10%...the fact of the matter is that a lot of people have died at the hands of untreated schizophrenics. A lot.

_even_ if hypothetically speaking only 10% was innocent, it doesn't allow you to put them in the same prisons as the ones who have been violent.

and i wonder how the number of violent schizos compares to the number of violently "sane", or "soldiers" of some sort.
it seems that every single time a schizo becomes violent, it's frontpage news, but that's not always so for all violent crime, eh?

>The ones that don't actually kill people do other things, like show up in business places like stores, shouting about religiously preoccupied babble. Or you find them sitting in the back of your pickup truck, eating your dog, refusing to get out because it is their truck (they think).

They'd such things so much less if they had someone to work out their psycho_logical_ problems with. Without being judged near-instantly, drugged against their will, locked up sometimes for months, etc.

>Your account of what the pills do is tainted by not only the paranoia of a schizophrenic, but also your ignorance of the clinical trials. I agree that the "cure" is about as bad as the disease.

That's quite eh.. paradoxical, texan.

>But the "cure" makes the schizophrenic bearable for society.

Thank you for being much more honest than any member of the psychiatric camp that i've met so far.

>It seems that what you are saying is that because someone is ill, they have a right to be treated in a specific way. It would be nice if this were so, but in truth such a person is at the whims of the society that must tolerate their illness. In Sparta, it would be death. In the EU, you get the crappy socialized medicine. In the US, it is only somewhat better.

Fine, if you revoke my human rights without reason (remember; i've NEVER even hit a person, i can give 'm a very convincing "just dont try dude" look, and as a child it was judo without hipthrows or the like, that solved the few confrontations i needed to go through), i reserve the right to defend myself and my peers. I know enough about warfare to know physical violence will be detrimental to my cause, but there are many physically peaceful ways to fight this type of bullzhit.
I'll try the legal inroads first, which i'll say are firmly roadblocked locally here.

>It is a crappy situation all the way around. The schizophrenic definitely got the short end of the stick, what with a malfunctioning brain and all. But we all have our disabilities. Since medicine is the only PROVEN way to effect an improvement, that is what we got. What you are recommending is based on the daydreams of a mentally ill person. What makes you think it is going to be effective?

Quite the opposite is proven; psychiatric treatment is detrimental to patients, makes chronic patients of many of them, and quite possibly it's detrimental to society too by alienating people into violence against others.
It's just that this has been true since psychiatry was invented, so it's considered "normal".
See the vid i posted earlier for confirmation.

>Edit to add: to debunk something you have to offer more than opinion and personal accounts. And you have to realize that the thought processes of a schizophrenic are not of an order that lends credibility to such opinions.

yea, the "hospitals" are the only ones who can do the number-counting, and if they do it all, they sure dont share it with citizens... i know, because i asked a lot of institutions locally here, and in aussie too..

i've met and talked with maybe 200-250 different patients over the years.. that's the view i can offer this forum.



[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

reply to post by jk197x


ln the State of Texas system, mentally ill are not put in prisons. They are put in hospitals. The 400 bed hospital in my hometown has transitioned to a high security hospital to accomodate the "forensic" patients. They are kept separate from non-forensic patients.

Each patient is in a room with 4 other patients, but each area of the room is partitioned off with a large wardrobe. Each patient has their own television with cable. Earplugs are provided so other patients are not disturbed by your TV. Each room has its own restroom with private showers.

The hospital is nothing like what you see on movies like "Clockwork Orange." Patients Rights (capitalized because it is an official office with the MHMR system) ensures that each patient is treated with as much dignity and privacy as possible (meeting all required HIPPA rules).

It isn't the raw number of violent mentally ill vs. violent undiagnosed mentally ill people (or, "sane" people). What matters is proportion. If you identify a segment of society that poses an increased risk, the principles of risk management dictate that you address the issue.

Regardless, anytime someone becomes violent it is on the news. The whole 24 hour news cycle is looking for any story they can put up. Regardless, in the US it is against the law to disclose information regarding the physical or mental condition of someone. This would mean that reporting on someone as "schizo" would be speculative, without official confirmation. In short: people will make an assumption, or take the statements of witnesses.

How about we see things others can't which makes us unique... whether it is a hand movement or a eye movement we will spot it....

Now you may say that this is imagination but how do you know?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


>ln the State of Texas system, mentally ill are not put in prisons. They are put in hospitals. The 400 bed hospital in my hometown has transitioned to a high security hospital to accomodate the "forensic" patients. They are kept separate from non-forensic patients.

that's what psychiatry says it does, while in reality many innocent people are convicted to closed wards for months and forced depressants, with the tactics i described earlier.

or if someone had a (semi-)violent incident many years ago, it will be used time and again behind the patient's back, to convict him to more lockup as soon as he shows the slightest signs of another psychotic episode.
it's against the law to punish someone for the same incident over and over again.


>Each patient is in a room with 4 other patients, but each area of the room is partitioned off with a large wardrobe. Each patient has their own television with cable. Earplugs are provided so other patients are not disturbed by your TV. Each room has its own restroom with private showers.

Gosh, that makes it sound like a pleasure cruise.
Which it really ain't. You've admitted that yourself, earlier.


>The hospital is nothing like what you see on movies like "Clockwork Orange." Patients Rights (capitalized because it is an official office with the MHMR system) ensures that each patient is treated with as much dignity and privacy as possible (meeting all required HIPPA rules).

patient rights are regularly bent or broken. when you try to address the issue, you're funneled toward "complaint procedures" that at max will give you a compensation for getting locked up without cause, which is usually eaten up by the taxagency.
the "hospital" is either insured for that, or has a tax budget for that. they dont feel a thing.
nor do the ones who lie to keep an innocent in lockup.
but i'll admit that as soon as it's clear to a "patients rights" representative that you're out of psychosis, he/she will help you get out of lockup.

>It isn't the raw number of violent mentally ill vs. violent undiagnosed mentally ill people (or, "sane" people). What matters is proportion. If you identify a segment of society that poses an increased risk, the principles of risk management dictate that you address the issue.

1) the percentage of violent schizo's (as measured against all schizos) is much lower than psychiatry and the media make it seem.
2) are you admitting you want to discriminate the (many) innocents for actions by violent people they dont know?

>Regardless, anytime someone becomes violent it is on the news. The whole 24 hour news cycle is looking for any story they can put up. Regardless, in the US it is against the law to disclose information regarding the physical or mental condition of someone. This would mean that reporting on someone as "schizo" would be speculative, without official confirmation. In short: people will make an assumption, or take the statements of witnesses.

www.fbi.gov...
44.2 murders / day in the USA, 2004. There have been years when it was twice as much.
You see all of those on the news?

And don't deny that often the media WILL mention a person "has mental problems" or something to that effect.


[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

reply to post by jk197x


what you call "punishment", the sane world calls "treatment".

Remember, your rights cease where they infringe on anothers rights. With schizoaffective disorders, that usually means hospitalization and court ordered meds.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


>what you call "punishment", the sane world calls "treatment".

you mean the _psychiatric establisment_ calls it "treatment" and "hospitalization".
i believe they do this so that they can spend the least amount of mental effort per patient, and make the most money off patients.

for reasons i described earlier, me and many other patients must consider your "treatment" a punishment. see, your "treatments" never cured a single patient of schizoness..

and normal people seem not to care about it, so long as they're not bothered with the abnormal behaviour of schizos.

>Remember, your rights cease where they infringe on anothers rights. With schizoaffective disorders, that usually means hospitalization and court ordered meds.

I didn't infringe on the rights of others, ever.
Neither did the majority of the rest of the schizos.

Yet you keep insisting on the right to infringe upon my human rights, and those of other peaceful schizos.

And you didn't provide counter evidence to a single one of the quite serious complaints i have against psychiatry, which is typical of someone from the psychiatric camp.
You seem to think you can just waltz over it with more lies.



[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 4-3-2010 by jk197x]

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
How about we see things others can't which makes us unique... whether it is a hand movement or a eye movement we will spot it....

Now you may say that this is imagination but how do you know?

I fully believe in telepathy. I believe in the ability for some to discern things so subtle that many are unaware of it. I believe that "psi" is comprised of anywhere from 17 to lord knows how many senses, most recieving such subtle input that the average person cannot percieve it over all the "noise" created by the main senses of sight, hearing, smell, etc. These senses are overwhelming, and we don't realize that we have a sensory organ in our nose that detects phermones, or magnetosensitive organs in our hands and feet (the source of the "trick" of divining).

You should read into Ingo Swann. He presents a very well reasoned argument for just how normal having "psi" abilities is.

But "psi" and schizophrenia are not even close. Spend some time with a schizophrenic. The sheer hell that their lives become from this horrible disease. This other poster here...he is not rational and exhibits deeply grained paranoia. But he hits th enail on the head when he talks about the social stigma of being "schizo". It is horrible they way humans treat one another.

reply to post by jk197x


The psychiatric community is often trying to correct the misconceptions people have about the mentally ill. I don't know if you had a bad experience with a psychiatrist, but most will use hospitalization as a last resort, and even then they can only do it if they are able to demonstrate that you are a threat to yourself or others. Otherwise all hospitalization is voluntary. Also, I'll be the first to admit that mental hospitals are understaffed, but to say they're not putting in work is a joke. Usually you have just a handful of people working at a time taking care of all the patients. That has nothing to do with psychiatry, that is a problem stemming from the fact that metal hospitals are underfunded. The APA is constantly battling to increase awareness of mental disorders, while getting more funding for treatment. These people aren't your enemy. They are constantly fighting to get you the best treatment you possibly can. But when patients go off their medication it reflects poorly on other patients and their doctors, so the places that need money don't end up getting it.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


For what its worth, in my role as a front line staff in that hospital all those years ago, I would escort patients to their court hearings. On more than 1 occassion I saw the judge release the person (and a few times it bit him in the butt later).

Due process is due process, at least in my fairly expansive experience.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


>The psychiatric community is often trying to correct the misconceptions people have about the mentally ill.

eh no, quite the opposite, they are the source of the fear mongering against schizos

>I don't know if you had a bad experience with a psychiatrist,

Not just 1, i saw about 20-30 of them, and they all:
- refused to provide any psychological help
- insisted on me using drugs that are detrimental to my health.
- will silently treat the patient like he/she's less than human
- will silently and behind your back revoke patient's human rights
- cannot handle any criticism at all, resorting even to tactics of locking patients up into solitary when they dare to confront them (even diplomatically) with an honest opinion of their "care".

it's especially that fragile ego and ruthless lying with innocent poker faces, that is the source of my anger towards psychiaterists.

>but most [psychiatrists] will use hospitalization as a last resort, and even then they can only do it if they are able to demonstrate that you are a threat to yourself or others.

Again, there is a huge discrepancy between what psychiatrists portray to do, towards the world and towards parents and friends of patients, and what they actually do.
I can honestly say of all the psychiatrists that i've met, _none_ of them gave a damn about the actual wellbeing of their patient. COMPLIANCE of the patient with procedures of "treatment", is what they care about, in my experience, and that of the other patients i've talked with.

And the nurses on closed wards are also in large part there for the money.
A very few of them provide a measure of real compassion, but they never (this is actually forbidden by psychiatric doctrine) provide psychological help. The kind of help that would matter to a patient.
See, patients keep getting stuck year after year on the same mental issues that caused their earlier disconnect(s) from reality (aka psychosis).
On the other side, there are plenty of nurses with a sadistic streak.

>Also, I'll be the first to admit that mental hospitals are understaffed, but to say they're not putting in work is a joke.

Yea, they get paid well for pushing people like meat through a factory (of procedures).
But they don't provide the _actual_ work, which is to heal a person of schizoness, by addressing the psychological issues that cause them to disconnect from reality from time to time.

>The APA is constantly battling to increase awareness of mental disorders, while getting more funding for treatment.

I would think that for 800-1200 euro per patient per day (depending on country) it should be possible to provide patients actual psychological help.

>These people [psychiaterists] aren't your enemy.

With their uber-hypocrytical abuse of the law against me they've made me their enemy.

>They are constantly fighting to get you the best treatment you possibly can.

Dont make me laugh, they have well established procedures to push living humans as meat through a factory, and wait for the techs of pharmacom to make "newer, better" depressant-muscle-relaxant combinations.
If they have some real compassion for their patients at all, they simply hope for pharmacom to make "the final pill", that would actually help schizos (lose the voices without "side-effects")

The evidence is in the fact that they refuse to provide psychological help to patients (on closed wards and "above that").
THAT is actual work, the kind that requires creativity and an open mind.
Procedural work like psychiatry still does exclusively, is like working at mcDonnalds or in a warehouse.
Fixing a human brain WILL require creative work per patient.
But eventually a large set of solutions to many mental problems in the form of logic-tied-to-emotions may prove to ease such work again.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by jk197x]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


>This other poster here...he is not rational and exhibits deeply grained paranoia. But he hits th enail on the head when he talks about the social stigma of being "schizo".

Well, considering i'm the only 1 in this thread who so vehemently exposed that stigma here, you must be talking about me again.
Too rude to call me by name, eh..

And what exactly am i paranoid about?
Does my still fairly diplomatic criticism of psychiatric procedures, with evidence and (ealier vid: ) accounts of many other people INCLUDING psychiatrists, which you time and time again refuse to comment on, make me paranoid?

Gosh, that sounds very eh, stigmatizing!

Many from the psychiatric camp are self-delusionals who are so good at lying to themselves and the world (it's all about keeping that innocent looking poker face intact! ), that they can convince the public and judges of the "need" to discriminate and lock up about 1% of the population, and drug them into oblivion.

And yet when they have a critic in their "legal" claws, their true face shows and the most sadistic of punishments are used to "keep a patient in line".

I've been pushed from medium-security closed wards into the very depressing high-security ward for talking to other patients about psychology (ok, i'll admit i called it a research project at the time)
I've been threatened with high-security ward stays when i dared to speak up about a "doctor" missing his appointment and waking me from a nap later for the talk.
I've heard from a patient who once swore loudly at nurses & doctors, and was then put on "electroshock treatment". But they'd lower the sedatives used in that procedure so that the patient felt pain.

Psychiatrists have a often very convincing innocent do-gooders poker face they show to the world, but that is to protect their priviliged status.
What they actually do, is creating hell on earth for the majority of their patients, while making a good living off it (as one psychiatrist who i've asked about it so blatantly confirmed).


[edit on 5-3-2010 by jk197x]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


>For what its worth, in my role as a front line staff in that hospital all those years ago, I would escort patients to their court hearings. On more than 1 occassion I saw the judge release the person (and a few times it bit him in the butt later).

Yea, the ones who are truely not in psychosis, get released.

I've been locked up and heavily drugged for no other official reason than traveling alone in australia, and saw no judge other than (after 2 months) the "patients rights" representative, who helped me get onto the path towards release.
I had committed no crime at all, hadn't harassed or insulted anyone, and yet, without a judge, they could lock me up for over a well over a month. iirc, they started "guided walks" after about 5 weeks of lockup.
I came for help to them because i was having trouble maintaining a regular sleep rhythm, and was having telepathic experiences.
I suspect me talking about telepathy to them, caused them to judge me to be in need of lockup.
But i can honestly say at the time i was _not_ disconnected from reality as normal people live it, i was able to focus a conversation led by someone else, and my explanations of my experiences were reasonably short and well built up.
So while they judge me
a) in a psychosis, which i wasn't at the time
b) "dangerous" enough to lock me up despite me having committed no other crimes than 2x slightly speeding on a motorcycle.
And on top of that, they abuse (as usual) all medical authority and use the law and threat of physical force to pump me full of heavy doses of stuff that only makes me weaker and less able to deal with problems that thanks to those "meds" can grow to physical, terrifying pain.


And the patients who lie about their experiences and "act normal" (so no esp talk),
stand a good chance of being released aswell.

Psychiatry can neither spot the fake patient, nor the real patient who is moderately good at hiding his condition.

>Due process is due process, at least in my fairly expansive experience.

Maybe that was true where you worked.
But in my experience the legal protections of patients are largely fake.
I've had my lawyer "explain" to me how "nothing could be done about those accusations of violent behaviour that you say are totally false", in the 45 minutes before "trial".
I've had that same lawyer tell me "ah, you really shouldnt bother to legally address the issue of false imprisonment. (he used a local proverb)". in other words, my lawyer advises me to not insist on my rights, to accept false accusations and imprisonment.
I've had the "independent psychiatrist" accept false accusations as reason for longer imprisonment, with a smile on her face, and the statement "ah, but i wasn't there eh..".

Got more lies from your unwritten propaganda book to make your camp seem like the good guys, texan?



[edit on 5-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 5-3-2010 by jk197x]

[edit on 5-3-2010 by jk197x]