28 year old untreated schizophrenic stabs mother 77 times

Let's have some subjective comparative reasoning’s..

There is a difference between a developmentally disabled Hispanic clapping and a psychotic murderer trying to beat up other patients.

There is a difference between someone trying to pound there head on a floor needing meds trying to harm themselves and me sitting quietly in a phone booth talking to family and being forced drugged for no reason. Also me just being there because of needing a place to stay, yet even that is disputable ultimately.

One day, in the future, the allowance to do such things, to treat people this way, especially the non-volatile, will be a scare in the history books.

Some people are so insane that indeed they have lost who they were entirely, such as murderers that are mentally ill. Until then, the system cannot be so non-subjective and too convenient with such treatment methodologies, freedom is a precious thing.

Concerned Citizen wrote:http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/JeremyPerkins/
Anti-Psychiatry: Ruining lives one mother and son at a time.

That is a gross oversimplification of both the article and anti-psychiatry. It is also unnecessary fearmongering.

Scientology is a cult, and it is dangerous to it's members. The fact that it is against psychiatry only secondary to keeping you dependant upon them. That should be taken into account.

It is my understanding that not all schizophrenics are murderers waiting to happen.

If one is to believe that all schizophrenics were about to kill their family, that does not mean that everyone else should be overmedicated alongside the schizophrenics.

Antipsychiatry does not mean there should be no assistance. It is an opposition to psychiatry, and it's treatment model. Different people in the antipsychiatry movement have different views on what is an acceptable alternative, or if one should be present.

Scientology is something I do not like. I also do not really like anti-psychiatry. However there are fundimental rights and freedoms to concern. IF one is against those freedoms move outside of the U.S.A, this is a free country.

NathanY wrote: IF one is against those freedoms move outside of the U.S.A, this is a free country.

NathanY wrote:Scientology is something I do not like. I also do not really like anti-psychiatry. However there are fundimental rights and freedoms to concern. IF one is against those freedoms move outside of the U.S.A, this is a free country.

Would those freedoms include my freedom of speech to refer to something as a cult, because I was unaware that I couldn't.

In the interest of not diluting my point in a debate, I will elaborate. I do not care about the beleif of Scientologists. When I was referring to it as a dangerous cult, I was referring to the behavior of an organisation and not the beleifs of the members of the organisation.

The cult behaviors I was referring to include the sabotage of a person's support network outside of the group, and creating a dependancy on the group. Due to this, the person would be less able to seek out alternative assistance for any problems related to schizophrenia.

Also a situation of total dependancy on any group can play havok with even a "normal" mind.

That is why I felt it was topical enough to mention. Otherwise, I wouldn't bother.

The term cult can be applied and misapplied. I suppose in a mild way it can be considered one.

Psychiatry in some senses is a cult as well and in others a terrorist group. The psychiatric cult instills fear into its potential long-term members by threatening individuals to comply with forced drugging. The terrorist then proceed to contain the person by force and or psychological threat with bodily and emotional harms if he or she does not comply.

By comparison psychiatry is a higher classification of a cult then that of silly scientology. It is the cult which is transparent to its own defined reasoning’s of that of cultism classifications, it is what defines others as cults symptomatologically. It thus is immune to such reasonings, the normal and if one does not assimilate to its normalism, one is sick and ill and in need of drugging.

I am not attempting to state that either is better or worse. It has no bearing on my argument, because I was not favoring either. The act of violence was being attributed to the fact that Scientology is opposed to psychiatry, and therefore we are to understand that antipsych is the cause of the death. I had simply stated that there are other factors which were not being considered.

I have no vested interest in comparing the two, nor am I interested in doing so. I certainly have no intent to do so without much more statistical information on both groups.

It is sarcasm.

NathanY wrote:It is sarcasm.

Then I completely didn't understand your statement,

The group dynamics of a cult by comparison to that of the dynamics of the group whom force drug people with fear and threats, hence a terrorist’s cult. Obviously it must be sarcasm as to believe psychiatry in some factions is a cult or terroristic would be considered irrational, the comparison was and still is an insult sarcastically.