Robert Whitaker Speaks at NAMI convention

Cledwyn Bulbs wrote:Well, Whitaker's no better. Look at the procrustean standards of the MIA community. He doesn't value individual differences, be they differences of opinion, differences of expression, emotional differences. Perhaps he knows how it feels now...

I don't understand this comment? whitaker dosnt value individual differences etc etc? where did u read that? id like to read it.

Devilock wrote:

Cledwyn Bulbs wrote:Well, Whitaker's no better. Look at the procrustean standards of the MIA community. He doesn't value individual differences, be they differences of opinion, differences of expression, emotional differences. Perhaps he knows how it feels now...

I don't understand this comment? whitaker dosnt value individual differences etc etc? where did u read that? id like to read it.

I didn't read anything. I am capable of making my own mind up based on the testimony provided by my eyes and the experience I have had on his website. I merely made inferences based on the standards of his community, which struck me as oppressive and discriminatory in both content and application, especially towards angry patients. Of course, Whitaker would deny this, as would all his disciples who have invested this man with messianic qualities as if he moved in the firmament or something, but to me, the standards of his community savor of intolerance of real differences, no matter how he rationalizes it. The human brain, as Szasz once felicitously put it, is a rationalizing organ, not a reasoning one.

Of course, any opinion uttered by Whitaker or that comes with his imprimatur is going to have legitimacy in the eyes of his supporters, and although I agree with much of what he has said, I am not one of his supporters, ergo I am not as inclined as some to take seriously the rationalizations he, through his moderators, advances in support of policies distinguished in my opinion by their disregard for real differences, hence my comment that he doesn't put a high premium on tolerance of differences of opinion, emotion and expression, otherwise he simply wouldn't moderate his website. It's a simple deduction for anyone to make, apart that is from his steadily accreting mass of followers who prejudge his every word as if it issued from the mouth of an oracle, some of whom seem to have collectively abdicated the responsibility of thinking for themselves. Based on what I have seen, and notwithstanding his rationalizations to the contrary, whatever tolerance he has does not withstand the test of confrontation with opinions, emotions and modes of expression that overreach the limits of most people's tolerance.

TBC below

Moderation, by definition, is about the process of eliminating extremes, and is a tool of normalization, and the conclusion follows ineluctably from this premise that anyone who uses it is no supporter of freedom of speech, expression and opinion. Such people, and people who support such people, can't have their cake and eat it. They can't support or practice moderation, censorship or any other infringements of these principles enshrined in documents such as the constitution, and act as if they are champions of the foregoing at the same time.

One commenter pulls the old "experience card", as if having a family member conferred a level of knowledge and insight that should be deemed beyond question. Witchhunters had a lot of experience dealing with supposed witches, does that mean they were right about them? Just because someone is a family member, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you, or that they are in relation to their family members these kind of transhistorical and transcultural intellectual beings. Being a family member or having experience with a group of individuals does not mean that you aren't caught up in the web of prejudices, superstitions (secular and religious), assumptions and lunacies of our age and our culture. Family members throughout history have believed all sorts of nonsense about their relations, which at the very least weakens the logical force of their claims to authority on this issue.

I think some of the parents of children that take there kids to psychiatrists are afflicted with this disorder to some degree:


Munchausen syndrome by proxy


A form of Munchausen syndrome in which a person induces or claims to observe a disease in another, usually a close relative, in order to attract the doctor's attention to herself or himself.

Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSBP) is a covert, potentially lethal, and frequently misunderstood form of child abuse. Although not uncommon, this syndrome is difficult to detect and confirm.[1]

In 1951, Dr Richard Asher originally used the term Munchausen syndrome to describe adults who fabricated illnesses to get medical attention, with no secondary gain except to adopt the role of illness through unnecessary medical procedures and treatments.[2] The term was used in reference to the 18th–century military mercenary Baron von Münchhausen, who was known for fictional and dramatic accounts of his travels.

In 1977, Roy Meadow coined the term Munchausen syndrome by proxy to describe 2 mothers who fabricated, lied, and induced symptoms in their 2 children.[3] One of the children had a history of prolonged and recurrent passing of purulent bloody urine, and the other had a history of recurrent hypernatremia. The first child, whose symptoms occurred only in her mother's presence, improved during psychiatric treatment of the mother for her abusive behavior. The second child's symptoms occurred only at home, and he died as a result of severe hypernatremia. In 1994, Meadow reported that the boy's mother admitted to her psychiatrist that she killed her son by salt poisoning.

These 2 cases underline the importance of early recognition of Munchausen syndrome by proxy and the seriousness of its consequences. In this discussion, several aspects of Munchausen syndrome by proxy are reviewed, including its definition, prevalence, characteristics of the perpetrators and their victims, complications, diagnosis, and management strategies.

In 1994, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), used the term factitious disorder by proxy (FDP) to describe a psychiatric illness of the perpetrator who fabricates or inflicts illnesses on her victims. Some perpetrators may have other motives besides psychiatric illnesses.

The American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC) introduced the following term pediatric condition falsification (PCF) to describe the condition in the abused child. PCF may or may not be associated with FDP. However, the APSAC requires the presence of both FDP and PCF to diagnose Munchausen syndrome by proxy.

The term medical child abuse (MCA) was proposed recently by Roesler and Jenny to describe the excessive, unnecessary and harmful medical or surgical treatments unknowingly imposed on the child at the instigation of a caregiver

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/917525-overview

cheldwin, I'll check out whitakers website, I havnt heard any of that about him, I thought he was a great supporter of psych survivors. I have heard some complaints about breggin, surviros were saying he wasn't interetested in having the patients viewpoint expressed at organized events, he was more interested in ppl and proffestionals (who shared his view of psychiatry) to speak and he was not very sympathetic towards the patiends emotional needs during the telling of their stories ie. that they might be upset or affected somewhat after telling their stories. But i'll try and find out more about whitaker. I still respect breggin and im disappointed to hear the complaints.
RE. munchousen by proxy - I have always suspected my abusive mother had this syndrome as she was basically the one who ran around to drs, lcoked me up all the time and diagnosed me herself. She made up symtoms to the drs to suit her own agenda. But basically her motives were more sinister , ie. she found pleasure in the hurt that she was causing me. I guess she did still enjoy the attention of the drs to some level, but it was more about doing anything to hurt me and getting me diagnosed mi, was one of them.

http://www.madinamerica.com/2012/05/ant ... do-better/

so is it really that bad to have anosognosia when if you compliant you at worse odd for the long term

-- Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:10 pm --

and the NAMI patient that ran away after the speech was threatened by his mother with homelessness making him unwelcome unless he was on psychiatric medication...if that isnt hostile I don't know what is...

]

Razael wrote:and the NAMI patient that ran away after the speech was threatened by his mother with homelessness making him unwelcome unless he was on psychiatric medication...if that isnt hostile I don't know what is...

Try this ,

Copy_Cat wrote:Roy Meadow coined the term Munchausen syndrome by proxy to describe 2 mothers who fabricated, lied, and induced symptoms in their 2 children

Like turning over furniture in the house to make things look chaotic before calling the police and accusing a person of mental illness, like NAMI suggests.

Jaffe and "Turn Over Furniture" see: http://www.patrisser.com/family/JaffeTu ... niture.htm

Ive heard that quote before from NAMi, God there is something seriously wrong with ppl who would do that to their relative.

BTW, the web address, patrisser.com, im re reading thru his web page now, read thru it years ago and really like him cause he speaks out allot about abusive parents who work hand in hand with psychiatry and what they are like and how trauma may account for symptoms of an 'illness'.
Have a look thru his web page its awesome!