As Nikolas Rose goes into the advances made in "The Decade of the Brain," he quotes Michael Trimble in claiming that, "with our present knowledge the distinction between 'organic' and 'functional' melts away, stripped of its Cartesian dualism." (pg 180) Advances in psychiatry takes on a more biological role in the studies of: brain chemistry, brain functions, experimental modeling systems, investigative techniques, human subjects, and truth technologies. And it is these great discoveries and testing that altered the crazy into just ailing "one located within the brain, metal disorders can sometimes, and somehow, escape from the stigma of madness, and become simply diseases like any others." And once they can be identified they can be treated with psychopharmaceuticals. Were these drugs really meant to treat an individual of a psychiatric illness? Or were these drugs created for profit? and where can a mentally ill person seek help?
Since the United States allows direct-to-consumer advertising, "'disease mongering' has become a key marketing tactic," where "ethical" shifts in tactics would just bring in more marketing expenses. (pg 214-215) So consumers have excepted this educational role because it also gives them insite and a share of responsibility in managing their mental health. "Person's are increasingly demanding control over the medical practices that subject them, seeking multiple forms of expert and nonexpert advice in devising their life strategies, and demanding that medics act as the servants and not the masters of this process." (pg 218) However, they're not, and so it becomes a "mind game" between self study and marketing techniques to convince the consumer that their psychopharmaceutical is what the mentally ailing person needs. Which easily encourages consumers to undergo the consumer-industry relationship. But what about the psychiatrists themselves? Are they objective doctor's or puppets to the drug companies?
The above photo is from the "the Great Scientology Protest against Psychiatry in San Francisco" in 2009. Apparently, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) is the nationwide organization to which most psychiatrists belong. Dr. Loren Mosher, who resigned from the APA, states that, "a large proportion of its income is from drug company advertising in its journals and newspaper. It also receives 'unrestricted educational grants' and convention revenue from drug companies. Drug company sponsored symposia and exhibitions dominate the two major annual psychiatric conventions." She goes on to state that it is her opinion that, "the APA is so dependent on pharmaceutical company support that it can not afford to criticize the overuse and misuse of psychotropic drugs. Perhaps more importantly, the APA is unwilling to mandate education of psychiatrists about the the seriousness of the short and long-term toxicities and withdrawal reactions from the drugs." And it's spreading. These psychopharmaceuticals are not being prescribed to the "crazy" but also to everyone else; children and adult alike. Suddenly, depression, anxiety, excess energy, or not enough energy, are all causes for "treatment" with drugs that are made for profit by doctors that are paid to prescribe them.
There are doctors that "opposition to the escalating overuse of psychiatric medications, the oppressive diagnosing and drugging of children, electroshock, lobotomy, involuntary treatment, and false biological theories," and Dr. Peter Breggin is one of them. On his website he has many articles about legal cases, scientific papers, and drug hazards along with key articles like "Violence and Suicide caused by Antidepressants" and "Mental dysfunction and addiction caused by benzodiazepines". This Harvard trained psychiatrist probably sees the irony when people call him "the conscience of psychiatry".
"Were these drugs really meant to treat an individual of a psychiatric illness?" I had asked. On page 211 of Nikolas book "Politics of life itself: biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century" he suggests that, "such drugs do not so much seek to normalize a deviant but to correct anomalies, to adjust the individual and restore and maintain his or her capacity to enter the circuits of everyday life." Take Luvox, for example, is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRIs) sometimes prescribed for the treatment of depression associated with bipolar disorder. Although the list of negative side affects is four times as long as the product description, it does help them enter the circuits of everyday life. So it is apparent that there are people that need this psychopharmaceuticals. But if the ruling party is a company who is only interested in earning more money, and have executive-regulation through a form of monetary control over physicians, schools, and hospitals, then how can the profession ever be objective? It can't. And so it will continue on in the form of "contemporary neurochemical selfhood, the blurring of the boundaries between treatment, recovery, manipulation, ..." (pg 223) until some ailments are helped and some are created.
Bibliography
Rose, Nikolas S. 2007. Politics of life itself: biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
"How Drug Company Money Has Corrupted Psychiatry." Loren R. Mosher, M.D. http://www.antipsychiatry.org/mosher.loren.1.htm
"Photos From the Great Scientology Protest against Psychiatry in San Francisco." San Francisco Citizen. http://sfcitizen.com/blog/2009/05/16/photos-from-the-great-scientology-protest-against-psychiatry-in-san-francisco (May 16th, 2009)
"Psychiatric Drug Facts with Dr. Peter Breggin." http://www.breggin.com (2008)
No comments:
Post a Comment