The conversation has begun! NAMI has Robert Whitaker speak at convention. NAMI member responds… http://wp.me/p5nnb-9p3

[GiaK]

http://wp.me/p5nnb-9p3

 

please share this in your networks...this dialogue is so important!! Happy it's happening

[compsports]

Thanks, I have been closely following the coverage and read Kathy's account.  I tried to post a comment but am totally confused by the log in procedures.   Anyway, I am glad you cautioned that tapering needs to be done slowly.

 

I still have to pinch myself that this dialogue is occurring. But it really is and that is fantastic.

 

CS

[Finn]

This is very cool!

 

I hope that those of us on this side of the discussion need to be ready with thorough, accurate information and clear, reasonable ways to improve the mental health system. This is in no way a black and white issue; it is incredibly complex and personalized.

[TJo]

I'm so excited to see this. When I involved my family doctor in my psychiatry care, she said many doctors are moving towards prescribing less meds and treating mental health from a more holistic perspective. Please let them listen and understand that each of us is different and need careful and tailored care. I'm so proud of the people speaking up and proud of the people listening with open minds. It can be better. It will be better.

[alexjuice]

I was involved with a NAMI satellite group that was very pro-psychiatric model and I still get mail from the group. When I first got on the mailing list the adminsitrators delivered the party line and tolerated no dissent. Is a mental illness syndromes specific biological things with corresponding, effective and generally-safe pharmacolgical treatment? What color is the sky? Blue, next question.

 

I have noticed that overtime the tone has really shifted to much more tolerance towards dissent from the party line and openness to altneratives.

 

This group, is funded by the local NAMI chapter and was founded by a NAMI employee (now a board member)...

 

I personally don't think NAMI is near the place where they can actually help me or people in my situation. However it'd be nice if they stopped advocating for the poisoning of their membership. We'll have to see about that. I remain pretty doubtful about the situation in my town as I read a recent annual report and saw that about 50% of the total operating budget came from donations from a handful of multi-national pharmaceutical giants.

[alexjuice]

I read the blog post and most of the comments at Kathy Brandt and feel ahorrible sadness. It is hard to get back in time to when i thought i 'needed' antipsychotics. as lousy as things have been since coming off the drugs, I rarely think back to my drugged years because it remains too upsetting and unfathomable.

 

I am really angry about my life and sad for people who are unaware of the information that I possess -- learned from people like Whitaker. It's very overhelming. I forget often that there are 3 groups of people. Group1: People who don't think about antispychotics much at all. 2. People who think they are miracle drugs for their loved one or self 3. People who started in Group 1 then spent a long time in Group2 and now feel alienated from everyone except other members of Group 3. And group 3 is very very small.

 

Sadness. Darkness.

[Finn]

Group1: People who don't think about antispychotics much at all. 2. People who think they are miracle drugs for their loved one or self 3. People who started in Group 1 then spent a long time in Group2 and now feel alienated from everyone except other members of Group 3. And group 3 is very very small.

 

 

And group 3 needs to be the spark that creates a group 4--people who will encounter what we now call mental illness but will receive compassionate, empowering care for their emotional needs, a group that won't be told their different and then asked to sit quietly accepting their lot.

[compsports]

To be fair, when I was on meds, if anyone questioned them like we do on this site, I would get very upset. Still not sure why I did but it defnitely happened.  Maybe I felt threatened that what I was doing might not be working and in fact could be harmful.

Anyway, I try to keep that in mind when reading posts from people who get so upset with Whitaker.

 

Also, in all fairness, if a relative has seen someone's functioning be horrible and then greatlly improve with antipsychotics, it is understandable that they would find what Whitaker has to say to be threatening. They feel like they are in a dammed if you do and dammed if you don't situation.  I think we all can relate to that.

 

CS

[Aria]

The more info that is out there the better. At one time I thought psyche drugs were helping (on 6 drugs I couldn't really think) but in fact they almost killed me (literally--Seroquel induced pancreatitis) and the terrible side effects my pdoc simply ignored. I did walk away from it all injured but hopeful. One particular comment that stood out to me was about being branded and how having a psychiatric diagnosis was permanent. No one who hasn't experienced being poly drugged and wrongly labeled can not understand. I have a sibling who is a psychologist and they still don't "get it" that these drugs are highly dangerous.