tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4162219926742636994.post2359298698883094329..comments2024-02-21T11:40:12.974-05:00Comments on BizOMadness: “Doing” Antipsychiatry on all Cylinders: Possibilities, Enigmas, ChallengesJerky LeBoeufhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06022293362312800819noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4162219926742636994.post-24950470817627740552015-04-24T08:58:27.351-04:002015-04-24T08:58:27.351-04:00(Repetition of above with missing word inserted)
... (Repetition of above with missing word inserted)<br /><br />Let me suggest that there is a fundamental logical fallacy inherent in looking at all things that call themselves "treatments" as is a natural right that not offering them means a deprivation of freedom. We pay doctors to offer certain services to the public under the understanding that they do indeed serve. If it can shown that anything is a disservice, doctors simply should not be offering it. In this regard, that is different than interfering with what people under their own initiative do to themselves.bonniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18085948021344637537noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4162219926742636994.post-9762199553575150682015-04-17T00:39:39.665-04:002015-04-17T00:39:39.665-04:00It's not about whether a total ban is "im...It's not about whether a total ban is "impossible", banning books, certain races, whatever, all sorts of total bans have been politically achieved in human history. It is about whether you have the moral right to deny people a procedure that they want to acquire, in my view, you don't. You're being totalitarian and it is not a good look. Hundreds of thousands of more people swear by electroshock than they did for lobotomy. You stand zero chance of banning it. <br /><br />Do you wish to outlaw naturopathy? chiropractic? all sorts of quack "treatments" that involve adding things to the body or manipulating the body but are also not "medical" in the sense of mainstream evidence based modern medicine? Or are you prepared to allow them the freedom to exist? Would a number of people claiming their back pain got worse from chiropractic manipulation turn you into a crusader to "totally ban" chiropractic? <br /><br />I do not support a ban on CONSENSUAL provision and procurement of services between consenting adults. It disappoints me that you do.<br /><br />Businesses offer laser hair removal and call it a "treatment", you don't, I don't, psychiatry doesn't, the government doesn't, have a monopoly on the word "treatment". If someone wants to pay to get electric shocks through their brain, or pay to get ink injected into their skin in the form of a tattoo, a cohort of regretters, does not justify a total ban on consensual services.<br /><br />It is totalitarian to want to use the state to make it a crime for the electroshock CONSENSUAL seekers and providers to engage in what to them is a mutually beneficial relationship. <br /><br />The "day of protest" (at other people's consensual freedom to buy and acquire electroshock), remains the most embarrassing strategic mistake of 2015 for this movement. It's embarrassing. <br /><br />Next you'll be saying the psychiatric drugs should be "total banned" for the same rationale.<br /><br />It's not just disappointing that you think a ban could every fly, it's disappointing that you think you have the right to tell people what they can and can't seek out as an option. Very disappointing. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4162219926742636994.post-1762759338550131072015-04-11T07:15:03.820-04:002015-04-11T07:15:03.820-04:00Let me suggest that there is a fundamental logical...Let me suggest that there is a fundamental logical inherent in looking at all things that call themselves "treatments" as is a natural right that not offering them means a deprivation of freedom. We pay doctors to offer certain services to the public under the understanding that they do indeed serve. If it can shown that anything is a disservice, doctors simply should not be offering it. In this regard, that is different than interfering with what people under their own initiative do to themselves.bonniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18085948021344637537noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4162219926742636994.post-19696005083409592642015-04-10T17:05:39.661-04:002015-04-10T17:05:39.661-04:00Doctors minimally should not be administering proc...Doctors minimally should not be administering procedures as if they are medical treatments when they are not. And ECT, in this regard ,qualifies, for no credible medical claim can be made for it. Note also that mostly (albeit not totally) lobotomy was stopped albeit there were people who swore that it helped them. The point is, no a total ban on doctors offering ECT is not impossible, for we have had comparable things happen in the past.bonniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18085948021344637537noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4162219926742636994.post-19128432879561480812015-04-08T22:59:01.510-04:002015-04-08T22:59:01.510-04:00The number one failed strategy this year in the &#...The number one failed strategy this year in the 'movement', is this mindless assumption that society will ever ban voluntary ECT. Yes, many people regret ECT. Yes, it's a ridiculous electric shock pseudoscience and not a real 'treatment' for anything. Yes, like many voluntary acts at causes harm, like smoking does. But you're dreaming if you think that hundreds of thousands of people who consented to it and identify as finding it helpful, are going to tolerate their freedom to fry their brains being taken away. This kind of totalitarian impulse, banning consensual, voluntary psychiatry, is totally misguided, focus on forced psychiatry. Society can see the clear violence and terror of forced psychiatry. It's disappointing that anyone in this movement thinks that a total 'ban' on voluntary shock, is ever going to fly. It's not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com