Dr. Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D,B.C.S.A.,DAPA.

Dr. Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D,B.C.S.A.,DAPA.
e-mail: batushkad@yahoo.com

Saturday, October 20, 2007

AGENTS OF OPPRESSION

I recall working with a young man who had undergone sexual trauma at the age of 4. He lived in a chaotic family with an aggressive, addicted father. There was little positives spoken to this young man. He had an extensive history of psychiatric hospitalizations. What I began to note was that within the hospital setting he was able to 'conform' and was discharged in only a few weeks, but problems would erupt again once sent home leading to further hospitalizations. In one instance, this young man stayed in the home of those outside his family. Though there remained some challenges, he apeared calmer and more able to communicate.
I recall a similar instance with another child. The step-father was abusive both verbally and physically. The mother often because of her own fear would 'cover' for the step-father's actions. The child in one on one settings never created any disturbance. However, his behaviors in the home were often 'disturbing'. I was pleased that during my work with him he was not hospitalized at any point nor on psychiatric drugs. However, I was aware that he had a prior history of this many times over. In both of these situations, I saw the fmaily dynamics as oppressive and detrimental and tried my best to help the children navigate through the challenges with the system doing little to collaborate in meeting these children's needs.
In light of these two situations, and hearing of others from colleagues, I determined that it was the home, the family dynamics that was the catalyst for making these children 'mad'. When apart from these dynamics, they were able to conform to the rules of the institutions because they were forced to do so. But really what were the psychiatrists accomplishing for them? They merely subdued them with drugs, forced their compliance, and returned them to the same oppressive environment which led to their being hospitalized in the first place. It became evident that the psychiatric establishment could really care less, for each admission added to their coffers. The family was pleased to create a scapegoat rather than addressing the core problem and to ahve a place to send the 'disturbed child' to so that they could continue in their own self-interest.

No comments: