LAZARUS HOUSE UPDATE AND THANKS TO ARCHBISHOP JOHN KERSEY

First, I must say how thankful I am to be a clergyman of the Liberal Catholic Apostolic Church and to have a supportive and loving Archbishop. Archbishop John Kersey has greatly supported my efforts for a humane mental health system and the Lazarus House project is now mentioned at the Church website at
http://www.liberalcatholics.org
The Liberal Catholic Apostolic Church is an indepedent catholic body respecting freedom of conscience and seeking to share and live Divine Love.
Lazarus House needs to raise funds towards becoming a reality. We need your help. Lazarus House will be a safe and loving environment for distressed people where they can reduce dependency on psychiatric drugs and feel respected and heard. Please contact me if you can help.
DoctorEdmunds@DrDanEdmunds.com

Dan L. Edmunds,Ed.D.
www.humanepsychiatry.info

LAZARUS HOUSE: SUPPORT FOR PERSONS LABELED WITH MENTAL ILLNESS

I am collaborating with Connie Shuster of Artists for Recovery in establishing a residence in Philadelphia that will offer a safe and supportive environment for people undergoing serious emotional distress. It will be a place where they can be heard and validated and focus on inner discovery. It will also help in reducing dependency on psychiatric drugs. We greatly need support to make this happen. Please contact me or Connie if you would like to help this effort. See the website below for contact info:
http://www.geocities.com/stnektarios/DISTRESS5.html

http://www.artistsforrecovery.com

http://www.DrDanEdmunds.com

Scranton, Pennsylvania and Human Rights

As a resident of the Scranton metro area, it has been exciting for me to see the expansion of our efforts for a more humane mental health system locally. In addition, I was informed that the Institute for Religion and Public Policy will be locating to the Scranton area. It is great to see efforts for the promotion of human rights flourishing in the Scranton area.

Dan L.Edmunds,Ed.D.
www.humanepsychiatry.info

Creating a Sanctuary to Safely Come Off Psychiatric Drugs

Connie Shuster of Artists for Recovery is working on a great project in Philadelphia. The project will be similar in scope to Soteria and provide distressed persons a safe and supportive residential environment in which to come off of toxic psychiatric drugs. This is a huge undertaking. I am pleased to support Connie's efforts and hope others will support this project. If you can assist or would like more information about the development of LAZARUS HOUSE, please contact me via the ICHP website:
http://www.humanepsychiatry.info

Dan L. Edmunds,Ed.D.

IS COMPASSION A RADICAL IDEA?

At times and by some, when I have shared ideas about a more humane and compassionate mental health system I have been looked upon as a radical. These are not radical ideas but common sense ideas. They are ideas based on our human potential to love and be benevolent. Force and coercion never solve problems, it only creates more trauma. I sadly see this in the children's mental health system where children are vulnerable and have no voice. I have seen the abuses firsthand. Mental health services have become not about mental health and well being but about control through drugs. If a person shakes and convulses because of the drugs, too bad, we will force you because we 'know what is best for you' Giving people a sense of empowerment and choice and building a relationship is what truly helps in recovery, the Soteria project proved this. But there is much money to be made in drugs, compassion does not pay. We want a quick fix or we want not to be troubled by disturbing people. Sedate them, what value do they have anyway? This is how our present society operates. I see this in some families where they seek to create their model child through technology (drugs) but destroy the child and his spirit in the process. What is normal? As Laing statedn normal man has killed millions of his fellow normal men. Hopefully in time we can come to the realization that compassion is not a radical idea, it is rather a noble idea and the best quality of being human.

Dan L. Edmunds,Ed.D.

A FEW REFLECTIONS FROM MY PAST WORK WITH VETERANS GIVEN THE DIAGNOSIS OF 'SCHIZOPHRENIA'

I recall my interactions with a number of veterans living together in a group home. A number carried a diagnosis of 'schizophrenia'. I served as a chaplain for some of these individuals and many of them became my friends. I fondly remember Joe in particular. He had been in the Vietnam War and came back with serious emotional scars. He would often repeat at times, 'the shock was awful and tremendous'. I would later learn that he had been subjected to electroshock 'treatments'. Joe used to come to the chapel and we would sit and have coffee. Joe enjoyed coversation and I invited him to help set up for services and to participate as an altar server. Joe always was helpful. There were times that Joe would have some unusual behaviors but I tolerated them, and sought to know his experiences and who he was as a person. I recall one of the more unusual experiences was finding Joe in the middle of the road, kneeling, and looking towards the sky. I stopped my car and asked Joe what he was doing in the road. "I am praying." I jokingly said, 'well, I hope you are praying not to get hit by a car." Joe laughed and I took his hand and led him back to his home. I told Joe that if he wanted to pray that his room would be a far better setting. I saw the immense power in joining in, building a relationship, and seeking to understand. I remember as well that there as a veteran who frequently could annoy others and be disruptive when there was a religious service. He would ask me, "can I have some wine" and repeat this as a mantra. Though I was not sure if he was allowed to have the wine, I agreed to give him a cup at the end of the service if he would agree to respect the others. He was very respectful and together we shared a cup of wine. From there, we began a conversation, and he also began to be more kind to to the others in the group home.

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrdanEdmunds.com
www.HumanePsychiatry.info

WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT A SYSTEM GONE 'MENTAL'

A PLAN FOR TREATING THE INSANITY IN THE MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM- WHAT WE MUST DO


First, we must stop looking through the eyes of a medical model, where we see children as broken and disordered and attempts are made to attributing their behaviors and emotions solely to a malfunctioning brain. There is no evidence supporting the psychopathology of a number of disorders. The linkage between the pharmaceutical companies and psychiatry needs to be evaluated as well as the information that is disseminated via the research and materials provided by pharmaceutical company money. One such example is CHADD, the 'support' group for parents of children diagnosed with ADHD that has received a great deal of his funding from the pharmceutical companies. The goal should be to examine the underlying factors of a child's behavior, looking at the child with dignity and respect, and seeing the child as one in conflict rather than a person who is disordered. Such stigmatization remains indefinitely, and labels can often become a self fulfilling prophecy and will follow our children for years to come and shape the way that they view themselves and also the way others view them, particularly the educational system. We cannot look to solely the most cost effective solution when our children's lives are at stake. Indeed, providing a prescription may control aspects of behavior and be though to have a 'therapeutic effect' but never gets to the root cause, and whereas it is far less expensive to medicate than to provide ongoing psychotherapy, it is appropriate and compassionate counsel that will make the difference. Second, the realm of psychotherapy must return to its orginal roots. The word psychotherapy literally means the healing of the soul. We must return the soul to therapy, encouraging therapists to instill within themselves the principles of compassion and empathy that are crucial for any therapeutic relationship to blossom forth. Therapists need to be compassionate and creative, and willing to give additional time and effort to see that a child's needs are met and to also provide community linkages and ongoing support within their environment and to encourage the least restrictive setting for our children. The coercion of parents and families into forced 'treatments' needs to be eliminated. Third, the educational system must be willing to accomodate to meet the various learning styles of children and not seek to place them in a box of rote learning or limit them to one particulat style. Some children may falter in a visual setting and need a hands on approach, whereas others may need other methods of encouraging their effective learning. We must return time, attention, and individuality to the classroom. Fourth, parents need to continue to take an active role in the lives of their children, providing ongoing guidance, validating emotions and not taking a dismissive, disapproving, or hands off approach. Rather, parents must be involved in helping the children develop their own sense of being, and being able to assess themselves. Parents need to avoid nagging their children and becoming entrapped in the propaganda that their children are disordered and need drugs to function. Fifth, our society must change in it attitudes. We are a society where we try to find our answers to ailments within a simple pill. We are a society that has unfortunately lost sight for the welfare of our children. We are a societry where we are prosperous, yet greed often blinds us. Such disorders such as ADHD can be looked upon as a social construct. 90% of Ritalin sales are in the US. This tells us that there is something to be examined within our society that needs correction. Somewhere along the line we have failed our children. This is not to lay blame on any particular individual but to understand that our children are in crisis, and it is up to all of us to take the steps for change. We need to rely less on psychiatry and its devices to solve our problems and more on what we can do within ourselves- to take a holistic approach, to understand the child as a whole person- physical, emotional, and spiritual, and to examine in each of these areas where there may be difficulties that can be alleviated. We need to rely less on others dictating the course of our own and our children's lives and develop workable plan within our own family structure. Nothing will ever be perfect, but even in the most serious disturbances, love and compassion can heal much. We must realize that in some situations within society and within our own lives, we may never be able to evoke complete change. This is the cause of much distress, not problems themselves but how we respond to them. To battle those things beyond our control can lead us to emotional distress, but if we seek live as principled individuals, we can make a difference. What we model to our children and to others has a lasting impact.


Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrdanEdmunds.com
www.HumanePsychiatry.info

Recovery

I am deeply inspired by the work of British psychologist Rufus May. Here is a gentleman suffering psychiatric abuse, diagnosed as schizophrenic and given no hope and fed the lie that he must always takepsch drugs yet recovers and becomes a psychologist! How does biopsychiatry explain such occurrences? I am pleased to support Dr. May and his work to truly understand those undergoing extreme states of mind.

Respect for Autistics Program

In the desire to offer support to autistic and developmentally different children, I have initiated a consultation program to school districts and families in Northeastern Pennsylvania and the Southern Tier of New York that focuses on relational approaches and encourages self advocacy, self determination, and helps the person be able to navigate through the mainstream. Please view the ICHP website for more info or contact me at DoctorEdmunds@DrDanEdmunds.com to arrange a consult.

KEPT IN THEIR PLACE

We are controlled in this country by a ruling elite, whether we wish to recognize it or not. The elite have their paths paved for them. The middle class struggle to survive and are burdened and the elite seek to make them slaves to the system. For example, a middle class young person will be burdened with student loan debt possibly until the day they retire, the elite do not face this. The elite have created this system to keep people 'in their place'. For the poor, the elite have sought to entice them with financial incentives if they will go along with the sad debacle of having their children labeled as 'crazy' or to be shipped off to fight the wars that the elite have created and benefit from. Some are more than willing to submit to this system, to receive the governmental handouts and to abdicate their freedom as well as any responsibility for themselves or their children. The elite seeks to keep this nation ingorant and stupid. Our educational system has become not about learning at all but rather regurgitation of information as the elite would have it. There is no present presidential candidate or any poltiician for that matter that can really save us from the mess we are in. Our only real hope is for people to flee from ignorance and to awaken to the real situation we are in, and for there to exist a true effort to restore social justice. Is it too late?
We must examine the inherent dynamics within families and within society where individuals enact violence upon one another to obtain their own particular selfish interests. This violence may be subtle and may even be said to be done because of love, but underlying it is selfish interest and desire. People are looking to fit a particular model of what it is to 'fit the norm'. Be it cosmetic surgery or psychiatric drugs, we are seeking to escape the actual realities of the human condition. We seek distractions and entertainments. We do not truly want to face the human condition. We only seek to try to escape it. Those who do not fit to our desires are made to be scapegoats, or they are shuffled away, or their freedom is taken away from them. We do not seek to udnerstand them nor do we want to understand them. In families, there can often be one child who is designated 'the problem' and all the dysfunction and turmoil of the family is laid upon this child. They will be the one drugged into submission or sent away so that the family can continue to pursue their selfish interests.
Can we once again become people of compassion? Can we once again be people of understanding? Can we accept what it means to be human? Can we be a human family?

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrDanEdmunds.com

CHILDREN IN THE MIDST OF CONFLICT

When children have experieced abuse and abandonment in early childhood, this often becomes a 'seared in' memory and halts emotional development to the point where the trauma occurred. They may be seen to have a more 'infantile' mind. These feelings of abandonment are often furthered by demeaning words and condescending language used with the child. Each times this occurs, the child begins to look at themselves as a 'non-entity'. They experience existential death. The external conflict that children see amongst their parents becomes an internal conflict for them, the internal conflict then manifests itself externally (usually as aggression). The child becomes devoid of trust, and those who draw near often becomes the persons who this internal conflict is unleashed upon. It is not that the child is devoid of any feeling for the person seeking to connect with them, it is rather that every connection had strings attached or every connection has been severed. The child becomes anxious and afraid of loss, of even losing themselves, if they are to try again to embark on the process of building a trusting relationship. Laing (1969) stated that 'if there is anything the schizoid individual is likely to believe in, it his his own destructiveness. He is uanble to believe that he can fill his own emptiness without reducing what is there to nothing.' It will be common then for these children to question whether they deserve 'happiness' and many times question if they even 'deserve to exist'. The children who have undergone the trauma of abuse and abandonment lack an identity of their own, they appear as a construct of others and often are conformist. They do what they feel will earn them the praise of others. But in reality this is based on their own fears and their negative perceptions of themselves. These children are prone to be seen as manipulative, but this is because they are seeking to exercise control over some aspect of their lives when prior they had absolutely no control. They strive for ideals they cannot be met. Often their intense desire to control or to engage in certain activities in reality is a crying out for their real desire- to have an actual loving and trusting relationship. But these children do not know how to respond to an outpouring of love. They feel that they do not have a voice, are not heard. It is easier for them to feel hated than engulfed by love, particularly when they have seen love to be about control. They desire autonomy and feel they will lose it in the process of building a true relationship. These children may begin to also de-personalize, they may not be prepared to relate to other persons. They may be perceived as lacking empathy, however this is not that it is not there or could not be there, rather it is their fear that blocks their emotional expression of empathy.
These children are often very hurt so they feel they must hurt others.
What do we do? How do we reach such a child? It requires a patient approach. We must allow the child to vent their frustrations. We must share our understanding that we know they are hurt. We must journey with them as they relate their experience of trauma. We do not judge them or withdraw. Even when their emotional expressions may cause us to be afraid, we continue to reach out. We need to be able to forge relationship know matter what and to help the child come to an understanding of life's impermanency, yet we can still strive for happiness now. The trauma is past and does not need to haunt us. We can encourage this child to explore their own sense of self and engage in activities that give them a positive sense of self worth apart from others. Caregivers and others need to make themselves emotionally available, to look at emotional expression as a time for intimacy and teaching. We need to be able to understand the behaviors, even that which are annoying to us, as a means of communication, and when the child is in the 'right space', to communicate with them and help them process those feelings that were behind whatever incident occurred.
We may be prone to drug the child because the behaviors are seen as 'out of control' or 'disturbing', but whereas this may cause the problematic behavior to lessen, we may be making a grave mistake. We may be subduing the very process by which the child is able to release the tension and pain. We may be numbing but not looking a tthe root cause. Unless we see the behavior, how can we truly know what to do? If we cannot allow the child to express their distress, how will we truly know of their distress?
To be simple, our means of reaching this child is this- to be with them unconditionally.

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrDanEdmunds.com

BEING DEVELOPMENTALLY DIFFERENT

The causation of autism remains in the realm of theory and is speculative. There exists many approaches towards how individuals and society regard autistic individuals. Autism is an umbrella term. It is not a disease, nor is it really an 'entity' in itself. Rather, it is a description of how a person acts and how they relate to their world. Autism is thus very much a part of who the person is. Many programs (such as ABA) seek to alter the autistic person and make them something other. The question is what exactly are we seeking to make the autistic person into and how exactly are we going to make that change? Are we solely seeking to coerce and force a person to behave as a 'typical' person would? Are we programming the person to act in ways that the majority would find more acceptable? Are we assuming that the autistic person is not to be valued? Are we assuming that the autistic person has no innate strengths because they may be developmentally different?
Are we assuming that these individuals lack communication because they may not speak? Are we assuming the likes and dislikes of the autistic person? Are we assuming that they lack intellect?
The attitudes that we put forward are readily understood and perceived. Because an autistic person may lack verbal communication does not mean they do not communicate. It is for the non-autistic persons to be able to learn the language. And it is hear that I given an analogy of what our relationship and help to autistic persons should be. If I am from India and speak Hindi, and I move to England, should I be expected to give up my culture, my language, my identity and adopt all that it means to be 'English'? However, if I do not learn English and something about what life is like in England, I may indeed have some challenges within that society. Therefore, those who wish to help the autistic person should not be set on the notion that they must change the person or force them to be 'typical' but rather accept their developmental difference and guide them into understanding something about the majority who are unlike them, so that they can be able to navigate through society with lesser challenges.
It is necessary for us to see beyond the label. It is necessary for us to understand the autistic person's experience and not come to assumptions based solely on what we may conclude from our limited observation. We must respect the autonomy of autistic persons, allowing them to advocate for themselves, and not bore them with rote exercises that frustrate them or with conceptions that they are a nuisance and that part of who they are must be eradicated. We can begin to join in with them, we can help to forge emotional connections. The autistic person may struggle with their conceptions of bodily space, they may experience sensory challenges that make the mainstream world a confusing place to be. Those in the helping professions must keep sight of compassion and patience and be able to help the autistic person explore and navigate through the world at their own pace. We cannot overwhelm. But because an autistic person may face the challenges I mention does not mean that they lack understanding, often they understand very well, it is us non-autistic persons who do not understand but think that we do. We can only understand by being with and joining with those who know firsthand what it is to be developmentally different.
We can seek to be guides and facilitators, to provide a voice when one may be lacking a voice, to journey with, not to coerce or change.

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrDanEdmunds.com

PROBLEMS WITHIN THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM

I am very pleased to have been invited to attend a meeting with representatives of the foster care/ child protective agencies in the State of Florida to discuss the dismal failure of this system. The majority of children in this setting are not being placed with relatives but in highly restrictive placements. In addition, a vast number of these children are being given psychiatric drugs that carry risk of suicidality, mania, and/or permanent neurological damage. The system is not understanding the experience of these children but solely looking at a glimpse of their behavior after being ripped from their natural families and then assigning a diagnosis and drugs. There is an obvious financial incentive to take this unfortunate line of action with these children. It is my hope that vast reform and change can be implemented in this system for the well being of young people.

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrDanEdmunds.com

FROM NY TIMES: ANTI-PSYCHOTIC DRUGS OFFER NO BENEFIT IN CURBING AGGRESSION

Drugs Offer No Benefit in Curbing Aggression, Study Finds
By BENEDICT CAREY



The drugs most widely used to manage aggressive outbursts in intellectually disabled people are no more effective than placebos for most patients and may be less so, researchers report.

The finding, being published Friday, sharply challenges standard medical practice in mental health clinics and nursing homes in the United States and around the world.

In recent years, many doctors have begun to use the so-called antipsychotic drugs, which were developed to treat schizophrenia, as all-purpose tranquilizers to settle threatening behavior — in children with attention-deficit problems, college students with depression, older people with Alzheimer’s disease and intellectually handicapped people.

The new study tracked 86 adults with low I.Q.’s in community housing in England, Wales and Australia over more than a month of treatment. It found a 79 percent reduction in aggressive behavior among those taking dummy pills, compared with a reduction of 65 percent or less in those taking antipsychotic drugs.

The researchers focused on two drugs, Risperdal by Janssen, and an older drug, Haldol, but said the findings almost certainly applied to all similar medications. Such drugs account for more than $10 billion in annual sales, and research suggests that at least half of all prescriptions are for unapproved “off label” uses — often to treat aggression or irritation.

The authors said the results were quite likely to intensify calls for a government review of British treatment standards for such patients, and perhaps to prompt more careful study of treatment for aggressive behavior in patients with a wide variety of diagnoses.

Other experts said the findings were also almost certain to inflame a continuing debate over the widening use of antipsychotic drugs. Patient advocates and some psychiatrists say the medications are overused.

Previous studies of the drugs’ effect on aggressive outbursts have been mixed, with some showing little benefit and others a strong calming influence. But the drugs have serious side effects, including rapid weight gain and tremors, and doctors have had little rigorous evidence to guide practice.

“This is a very significant finding by some very prominent psychiatrists” — one that directly challenges the status quo, said Johnny L. Matson, a professor of psychology at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, co-author of an editorial with the study in the journal Lancet.

While it is unclear how much the study by itself will alter prescribing habits, “the message to doctors should be, think twice about prescribing, go with lower doses and monitor side effects very carefully,” Dr. Matson continued, adding:

“Or just don’t do it. We know that behavioral treatments can work very well with many patients.”

Other experts disagreed, saying the new study was not in line with previous research or their own experience. Janssen, a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary, said that Risperdal only promotes approved uses, which in this country include the treatment of irritability associated with autism in children.

In the study, Dr. Peter J. Tyrer, a professor of psychiatry at Imperial College London, led a research team who assigned 86 people from ages 18 to 65 to one of three groups: one that received Risperdal; one that received another antipsychotic, the generic form of Haldol; and one that was given a placebo pill. Caregivers tracked the participants’ behavior. Many people with very low I.Q.’s are quick to anger and lash out at others, bang their heads or fists into the wall in frustration, or singe the air with obscenities when annoyed.

After a month, people in all three groups had settled down, losing their temper less often and causing less damage when they did. Yet unexpectedly, those in the placebo group improved the most, significantly more so than those on medication.

In an interview, Dr. Tyrer said there was no reason to believe that any other antipsychotic drug used for aggression, like Zyprexa from Eli Lilly or Seroquel from AstraZeneca, would be more effective. Being in the study, with all the extra attention it brought, was itself what apparently made the difference, he said.

“These people tend to get so little company normally,” Dr. Tyrer said. “They’re neglected, they tend to be pushed into the background, and this extra attention has a much bigger effect on them that it would on a person of more normal intelligence level.”

The study authors, who included researchers from the University of Wales and the University of Birmingham in Britain and the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, wrote that their results “should not be interpreted as an indication that antipsychotic drugs have no place in the treatment of some aspects of behavior disturbance.”

But the routine prescription of the drugs for aggression, they concluded, “should no longer be regarded as a satisfactory form of care.”

SOCIAL DIVISIONS

Within society today we see 4 social divisions-
the ruling oligarchs- that is the few who maintain power and control over the system of things.
The privileged class.
The oppressed.
and the controlled.
The controlled are those who have accepted handouts from the elites and do not think ciritcally or engage in any active resistance but mrely accept the status quo. The oligarchs and privileged keep the oppressed class in a situation where it is difficult to overcome (for isntance, the privileged have their educations paid for, the oppressed must struggle with lifetime debt to be able to enter college). The oligarchs want to keep everyone in their place. The controlled remain in their place without question. It remains up to the oppressed to unite together and become active in the political process to be able to overcome the current system of things.

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT IN REGARDS TO PURE STUPIDITY

I recently received an anonymous comment that stated that persons 'need stimulants' to live a 'normal life'. First- what does this 'normal' possibly mean? To conform means we need a highly addictive narcotic? A few shots of whiskey at the end of the day may make me feel a bit more mellow, do I need this for a 'normal' life? The comment goes on to say that if we do not give stimulants to a person with this 'admitted;y vague disease' (at least they recognize that), that the person will become a future drug addict and all other assorted grim things. Has this person read the recent study from University of Buffalo that shows in the long term NO difference between drugged or non drugged kids other than the fact that the drugged kids had growth suppression and other adverse events or Lambert's study stating that stimulants themselves actually lead to a rise in addictive behavior, not to mention the addictive nature of stimulants in themselves? Then this person continues on that I need to have 'compassion'. This has been the entire theme of my work, to offer a more compassionate mental health system. Lastly, this person suggests that I hang out with unmedicated "ADD' people as if this is some dreadful thing. Well, I do. Everyday. Is there a problem with this? Whose problem is it?

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrDanEdmunds.com

A JOURNEY WITH

I had the experience of encountering a young man who had been given the diagnosis of 'schizophrenia'. He had been through years of therapy and had been through multiple psychiatric hospitalizations. Mental health professionals spoke of him only in clinical terms and I found this disturbing. His chart was reams and reams of paper painting the picture of an immensely helpless and hopeless character. The scholl system sought to exile him as well. I tossed aside all the clinical records, they only reported on his behavior, not his experience. It is the experience that is the 'soul' of the person. Psychiatrists never really spoke to the young man, they deffred to his parents, or spoke at him, judging his behavior and assign their labels. I embarked on becoming his therapist and in this did not want to judge his behavior, I wanted to know the person. So our sessions involved a process of my merely listening, of connecting. I did not seek to judge him, label him, or dismiss his experience. I only sought to join him where he was at. He began to relate to me his pain, his feelings of isolation and aloneness. He shared with me about the voices he heard and the beings he saw. I would converse with him about these beings, treating them as real as he was before me. Over time, I saw that these things were fragments of himself, they were dreams he had, hopes he envisioned, people he wanted to meet who never arrived. He had immense fear, and I journeyed with him in understanding the roots of this fear. I stood by him as he sought out new ways of living and coping. I understood the circumstances which led to his 'madness' and set forth some new possibilities, but at his pace, at his comfort level.
He has overcome a lot, and we continue to have periods of conversation though we do not see each other as frequently. We forged a bond as two persons with very different experiences, but each seeking to understand the human condition, each seeking to know about this thing we call life.


-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
www.DrDanEdmunds.com

THE HUMAN CONDITION

When we look at those who are labeled delusional, we must realize and understand that society itself is delusional. The difference is that in one situation the majority has accepted the delusion whereas with the one labeled so, it is the delusion of one.
It is often when one faces the sense of feeling alone or being alone in this world, of seeking to define a sense of self before realizing their existence itself, that angst arises. Mental distress arises from not finding any point or purpose to existence and then feeling that in this, the person stands alone. The person then must seek to define or be defined. Being defined means to be labeled.
What ultimately is the human condition? Has psychiatry and psychology truly answered the questions about it? Has it really offered solutions? People remain troubled and in spite of research and studies and psychiatric inquiry, little has changed, in fact, it has become worse. Because we have not really looked at the human condition, we have not faced the things that would lead persons to a better existence, instead we have developed systems based on self-interest, seeking not to understand the human condition and do something about, but to create a sense of 'groupthink', to solely make persons more amenable to the oppressive environments they encounter. We see it in schools, where children are stifled and drugged if they dare not comply with the demands of a system that has become less and less about learning and more about how to think. We see it in the divisions between class. It is all around us.

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.
International Center for Humane Psychiatry
www.DrDanEdmunds.com

HOW OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM DRIVE OUR CHILDREN 'MAD'

Sitting in a meeting for a child, the first topic of the special education director was 'well, we need to get this child back on medication". After an explanation of the flaws of the MTA study and the recent study of University of Buffalo showing no difference in the long term between drugged kids and those not subjected to drugs as well as growth suppression and adverse events amongst the drugged, this did not sway any opinion. Rather, this person stated he had 'connections' to the psychiatrist and would see to it that this was accomplished. Of course, when the topic of the child's behavior being communication and my awareness of what his current distress is about, this conversation was basically ended. Instead, it became a conversation on how to force the child into compliance to a situation that he finds uncomofrtable and distressing. But in this, the special education director found that if he could shirk repsonsibility and out it upon another to create a behavioral assessment that this would also be positive. Once again, blame the brain, blame the child, but exonerate yourself from examining the situations which have led the child to distress. And if that does not work, warehouse the child somewhere where he will not be a bother to anyone. This is the sad state of affairs under which we operate. As Laing had noted once that children in the UK had a higher chance of entering a mental institution than college and that it could be the way we educate children that is driving them mad.

-Dan L. Edmunds, Ed.D.

10 REASONSTO SAY NO TO PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS

1. Premium Non Notre...or...Do no Harm.

* Drugs create altered states of mind by artificially increasing or decreasing neuro-functioning, and this causes harm to neuroconnections (e.g. downregulation, upregulation, tardive dyskinesia, EPS, Allostatic load, etc…) See reference list.

2. Use least intrusive method possible when treating.

* It is less intrusive to conduct psychotherapy than to administer a psychotropic mood and thought altering drug that always carries negative side effects. Drugs “work” by causing brain pathology and disrupting the normal neurotransmitter functioning and levels. See reference list.

3. Psychotherapy is MORE EFFECITVE than Drugs, especially in the long run.

* Psychotherapy is more effective than medication, especially in the long run, and psychotherapy plus medications show no greater benefit than therapy alone.(There are numerous studies showing this effect, most notably: Effectiveness of Psychotherapy: Michigan State Study. Seligman, M., **Consumer Reports, 1995.)

* Even exercise shows greater benefits for symptom reduction than anti-depressant medications. (Mercola, J., British Journal of Sports Medicine, April 2001: 35: p.114-117.)

* Psychotherapy can work better than drugs even for insomnia. (U.S. News and World Health Report, December 3, 2004. Visit www.behavioralhealth.typepad.com)

* Recovery rates are almost 3 times better in unindustrialized countries than in the U.S., where we use psychotropic drugs to “treat” patients. It is quite simple as to why we suffer more by attempting to suppress our suffering with technology. Freud stated “civilization is the root of our neurosis.”

Harrison, G., Hopper, K., Craig, T., Laska, E., et al. (2001). Recovery from psychotic illness: a 15- and 25- year international follow-up study. British Journal of Psychiatry, 178, 506-17.

Hopper K. & Wanderling J. (2000). Revisiting the developed versus developing country distinction in course and outcome in schizophrenia: results from ISoS, the WHO collaborative follow-up project. International Study of Schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 26(4), 835-46.

Hopper, K., Harrison, G., Aleksander, J., & Sartiorius, N. (2004, In Press). Recovery from schizophrenia: An international perspective. Madison, Connecticutt: International Universities Press, Inc.

Indian Journal of Medical Research, August 2004; WHO studies published in 1992 and 1996; US SAMHSA; Washington Post.

Jablensky, A., Sartorius, N., Ernberg, G., Anker, M., Korten, A., Cooper, J. E., Day, R., Bertelsen, A. (1992). Schizophrenia: Manifestations, incidence and course in different cultures, a World Health Organization ten country study. Psychological Medicine Monograph Supplement 20, 1-95.

Leff, J., Sartorius, N., Jablensky, A., Korten, A., & Ernberg, G. (1992). The international pilot study of schizophrenia: five-year follow-up findings. Psychological Medicine, 22, 131-145.

Murphy, H. B. & Raman, A.C. (1971). The chronicity of schizophrenia in indigenous tropical peoples: Results of a 12 year follow-up survey in Mauritius. British Journal of Psychiatry, 118, 489-97.

* Psychological interventions are at least as effective as pharmacological treatments for depression (Antonuccio et al., 1995; DeRubeis et al. 1999.)

* Even for people diagnosed Schizophrenic (no or minimal drug usage references):

Alanen, Y.O.; Ugelstad, E.; Armelius, B.A.; Lehtinen, K.; Rosenbaum, B.; and Sjostrom, R., Eds. (1994) Early treatment for schizophrenic patients: Scandinavian psychotherapeutic approaches. Oslo, Norway: Scandinavian University Press.

Alanen, Y.O.; Lehtinen, V.; Lehtinen, K.; Aaltonen, J.; and Rakkolainen, V. (2000) The Finnish model for early treatment of schizophrenia and related psychoses. In: Martindale, B., Bateman, A., Crowe, M., and Margison, F., Eds. Psychosis:

Psychological approaches and their effectiveness. London: Gaskell. (The centerpiece of their approach is rapid in-home family and social network intervention to avoid hospitalization and medicalization.) Ciompi, L., Duwalder, H.-P., Maier, C., Aebi, E., Trutsch, K., Kupper, Z., & Rutishauser, C. (1992). The pilot project "Soteria Berne": Clinical experiences and results. British Journal of Psychiatry, 161(suppl. 18), 145-153. (A replication of Mosher and co-workers Soteria Project in California. Similar results-about 2/3rds of newly diagnosed psychotics recovered without neuroleptic drug treatment)

Lehtinen, V. et. al. (2000). Two-Year Follow-up of First Episode Psychosis Treated According to an Integrated Model: Is immediate neuroleptisation always needed? European Psychiatry, 15(5): 312-320. (44% of the randomly assigned subjects received no neuroleptic drug treatment-vs. 6% of the controls- over the two-year period and their outcomes were comparable or better than those treated with drugs.)

Matthews SM, Roper MT, Mosher LR, and Menn AZ. (1979) A non-neuroleptic treatment for schizophrenia: Analysis of the two-year post-discharge risk of relapse. Schiz. Bull. 5: 322-333. (Soteria treated patients-as compared with hospital treated-had a significantly lower rehospitalizaton rate over two years despite few being neuroleptic maintained. First cohort analysis)

Mosher, L.R. & Bola, J.R. (2000) The Soteria Project: Twenty-five Years of Swimming Upriver. Complexity and Change, 9: 68-74. (Soteria patients-43%- who received no neuroleptics over the two year follow-up period did substantially better than those who did. As a group the Soteria treated patients had better outcomes than a control group that received "usual" hospital and drug treatment. The subgroup of "poor prognosis" subjects treated at Soteria had better outcomes than the Soteria group as a whole. First combined cohort analysis)

Mosher LR & Menn A Z (1978) Community residential treatment fornschizophrenia: Two-year follow-up. Hosp Comm Psych 29: 715-723. (Better psychosocialoutcomes for Soteria treated 1st and 2nd episode patients compared with control subject receiving "usual" treatment. First cohort.)

Mosher LR, Vallone R, and Menn AZ .(1995) The treatment of acute psychosis without neuroleptics: Six-week psychopathology outcome data from the Soteria project. Int. J. Soc. Psych. 41: 157-173. (2nd cohort: as was true of the 1st cohort, at six weeks the Soteria group had improved as much without meds as the hospital group-all of whom received neuroleptics.)

Tuori, T. et al (1998) The Finnish National Schizophrenia Project 1981-1987: 10 year evaluate on of its results. Acta. Psychiatrica Scandinavica 97: 10-18. (In the presence of comprehensive "need adapted"psychosocial treatment, drugs are unneccesary for the most part and may, in fact, prevent recovery.)

4. No Evidence for Biological Basis, so Why Use Biological Intervention?

* "There is no definitive lesion, laboratory test, or abnormality in brain tissue that can identify mental illness." in Surgeon General's report on mental health December, 1999.

* “psychiatry is the only medical specialty that…treats disorders without clearly known causes…including disabling diseases such as schizophrenia.” In American Psychiatric Association. (1998). Textbook of Psychopharmacology.Washinton, DC: American Psychiatric Press, AND American Psychiatric Association. (1999). Textbook of psychiatry. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press. (Texts used by Psychiatry Students)

*"Brain Disease Hypothesis for Schizophrenia Disconfirmed by All Evidence" by Al Siebert, PhD., Ethical Human Sciences and Services, Vol 1, No. 2 1999

* “there are no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction...After years of clinical research and experience with ADHD, our knowledge about the cause or causes of ADHD remain largely speculative." Nov. 1998 National Institute Health (NIH) Consensus Conference on ADHD concluded (see quote above).

* Leo, J. & Cohen, D., Broken Brains or Flawed Studies: A Critical Review of Neuroimaging Research, In The Journal of Mind and Behavior, Winter 2003, Volume 24, Number 1, pp 29-56

* Joseph, J. (1998). The equal environment assumption of the classical twin method: A critical analysis. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 19, 325-358.


* Joseph, J. (1999). A critique of the Finnish Adoptive Family Study of Schizophrenia. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 20, 133-154.

5. Psychotropic Drugs Create, not correct, Chemical Imbalances & Disorders.

* Psychotropic drugs create potential permanent Downregulation and Upregulation: increasing the susceptibility to having the very symptoms or problem they are attempting to reduce. Dr. Peter Breggin, MD, Harvard Graduate, Psychiatrist and Researcher, Breggin, P. & D. Cohen. (2000). Your Drug May Be Your Problem: How and Why to Stop Taking Psychiatric Medication. New York: Perseus Books. Also see Grace Jackson, M.D.(2005) Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs: A guide to Informed Consent.

* Untreated Initial Psychosis: Relation to Cognitive Deficits and Brain Morphology in First-Episode Schizophrenia, by Ho, Alicata, Ward, Moser, O'lLeary, Arndt, and Andreasen, American Journal of Psychiatry 2003; 160:142-148. This studies' "results suggest that large-scale initiatives designed to prevent neural injury through early intervention in the prepsychotic or early psychosis phase may be based on incorrect assumptions that neurotoxicity or cognitive deterioration may be avoided.

6. Many Psychotropic Drugs Increase Risk of Suicide-Aggression.

* Taking almost all of the SSRI antidepressants increase the patient’s risk of having and acting upon suicidal thoughts, agitation and akathisia. Dr. David Healy, MD, medico-legal expert witness/researcher, former Director of North Wales Dept. of Psychological Medicine and Secretary of British Association of Psychopharmacology, author of over 120 peer reviewed articles and 12 books.

7. We Don’t Really Know If The Drugs Are Safe or Risks All Known.

* “Our current drug approval system has demonstrated that we don’t always understand the full magnitude of drug risks prior to approval of products.”

Dr. Steve Galson, director of FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,reported in the N.Y. Times, Nov. 6, 2004, in FDA’s Drug Safety System Will Get Outside Review.

* Since 1997, almost two dozen prescription drugs have been taken off the market due to serious side effects–some causing numerous deaths. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/prescription/hazard/)

* Whitaker, R., The case against antipsychotic drugs: a 50-year record of doing more harm than good, Medical Hypotheses, Volume 62, Issue 1 , 2004, Pages 5-13.

8. Drugging your problem is MORE Expensive.

* Psychotherapy is Less Costly Than Drugs, basically because suppressing the problem does not help you work through, solve, HEAL, AND because therapy produces natural brain changes (Antonuccio et al. 1997; Cuijpers, 1997; Smith et al, 1997.) Especially since psychological treatments can be successfully delivered in a group format or even as bibliotherapy with minimal therapist contact.

* Pharmacotherapy alone increases vulnerability to depression relapse (Hollon et al, 1991; Segal et al, 1999) and there is virtually no evidence of antidepressant efficacy in children (Ambrosini et al, 1993; Hazell et al., 1995.)

9. Drugs simply do not work.

* Greenberg et al in 1992 outlined how effects of medication were significantly smaller than normally reported.

* Approximately 75%-90% of sugar pills were EQUALLY EFFECTIVE as SSRI-Antidepressant drugs, and that when the sugar pill-placebo gave a side effect,there was NO CLINICAL DIFFERNCE BETWEEN THE DRUG AND THESUGAR PILL. (J. Moncrieff & I. Kirsch, July 16, 2005, British Medical Journal, doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7509.155 2005;331;155-157 BMJ.

* Kirsch, I,. & J. Thomas, at el, The Emperor's New Drugs: An Analysis of Antidepressant Medication Data Submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,, In Prevention & Treatment, Volume 5, Article 23, posted July 15, 2002.

10. Saying Yes to a Psychotropic Drug is almost Never an Informed Choice.