Half of US teens 'meet criteria for mental disorder'

[barracuda]

Wordspeak, I have indeed made some time for looking closely at the film Psychiatry: An Industry of Death. And I would consider the time spent as completely wasted were it not for your request and the opportunity to pass on what I found to be the case with this work of Scientological propaganda. For that is most certainly what it is, regardless of the content of the film itself. I am perfectly willing to deal with at least a few points regarding that content. But when I look for a movie to watch in my leisure time, I'll admit, I like films that have stars! So first, let's check the listing and see who's in it:

Cast (in alphabetical order)

Walter Afield ... Himself (as Dr. Walter Afield)
George W. Albee ... Himself (as Dr. George W. Albee)
Garland Allen ... Himself (as Dr. Garland Allen)
R. Christopher Barden ... Himself
Lewis Bass ... Himself Scientologist
Michael Berenbaum ... Himself (as Dr. Michael Berenbaum)
Mary Ann Block ... Herself (as Dr. Mary Ann Block) An Osteopath (not an MD) with a bit of a conflict of interest, in that she markets her own child focus medications.
Samuel Blumenfeld ... Himself (as Dr. Samuel Blumenfeld)
Arthur Caplan ... Himself (as Dr. Arthur Caplan)
Paula Caplan ... Herself (as Dr. Paula Caplan)
Beth Clay ... Herself
Ty Colbert ... Himself (as Dr. Ty Colbert)
Here's an honest quote from an honest letter to the editor by the honest UK national spokesperson for CCHR in The Birmingham Post:


Ty C Colbert, author of Blaming Our Genes, says, “Diagnosing someone as schizophrenic may appear scientific on the surface, especially when biopsychiatry keeps claiming that a genetic brain disease is involved. But when you step back and observe from a distance … you wonder how they can justify their work. This is not science.”


Dennis Cowan ... Himself
Moira Dolan ... Herself (as Dr. Moira Dolan) Scientologist
Beverly Eakman ... Herself
Jan Eastgate ... Herself Scientologist, Scientologist, Scientologist
Marla Filidei ... Herself Scientologist
John Friedberg ... Himself
William Glasser ... Himself
Margaret Hagen ... Herself (as Dr. Margaret Hagen)
Raymond Haynes ... Himself
Lawrence Hooper ... Himself (as Dr. Lawrence Hooper) Scientologist
Earl Ofari Hutchinson ... Himself
Grace Jackson ... Herself (as Dr. Grace Jackson)
Herb Kutchins ... Himself (as Dr. Herb Kutchins)
Ron Leifer ... Himself (as Dr. Ron Leifer)
Otan Logi ... Himself Scientologist
Hamilton D. Moore ... Himself
Sonja Muhammed ... Herself (as Dr. Sonja Muhammed)
Jim Nicholls ... Himself (as Dr. Jim Nicholls) Mentioned here as a CCHR board member
Gary Null ... Himself (as Dr. Gary Null)
Kelly O'Meara ... Herself
Ron Paul ... Himself
Tony Platt ... Himself (as Prof. Tony Platt Ph.D.)
Henry Powell ... Himself (as Dr. Henry Powell)
Lawrence Priddy ... Himself
Richelle Rose ... Herself
Colin Ross ... Himself (as Dr. Colin Ross)
Gayle Ruzicka ... Herself
Jefferey Schaler ... Himself (as Dr. Jeffery Schaler)
Skip Simpson ... Himself
Kathleen Slattery-Moschkau ... Herself
David Stein ... Himself (as Dr. David Stein)
Joanne Suder ... Herself
Thomas Szasz ... Himself (as Dr. Thomas Szasz) Here's a nice shot of Dr. Szasz and somebody, I don't know who:



Julian Whitaker ... Himself (as Julian Whitaker M.D.), whose Whitaker Wellness Institute's Medical Director is an osteopath, and a Scientogist
Robert Whitaker ... Himself, son of the above.
Ken Whitman ... Himself Scientologist
Bruce Wiseman ... Himself Scientologist

I'm not sure how one can evaluate the point of view of two hours of "information" presented by "experts" without understanding first off that they are in fact Scientologists. And it should be understood that despite undead's characterizations, CCHR is not simply funded by CoS, it simply IS CoS. So let's be clear about that. As well, you should know that their documentary-making practices aren't always entirely honest, either.

Now let's look at two quotes I've pulled from the movie.

The section on eugenics is problematic. I don't think there's really any way you can legitimately call Francis Galton a psychologist. I mean, according to wiki he was a polymath, anthropologist, eugenicist, tropical explorer, geographer, inventor, meteorologist, proto-geneticist, psychometrician, and statistician. The entire argument regarding psychiatry as the birthplace of eugenics sort of relies on Galton actually being a psychiatrist or a psychologist. He wasn't.

What had began with a psychiatric plan to eliminate undesireable humanity had now spread throughout the civilized world and was responsible for the murder of eleven million people. Never brought to justice, psychiatrists as you will see, continued to advance eugenics around the world, and today we see the results, in racism, human misery, and unending social conflict.

Please explain to me how such a statement can be seen as anything but hyperbole and propaganda. The makers of the film have just blamed every human failing and difficulty in the world on psychiatry.

The entire history of psychiatry, beginning with scientific conclusions that were made in the 1830's, was an effort to prove the intellectual inferiority of African Americans.

Can this really be the case? The entire history? I doubt it.

Propaganda.

As to why Scientology has such a big stake in the fight against psychiatry, L.Ron himself is the best source for that:

In 1966 Hubbard declared all-out war on psychiatry, telling Scientologists that "We want at least one bad mark on every psychiatrist in England, a murder, an assault, or a rape or more than one." He committed the Church of Scientology to the goal of eradicating psychiatry in 1969, announcing that "Our war has been forced to become 'To take over absolutely the field of mental healing on this planet in all forms.'"

Let's repeat that one: To take over absolutely the field of mental healing on this planet in all forms.

To what ends? Money. Control. Power. Enslaving the world. Those sorts of things.

[slomo]

I'm more interested in asking which forces in America profit by the stunting of emotional intelligence:

A current example, from America's leading polisher of turds both business and political:

Friday, Oct 15, 2010
Yale fraternity pledges chant about rape

Sometimes, the post just writes itself: On Wednesday night, Delta Kappa Epsilon pledges marched through Yale's Old Campus -- where most first-year female students are housed -- chanting, "No means yes, yes means anal!" The fraternity pledges were marched blindfolded while barking like soldiers ... with marching orders of anal rape. They also threw in, "My name is Jack, I'm a necrophiliac, I fuck dead women." A video of the initiation was immediately posted on YouTube and, what do you know, it's gone viral.

Now, DKE President Jordan Forney has been forced to apologize for this blatant sexual intimidation by calling it "a serious lapse in judgment by the fraternity and in very poor taste." But this sort of hateful crap isn't a "lapse in judgment." It doesn't innocently happen that you're guiding male pledges by young women's dorms in the dark of night chanting about anal rape. It isn't a forehead-slapping slip-up, it's a sign that you need major reprogramming as a human being. Student feminist magazine Broad Recognition has it right: It's calling for Yale to take disciplinary action against DKE -- where George W. Bush got his presidential training -- "on behalf of its female students."

http://www.salon.com/life/violence_agai ... about_rape

This may be totally beside the point and OT, maybe even inappropriate for this thread, but can someone explain to me why straight men are now so obsessed with "anal"? I mean, this is one of the aspects of gay sex I personally find icky [and I remind all of you that I am a gay guy]. To me, the act is a not-so-symbolic representation of violation and calls up images of torture. I dunno, maybe that's why people are suspicious of gay men (even though for me, sex is about being physically close to a guy I really admire). It's weird that the current generation of straight men seem to be publicly obsessed with something that has overtones of violence. Or am I just a prude?

[barracuda]

Or am I just a prude?

If you are, maybe you're not the only one around here. No one seems to want to touch that one with a six-inch ten-foot pole.

[Simulist]

I just thought "Anal" was the twin brother of Oral Roberts.

And who'd want to touch that?

[slomo]

And just to bring the thread full-circle to the misdeeds of the psychiatric industry, there is the (somewhat, in some contexts) comical portmanteau that combines the word "therapist" with "analyst".

But seriously, has sex always had such prevalent overtones of violence, and we're just hearing more about it in the age of narcissistic public declaration? Or does the increasingly violent edge of mainstream sex reflect the darkening of our collective soul?

[Peregrine]

Erm, my apologies for veering the thread off topic myself, but, are you equating anal with violent, torturous sex? Because if so, ya gotta read Tristan Taormino's Ultimate Guide to Anal...

[undead]

Barracuda,

I counted 9 Scientologists out of 37 names. I think it's a bit unreasonable to characterize the group as "nothing but Scientology". Also, I didn't notice any mention of Scientology whatsoever in the film besides the very end, in the disclaimer. So considering the numbers, I think a much more likely scenario is that CCHR is an example of a well meaning movement (pscyhiatric survivors) being infiltrated by an authoritarian group. As far as L. Ron Hubbard's remarks on psychiatry go, that answers the question. Scientologists are wannabe psychiatrists. If Scientology wants to take over every form of mental healing for the purposes of "Money. Control. Power. Enslaving the world. Those sorts of things.", does it make it reasonable for psychiatrists to do the same thing?

A great example of psychiatrists wanting to do exactly this is Ewan Cameron, MKUltra subcontractor. I will refer interested parties to the film "The Living Dead" by Adam Curtis, part 2, "You Have Used Me As A Fish Long Enough"

(Again, this is an incomplete and biased treatment of the subject but I'm sure people can check the RI archives for articles on Cameron's MKUltra activities)


It is true that the CCHR film exaggerates at times. However, the information about the practices of psychiatry, including lobotomies, electroshock, and mass drugging, is completely sound. To call the film dishonest is not accurate. To call it overzealous is a legitimate criticism. However, considering the pervasive influence of Scientology and their infiltration of the anti-psychiatry movement, it would be myopic to ignore this film. The influence of Scientology is probably a major factor causing the over-diagnosis of medical disorders, since they seem to be the only competition for the established cartel in the psychiatric brainwashing game. Naturally the control freaks in charge of the psychiatric establishment will scramble for control when threatened with formidable competition. A parallel can be seen when one compares the rise of Scientology, psychiatric drugging, and psychedelic drug usage, particularly MDMA.

To Jeff, who thinks that 50% of teenagers suffering from mental disorders is optimistic, you are changing the subject. Obscure S&M and pedophilia clubs do influence the ruling elite, who in turn influence the general population, but the subject was "medically" diagnosed disorders, not undiagnosed societal derangement. Diagnosing more than half of the population as having an abnormal psychology is by definition incorrect, not to mention paranoid and insane. The effect of psychiatry and mass drugging is to coerce the population into accepting the kind of behavior exhibited by Yale frat boys.

It is understandable that people would rather not talk about a practice that is poisoning the water supply and enslaving the population systematically, because it highlights the total lack of control that we have as individuals over the collective situation. Being in denial is a lot easier than recognizing the influence that psychiatry has over our existence as individuals. Becoming aware of something malevolent that is controlling you can be impractical when that knowledge is going to make it difficult to continue with the pathological activities of daily living.

As far as the original subject, the over-diagnosis of psychiatric disorders in adolescents, I don't think there is much left to say. Go ahead and file this thread with all the other fear porn and grotesquery compiled in this site. Besides, I am sure there will be many more threads on this subject as the situation worsens.

[barracuda]

Scientologists are not "wannabe psychiatrists", dude. They are a dangerous, murdering cult. Their hatred of psychiatrists stems from the fact that psychiatrists have been among the most vocal critics of their pseudo-science "religion" since the 1970s.

You keep trying to pass off CCHR as a well-meaning movement, when I have provided several links in my post above showing that the group is, in fact, Scientology and nothing more. Why you'd want to mitigate that knowledge is beyond me - I can only assume that you are either a Scientologist yourself, or you simply don't care where you find allies in your crusade.

The film is propaganda. They don't have to make every psyop presentation they create an overt advertisement for their cult. The information presented in it is anything but sound, and the film is one of the centerpieces at Scientology's Industry of Death Museum in Hollywood, a place I'm sure you'd feel right at home.

Listen, if you want to subject yourself to hours of watching Scientology movies til your brains come dripping out of your earholes, or end up forced into slavery by an avaricious cult, then that's your choice. But when you recommend the studied viewing of the indoctrination materials of a brutal and bloodthirsty group of mind-controlling killers, and attempt at every step to pretend they have my best interests at heart as a zealous but well-meaning bunch of do-gooders, I have to wonder what you're really up to. It really doesn't inspire trust.

[undead]

I can only assume that you are either a Scientologist yourself, or you simply don't care where you find allies in your crusade.

Aren't there rules on this board against accusing people of being disinformation agents? I don't really mind, I just thought I would point out the blatant hypocrisy. Especially from a moderator. If there is a splinter group of Scientology that promotes medical cannabis, MDMA, and Terence McKenna, I might be interested, but I don't think that exists.

You are the one who wants to make this thread a discussion about Scientology. I have provided many other relevant sources to discuss. We even had some productive contributions like the article about John Ioannides. It's unfortunate that this discussion can't continue without hysterical accusations of covert Scientology promotion.

[barracuda]

I challenge you to offer any specific points to support your dismissive attitude. Of course, that would mean watching the movie, and you don't feel like doing that.

Don't whine when someone you've called a liar accepts your "challenge" and then you don't like hearing what they have to say. It's unseemly.

Aren't there rules on this board against accusing people of being disinformation agents?

It's not really an accusation. The video you posted is Scientology propaganda, as I have demonstrated. To insist that CCHR is just a group of well-meaning individuals is, in fact, either disinformation or plainly wrong.

[undead]

It's not really an accusation. The video you posted is Scientology propaganda, as I have demonstrated. To insist that CCHR is just a group of well-meaning individuals is, in fact, either disinformation or plainly wrong.

I haven't ever denied the connection to Scientology, and I only suggested that people watch the movie and use their judgment to form their own opinion, instead of swallowing the conventional wisdom of this site and it's moderators. To conflate any criticism of psychiatry with Scientology is quite ridiculous, and I wonder why you don't have anything to say about any of the other issues raised in this discussion. Your critique hardly scratched the surface of the film's content regarding psychiatric practices, but since I don't really care that much about that one source of information I'm not going to continue arguing that point. If I admit that this film should be stricken from the record, so to speak, I doubt you would have anything productive to add to the conversation.

It's pretty comical how concerned everyone here is about Scientology. It kind reminds me of what Robin Williams said about cocaine being God's way of telling you that you have too much money. I don't have enough money to be a Scientologist and I don't know a single person who does. I also don't know anyone stupid enough to fall for such an absurd scam.

Psychiatry and pharmaceutical drugging, on the other hand, is forced on everyone from the moment you are born, by practically every government supported institution that exists. It is the bottom line of official mind control in this society. Considering that the American Psychiatric Association does exactly the same thing as Scientology, except with the full backing of the government of the United States, I have a hard time considering Scientology to be such a pressing problem compared to the issue of psychiatric drugging.

One function Scientology does serve is to be a boogeyman that will never go away. The presence of a dangerous cult can benefit the dominant cult of capitalism by scaring people into submission and mis-characterizing any and all opposition.

And now, back to the latest news on pedophilia, anal sex at Yale, etc.

[justdrew]

undead -> from a bitter root grows no fruit

also a leading reason for doping up kids is PARENTS - often they go in with their minds alreay made up on a diagnosis, requesting pills from the start. That said, pediatric psychology is often run as a drug delivery machines also, it's just pathetic. ADHD is probably one of the main "fake" diags and drug vectors out there. Parents and society completely fail to provide an appropriate environment on the one hand on the other rambunctious spirited kids just don't stand a chance unless they are lucky to have educated parents with enough historical human perspective to know better.

[Simulist]

I haven't seen the video in question, because I've simply not taken the time yet to watch it.

When I do watch it, I will remember that it is the product of a brutal, avaricious, mind-controlling cult called "Scientology." I will also remember that another brutal, avaricious, mind-controlling cult called "the Roman Catholic Church" both intentionally and inadvertently taught me a number of valuable lessons over the years.

While I sincerely doubt that this experience will be as information-rich as that one, I'm still open to whatever intentional or inadvertent lessons I can discern from this one, too. We'll see.

[crikkett]

I also don't know anyone stupid enough to fall for such an absurd scam.

I do, and they don't seem as stupid as they seem naiive and emotionally vulnerable. And I have seen firsthand how dangerous this group is. Think "Screwtape letters" and you've got the picture. I understand completely barracuda's aversion to Scientology.

Psychiatry and pharmaceutical drugging, on the other hand, is forced on everyone from the moment you are born, by practically every government supported institution that exists. It is the bottom line of official mind control in this society.

I don't think I would argue with this statement of yours. However, the following statement is misinformed:

Considering that the American Psychiatric Association does exactly the same thing as Scientology, except with the full backing of the government of the United States, I have a hard time considering Scientology to be such a pressing problem compared to the issue of psychiatric drugging.

And finally,

One function Scientology does serve is to be a boogeyman that will never go away. The presence of a dangerous cult can benefit the dominant cult of capitalism by scaring people into submission and mis-characterizing any and all opposition.

The 'dominant cult of capitalism' can do just fine without Scientology, which IMO serves no useful function whatsoever and spoils everything it touches, including this thread. I'm sorry that the fact that your sources are unreliable stole your thunder.

[barracuda]

To conflate any criticism of psychiatry with Scientology is quite ridiculous, and I wonder why you don't have anything to say about any of the other issues raised in this discussion.

I don't think ridiculous is the word I would use (maybe "zealous" would be better), as many of the conventions of the anti-psychiatry movement in its modern form are seeds planted by Scientology in the first place, or have developed as derivatives of those seeds. For example, while I may agree that Ritalin may be over-prescribed, see this Los Angeles Times story on the genesis of the Ritalin controversy of the late 1980s, the furor of which can be traced directly back to activities of the CoS.

If I admit that this film should be stricken from the record, so to speak, I doubt you would have anything productive to add to the conversation.

You're probably right about that. As long as cult indoctrination material is not being passed off as the beneficent revelation of well-intentioned samaritans, I might not have much to say on the subject. But you never know.