Robert Whitaker is probably the most convincing writer I have ever read. His first book, “Mad in America” is a masterpiece. It changed much about the way I look at things. His description of mental illness as being a cultural and historical phenomenon was past brilliant and put everything that tries to portray itself as “objective scientific truth” as being a creature of the times and place that gave it birth. His description of what has been done historically to the mentally ill in America under the guise of scientific treatment exposes a horror story that this country had good reason to be completely ashamed of.
The second part of the book talks about the role of pharmaceutical companies since Thorazine was introduced. The track record there is equally if not more horrifying. Many, many people were made guinea pigs and manipulated to take part in treatment that misrepresented its effectiveness and its risks. It makes it clear that the pharmaceutical companies pushed a simple medical model of mental illness that was poorly researched, ineffective; whose primary role was to make them money. If you have not read that book you should. If you have an interest in mental health it is a must.
His new book, “Anatomy of an epidemic” traces how it happens. I have not read that book. I have read many, many reviews plus regularly read his blog that deals with some of those issues. I hope to read the book soon, but everything that I have read indicates it too is a masterpiece.
But I have a caution. It is not about the book. I havent read it. I expect to be very impressed when I do. My caution is about the way the book may be received.
Whittaker in the latest post I have read makes it very clear that as developing countries have gotten more Westernized the outcomes in those countries for people with schizophrenia has gotten worse. He has the figures to prove it. He cites the increased use of psychotropics as the guilty party and then points out studies in the United States which have shown that supposedly “chronic” schizophrenics have done better without medication. Whether his conclusions are totally accurate or not it seems clear they hold a large measure of truth. People need people far more than they need pills. And without question, particularly, in the public sector of the mental health system, maybe because of the sheer number of people served, or because it is cheaper and easier,or because it is what insurance companies automatically pay for, pills sometimes take precedence over people. I have more friends who see, what they perceive as being discounted and treated as a number in a mass production mental health system as being perhaps the largest problem they face.
I dont think that Whittaker intends for his explanation to be an explanation of all mental health issues. But many people I have read seem to take it that way. There reaction has been some variation of, “We have created mental illness by using poisonous drugs which turn short term problems in living to long term, life long problems.”
For myself I tend to be very wary of anything that explains everything, particularly in the mental health field. If you assume things are an artifact of medication what about those people who dont fit? I know people whose personal experience is that medication may have saved their lives and given them the freedom and opportunity to lead a much more normal life than they ever would have without it. Are those people to be judged as being foolishly deluded to the real truth about their issues?
My concerns may be very misguided. Robert Whittaker is a brilliant man who has done an amazing service to all of us. His research is thorough. His treatment of issues is clear and convincing. And perhaps my fear of people being hurt by a new sort of political correctness is premature and out of line. I certainly hope so.
Many people I know have been tortured in their experience of medication. My wife went to a psychiatrist (the kindest thing I can say about him is he was stupid) with complaints of akathesia. He told her she needed to increase the meds. She was told by another doctor that the side effects she reported to him couldnt be real, because they were not substantiated by research. Stupidity lives and is in good health.
But so many people I know experience mental illness as real and not a pharmaceutical invention and so many people see medication as having been a positive benefit in their lives. I think maybe if we realize it is so different for so many people we may get to the point where we can tolerate more than one explanation.
If you havent read Whittakers new book read it. I know I will. I know this has been a strange post in many ways. It has been a strange post to write. I have never written anything about the reactions to a book I have not read before. And for those of you who criticize for that you may indeed be right. But like I said before this post is really not so much about him.
And finally a closing confession: As much as anything else this post is my attempt to explain a stupid comment I made on Facebook. I made the comment, in regard to Whittakers book that we “didnt need another bible. We already had one.” Sometimes I amaze myself with my ability for my jaws to work faster than my brain. The comment was in poor taste and not appropriate and for that I am very sorry. I hope this post does a better job explaining what I was talking about. No one will ever go broke betting on the ability of people to say things they wish they hadnt said.
Robert Whitaker is probably the most convincing writer I have ever read. His first book, “Mad in America” is a masterpiece. It changed much about the way I look at things. His description of mental illness as being a cultural and historical phenomenon was past brilliant and put everything that tries to portray itself as “objective scientific truth” as being a creature of the times and place that gave it birth. His description of what has been done historically to the mentally ill in America under the guise of scientific treatment exposes a horror story that this country had good reason to be completely ashamed of.
The second part of the book talks about the role of pharmaceutical companies since Thorazine was introduced. The track record there is equally if not more horrifying. Many, many people were made guinea pigs and manipulated to take part in treatment that misrepresented its effectiveness and its risks. It makes it clear that the pharmaceutical companies pushed a simple medical model of mental illness that was poorly researched, ineffective; whose primary role was to make them money. If you have not read that book you should. If you have an interest in mental health it is a must.
His new book, “Anatomy of an epidemic” traces how it happens. I have not read that book. I have read many, many reviews plus regularly read his blog that deals with some of those issues. I hope to read the book soon, but everything that I have read indicates it too is a masterpiece.
But I have a caution. It is not about the book. I havent read it. I expect to be very impressed when I do. My caution is about the way the book may be received.
Whittaker in the latest post I have read makes it very clear that as developing countries have gotten more Westernized the outcomes in those countries for people with schizophrenia has gotten worse. He has the figures to prove it. He cites the increased use of psychotropics as the guilty party and then points out studies in the United States which have shown that supposedly “chronic” schizophrenics have done better without medication. Whether his conclusions are totally accurate or not it seems clear they hold a large measure of truth. People need people far more than they need pills. And without question, particularly, in the public sector of the mental health system, maybe because of the sheer number of people served, or because it is cheaper and easier,or because it is what insurance companies automatically pay for, pills sometimes take precedence over people. I have more friends who see, what they perceive as being discounted and treated as a number in a mass production mental health system as being perhaps the largest problem they face.
I dont think that Whittaker intends for his explanation to be an explanation of all mental health issues. But many people I have read seem to take it that way. There reaction has been some variation of, “We have created mental illness by using poisonous drugs which turn short term problems in living to long term, life long problems.”
For myself I tend to be very wary of anything that explains everything, particularly in the mental health field. If you assume things are an artifact of medication what about those people who dont fit? I know people whose personal experience is that medication may have saved their lives and given them the freedom and opportunity to lead a much more normal life than they ever would have without it. Are those people to be judged as being foolishly deluded to the real truth about their issues?
My concerns may be very misguided. Robert Whittaker is a brilliant man who has done an amazing service to all of us. His research is thorough. His treatment of issues is clear and convincing. And perhaps my fear of people being hurt by a new sort of political correctness is premature and out of line. I certainly hope so.
Many people I know have been tortured in their experience of medication. My wife went to a psychiatrist (the kindest thing I can say about him is he was stupid) with complaints of akathesia. He told her she needed to increase the meds. She was told by another doctor that the side effects she reported to him couldnt be real, because they were not substantiated by research. Stupidity lives and is in good health.
But so many people I know experience mental illness as real and not a pharmaceutical invention and so many people see medication as having been a positive benefit in their lives. I think maybe if we realize it is so different for so many people we may get to the point where we can tolerate more than one explanation.
If you havent read Whittakers new book read it. I know I will. I know this has been a strange post in many ways. It has been a strange post to write. I have never written anything about the reactions to a book I have not read before. And for those of you who criticize for that you may indeed be right. But like I said before this post is really not so much about him.
And finally a closing confession: As much as anything else this post is my attempt to explain a stupid comment I made on Facebook. I made the comment, in regard to Whittakers book that we “didnt need another bible. We already had one.” Sometimes I amaze myself with my ability for my jaws to work faster than my brain. The comment was in poor taste and not appropriate and for that I am very sorry. I hope this post does a better job explaining what I was talking about. No one will ever go broke betting on the ability of people to say things they wish they hadnt said.