To: <s-acc@yahoogroups.com>

From: "Andrew Phelps" <starfish@northcoast.com>

Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:19:59 -0800

Subject: Re: [s-acc] Re: Reasonably held anger (and its discontents)

 

Hi

Kmo wrote:

There is a full accounting of ECT and its destructive effects in Linda Andre's new book which I believe is called "the deceptive science."

Doctors of Deception, Rutgers Univ. Press.

Linda is centered on the current FDA safety of ECT agenda. Hopefully she will post some on that.

When Naomi and Pat and I were discussing privately "how do we present the petition to the NCMHCSO in a polite and non-confrontational way?" Linda was standing there with us. Her concern for the accountability of the deceptive psychiatrists is deserving of our respect and support.

When I posted and brought on this conversation, that wasn't my direct intention. I've paid attention to the philosophical questions related to the 'medical model' quite a bit - see articles I've written, particularly the four from 91-97

What I was seeking to do was - I keep doing this – to try to get the conversation to aim at what a socially accountable movement would look like and how do we get there. The S-ACC happily engages questions of merit like ECT and post-modernist critical thinking (and Vernon, my data on ECT in California are 20 years old and come from NAPA's accomplishment of reforming state reporting so that the Legislature GAO keeps the ECT stats, and County Patients Rights has access), but they deserve their own concentrated advocacies, when it comes to effective campaigns, as well.

What I was citing was my "previous attempt" to pull together a "client/survivor" advocacy targeting the 'medical model', and say where we got, and where we didn't. In Omaha, the theme was "Uniting the Movement for Change," and they brought in dysfunctional advocacies such as Magellan Behavioral Health, and multiple NAMI organizing activities, for whom I'd say "change" is problematical for their agendas.

When the Senator from Nebraska spoke at lunch 10/31 that was too much for me, I walked out on him. :-( [And please, I'm not speaking here against the conference, only that existentially it's hard to bear the psychological brutality.]

So I'm reflecting on "how do we bring together a movement for change that challenges the objectification system known as "behavioral health," that takes on 'dignity' the way our movement earlier fastened onto 'empowerment', and brings on a new level of advocacy.

And I keep on reflecting on the matter.

 

Andrew