|
Enemy of psychiatry
A recent family tragedy has focused attention on
the Church of Scientology ’ s controversial
stance against psychiatric care. By Heather Wiseman
Source
: http://www.australiandoctor.com.au/news/16/0c04f116.asp
WHEN a Sydney court was told last
month that a 25-year-old woman stabbed three family members, killing her father
and sister, the Church of Scientology was thrust into the media
spotlight.
A medical report filed in
court alleged the woman was mentally ill, but stopped taking prescription
medication and receiving treatment, apparently because of her family’s
Scientology beliefs. The court also heard that she resumed taking the medication
prior to the attacks.
What ultimately led
to the tragedy is for the courts to decide. But the case has renewed debate
about Scientology’s objection to psychiatric care.
Professor Ian Hickie, executive director of the Brain and Mind
Research Institute at the University of Sydney, is concerned that Scientology
may influence vulnerable individuals and says the negative health implications
of this have never been adequately addressed.
“That, from a medical point of view, needs to be confronted,”
he says.
“Individuals, particularly
vulnerable individuals, may be taken in and avoid
treatment.”
It’s a concern that is not
new. The religion was banned for some years in Victoria after a 1965 State
Government-commissioned inquiry that said Scientologists were conditioned to
avoid psychiatrists and this “may have tragic results”.
Today, the Church of Scientology says there are constant
“horror stories” of people who are adversely affected by psychiatric medication
“who repeatedly report their inability to get anybody to listen or take
notice”.
Professor David Copolov,
professor of psychiatry at Monash University in Melbourne, rejects Scientology’s
view that psychiatric drugs are dangerous and ineffective.
“For Scientology to say there are no data to support
[psychiatric medication’s] usefulness is clearly incorrect,” says Professor
Copolov, who was the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee’s psychiatric expert
from 1992 to 2000.
“All medications have
side effects, but the balance between efficacy and side effects [with
psychiatric medications] is hugely in favour of efficacy.
“We have to counter this anti-psychiatric rhetoric. To the
extent that it discourages seriously ill people from seeking and receiving
treatment it could be very dangerous.”
Public affairs director for the Church of Scientology in
AustraliaMs Virginia Stewart told Australian Doctor that the
church does “not agree with psychiatric drugs for a myriad of scientifically
proven reasons”.
“It is not based on
belief, but on fact, that drugs do not resolve mental problems,” she
says.
“They cover them up and in doing so
often cause great harm, including a worsening of the original feelings of
depression, resulting in violence or suicide.”
She says this is why the church, which has 250,000 members in
Australia and 10 million internationally, founded a separate organisation called
the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) in 1969. The Australian
Scientology web site explains that the CCHR’s role is “to expose and bring to an
end the brutalizing of individuals in the name of ‘mental
health’”.
The CCHR claims to operate in
more than 100 countries and is an active force in Australia, making submissions
to government inquiries, forming relationships with other interest groups,
issuing press releases and lobbying politicians.
It claims to have exposed the
Chelmsford PrivateHospital’s notorious deep sleep therapy and is now lobbying
strongly against pregnant women and children receiving ECT, against involuntary
psychiatric treatment and the “drugging of children” for
ADHD.
The Australian CCHR web site says:
“Recent studies show that children who take psychiatric stimulants for ‘ADHD’
are 46% more likely to commit one felony, and 36% more likely to commit two or
more felonies. Instead of overcoming supposed learning difficulties, these
children are at risk of moving toward a life of crime.”
A string of sensational messages flash across the web site,
borrowing spelling and facts from the international site: “There are 374 ways
for psychiatrists to label you mentally ill; Every 75 seconds another innocent
citizen is encarcerated [sic] by psychiatry; 2 million children and adolescents
are on antidepressants that can induce violent or suicidal
behaviour.”
The Australian site describes
ECT as one of the “two main treatments used by psychiatrists today” and says its
effectiveness relies on “overwhelming and damaging the
individual”.
Professor Patrick McGorry,
professor of youth mental health at the University of Melbourne, says the CCHR
presents a very distorted picture of modern psychiatry.
“They’re projecting … that psychiatry as a profession would
endorse widespread use of Ritalin, involuntary treatment and ECT,” he
says.
“All of these things we have
cautious views about. They’re misrepresenting psychiatry’s position and modern
psychiatry’s perspective.”
He says the
CCHR uses evocative issues such as ECT to more deeply entrench a One Flew
Over the Cuckoo ’ s Nest version of psychiatry, which
is “not what most people’s experience of psychiatry is”.
Professor McGorry says there is great potential for CCHR
fear-mongering to cause harm if it leads to a delay in people receiving
treatment.
He says both the CCHR and
Scientology “haven’t been tackled adequately”despite their beliefs having
potential to interfere with vulnerable people’s health care.
“It is very damaging and yet they’ve not been brought to
account for that behaviour,” he says.
“Great harm … can flow from the stance they have
taken.”
Executive director of the CCHR’s
National Office for Australia Ms Shelley Wilkins rejects that psychiatrists are
cautious.
“It cannot be proven that
anyone has any of psychiatry’s disorders and their DSMactually says, for
example, that there are no laboratory tests for ADHD or schizophrenia, so
caution does not come into it. Any use of Ritalin, involuntary commitment or ECT
is therefore based on a fraudulent diagnosis and is abuse,” Ms Wilkins
says.
In response to the suggestion of
CCHR fear-mongering, she says psychiatry “causes fear with its brutal treatments
and dangerous drugs”.
“People do not want
to seek help from psychiatry because their treatments can cause great harm and
even death and they fear being involuntarily detained and treated,” she
says.
“CCHR is dedicated to informing the
public about the dangers of psychiatric treatments, and as a result lives are
saved.”
Chief psychiatrist for NSW
Associate Professor John Basson acknowledges widespread concerns in
Australiaabout Ritalin being overprescribed.
He also says some US courts have deemed that Prozac can make
some people violent. “These circumstances seem to be rare, but they are to be
concerned about,” he says.
But Professor
Basson says the CCHR uses extreme, negative examples from the world literature
to evidence its stance against psychiatric medication.
“It uses extreme examples to make an argument about the
general use of the drug,”he says.
“A lot
of adults take these drugs and get relief from serious and debilitating
circumstances.”
He says those who are
influenced by the CCHR “might choose not to go and get help. They may try and do
without and become very sick indeed”.
Professor Basson says there is a danger in not treating mental
illnesses that recur.
“Those that recur
would recur much more seriously. The [risks] in not doing anything are very bad
indeed.”
He says psychotic episodes can
cause people with schizophrenia to lose key non-verbal communication skills and
experience a degree of emotional blunting.
“It damages people’s capacity to have good intimate
relationships,” he says.
“It could lead to
long-term disability for people, which we feel [with treatment] we could
avoid.”
Professor Basson says poor
compliance is already a problem, with about 50% of mentally ill patients not
taking prescribed medication.
“There is a
danger [the CCHR] encourages that percentage to stay high when we are trying to
reduce it.”
|
