ECT Survivor Speaks Out Against the Procedure

Doctor and ECT survivor Sue Cunliffe has been interviewed on various radio and video programs this year and has recently added another appearance.

Check out Sue Cunliffe’s other interview: BBC Hereford & Worcester – Elliott and Toni at Breakfast, A Herefordshire woman’s experience of electroconvulsive therapy, and Dean Ryan on referees

TRIGGER WARNINGS:

Footage of the modified ECT procedure, conscious man convulsing and side-effects discussion.

I was greeted with a traumatic surprise at this videos opening footage of a patient receiving ECT. The psychiatrist and aids in the video were the first to assure me of ECT’s safety before repeatedly damaging my brain.

My trauma aside, I was also surprised at the mention of the increased seizure threshold. Seizures are catastrophic events the body works hard to prevent so over time, shock doctors have to use more electricity to induce them. This was one of the many vital pieces of information I was never given and  I have only ever seen mentioned by people who speak against ECT. It is doubtful it is ever included in consent forms or discussed with patients or family members. If it is, it is most likely downplayed.

As for ECT journalism, If you’re not familiar with electroshock’s media history, it is almost always favorably biased to the point of being promotional. Anything other than glowing reports with a mumbled mention of a few bad outcomes are practically unheard of.

This video does repeat many of the same unoriginal, recycled ideas and statements from past ECT articles:

  1. One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest reference
  2. People believe ECT is barbaric
  3. ECT ‘worked’ for this person, but doctors don’t know why (Not true! See my video, Brain Damage Therapy)

That said, there is a refreshing aspect of this video and other media Sue Cunliffe has participated in–there’s less bias towards ECT and provides more time to critical views and negative experiences.

The journalist mentions the bizarre thought process that went into the creation of ECT and also interviewing John Read, Australian psychology professor, and writer, about psychiatry’s ‘new and improved ECT,’ claim. John had also written several important articles about the obscene use of  forced ECT in the Garth Daniels case this last year.

There was also a critical look at the  Royal College of Psychiatrists data on how many patients they claim are injured (1 in 10 versus more likely projections of 1 in 5).

My hope is that harder hitting, less biased news stories will become the norm and psychiatry will no longer get a free pass in the public arena.

 

 

Spot a typo? Tell me about it at aftershockrecovery (at) gmail (dot) com. Thank you 🙂

 

FDA: Electroshock has risks but is useful to combat severe depression – The Washington Post

In December 2015, Dan Hurley wrote a glowing piece about psychiatrist and ECT proponent, Sarah Lisanby and the “new ECT,” in the Atlantic. Well, he’s at it again in his new piece for the Washington Post FDA: Electroshock has risks but is useful to combat severe depression

Survivors and allies have already begun injecting some balance into this article via the comments. Feel free to join the discussion on both articles 🙂

 

Garth Daniels is Free!

I was doing a late night email check and was beyond delighted to see this petiton update for Garth Daniels, an Australian man who was being subjected to excessive restraints, drugging and electroshock has finally be realeased and will be given proper care to rebuild his life. Get the rest of the details here

A Survivor’s Response to FDA’s ECT Rule Change

Chris Dubey is a psychiatric survivor who has done excellent writing on the issues surrounding electroshock. Seriously, I was thrilled when I stumbled across his work.

He recently shared his FDA shock device reclassification response on Mad in America

To read more of his well cited and argued work elsewhere on the web, check out the links below.

Letter to Three Connecticut Politicians about involuntary Electroshock

A summary of references against electroshock

If you haven’t signed the Mindfreedom FDA electroshock reclassification petition, you can find it here.

Please sign and share!

Thanks!

Less Than 72 Hours Left to Respond the FDA

We have just a few days left to respond to the FDA dockets and sign the MindFreedom petiton. Click on the link below to get the latest update on the our efforts and read Lauren’s experpertly crafted letter to the FDA ombudsman.

http://www.madinamerica.com/2016/03/only-72-hours-left-to-stop-shock-device/

Who Are Anti-Psychiatry Activists? People Harmed by Psychiatry

The APA is employing a popular tactic of playing the victim to “anti-psychiatry movement.”

That term carries unflattering stigma.

The anti-psychiatry movement is portrayed as anti-science, fringe quackery, and consisting of only Scientologists and busy bodies who are interfering with doctors ability to soundly treat suffering mental patients.

The truth?

The majority of the anti-psychiatry movement are people who themselves or their loved ones have been grievously harmed or killed by unscientific, dangerous treatments such as drugs and electroshock. People who don’t who aren’t treated as credible because of the diagnoses they have been given, often have limited resources for legal recourse- not that they would be taken seriously any ways.

These “anti-psychiatry” people have lost everything and bravely choose to speak out so others may be saved from this iatrogenic suffering and so the public and government can be made aware so justice can be served and protective changes made.

Psychiatry doesn’t look so noble when you put this tactic in its correct context. It’s is a well funded bully with the blind support of people taught that doctors are always good and trust worthy and their treatments scientifically sound.

Do they really care about their patients? All you need to know is look at how they treat those they harm who are be brave enough to speak out against them. 

I was irrevocably injured by psychiatry. I was uniformed of the risks. I don’t want what happened to me to happen to other people-they need to be warned of the dangers, especially since psychiatry is unwilling to do so.

I think those who knowingly cover up, ignore or deny harm caused by their treatments should be held accountable along with watchdog agencies like the FDA for choosing special interests over upholding their duty to protect people.

If what I say sounds reasonable- if you agree patients deserve to be informed and protected against dangerous psychiatric interventions, and organizations like the FDA should follow their governing rules  then please sign and this subversive, “anti-psychiatry” petition:

https://www.change.org/p/fda-stop-fda-from-down-classifying-the-shock-device-to-a-class-ii-device-stop-shock-treatment