Fwd: Fw: Giombetti reviews Szasz

[Guest guest]

Hirschfeld <mhirschf@...> wrote:From: " Hirschfeld "

" Ben Hansen "

CC: " Carol Collier "

Subject: Fw: Giombetti reviews Szasz

Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 20:34:22 -0400

Sent: 31 July, 2004 8:00 PM

Subject: Giombetti reviews Szasz

http://www.counterpunch.org/giombetti07272004.html

Faith in Freedom

Szaz's Challenge to Libertarians

By RICK GIOMBETTI

In his latest book, Faith In Freedom: Libertarian Principles and Psychiatric

Practices, psychiatrist and long time advocate for the abolition of involuntary

committment Szasz challenges his fellow libertarians to apply the

libertarian credo of self-ownership and non-agression to people accused of

mental illness. While libertarians both past and present have expressed many

ideas concerning economic regulations Szasz agrees with, most have turned a

blind eye to, or even openly supported, the incaceration and forced treatment of

people accused of mental illness. Szasz argues that the detention and

inprisonment, plus forced treatment, of innocent people accused of mental

illness is a more egregious violation of libertarian principles than economic

regulations. Szasz argues that the regime of coercive psychiatry in Western

societies is a manifestation of what he calls a " therapeutic state, " and that

libertarians must recognize this and fight it if they are really interested in

creating a truly free society. Szasz scoffs at the ideas put forward by

mathematical economists and the embrace of mathematical economics by many

libertarians. Szasz compares the folly of the mathematical economists with the

folly of those who argue that the existential problems of those accused of

mental illness are problems that should and must be dealt with in a coercive

manner by modern medical science. Szasz characterizes the pronouncements of

modern economists and psychiatrists as examples of " scientism, " or imitations of

modern science.

Before reviewing the views of libertarians both past and present on the topic of

psychiatry Szasz offers some choice words for the refusal of the American Civil

Liberties Union (ACLU) to come out against involuntary committment in

psychiatry, or what he calls psychiatric slavery. Forty years after his first

critcisms of the ACLU's position, or lack of a postion, on involuntary

committment were published, Szasz demonstrates that the ACLU as an organization

has evolved into fully devoted supporter coercive psychiatry. While not a

libertarian organization, the ACLU's influence and claims of supporting the

right to free speech for everybody, accept psychiatric patients, has perhaps

done the most damage to the cause of the battle for abolishing involuntary

committment. Over the past four decades the ACLU has helped give an institution

that is an egregious violator of liberty the image of a profession that " helps "

people, and, thus, has helped butress the idea that the forced " reception "

of psychiatric " help " is a " civil right, " not an egregious violation of a

person's human rights. Szasz's words ring true for those of us organizing to

abolish involuntary committment. The ACLU can be counted on to not only not help

us, but to work against us. For me the reason why the ACLU won't take any stand

against involuntary committment is obvious. The ACLU's liberal base of financial

supporters are mostly staunch believers in psychiatry and the public promotion

of mental health. The ACLU wouldn't be caught dead taking a position that would

likely alienate most of the organization's financial base.

The most interesting biographical outline offered by Szasz is the one that deals

with Bertrand in Chapter 6. Szasz reviews 's relentless campaign

to have his son permanently locked up in a psychiatric institution in the

'50s, despite the willingness of 's mother, 's second wife Dora

Black, to take her son in. raised his two children he had with Dora

Black (They also had a daughter named Kate who didn't grow up to disappoint

) to be super children and grew up to be an embarrassing

disapointment to . Szasz concludes that 's relentless campaign to

lock up and silence as an alternative to disowning was because

, and other parents like him, don't want their children to be " free to

embarrass the parent, precisely what the parent wants to avoid; it (divorce)

also leaves the parent open to censure by kin and friends for 'abandoning' his

own child. Psychiatric disposition protects the parent at the expense of

the child. " What we see with is the prototype of the modern National

Alliance of the Mentally Ill parent, who insists on disposing of an unwanted

child under the guise of a getting said child " medical treatment. " Szasz argues

knew full well that the practice of psychiatry had nothing to do with

modern medicine. Given how used psychiatry against suggests to me

Szasz is right. 's use of coercive psychiatry within his family certainly

should give persons pause whenever they read any of his pronouncements about his

love of freedom. If couldn't trust to be free and embarrassing to

him, then who else would not trust to be free as well?

Szasz offers up biographical sketches of eight prominent libertarian thinkers

both present and past, and presents his criticisms of where they have been

wrong, and where they have been right, on psychiatric slavery. The most

interesting biographical sketch among libertarians is the story of libertarian

economist and transexual Dierdre McCloskey, author of Crossing: A Memoir, and

the deployment of psychiatric violence against Dierdre by her sister. Deirdre

was born McCloskey and 's mid-life decision to transform himself

legally into a woman led his sister McCloskey, a psychology professor at

the University of Arizona, to attempt to involuntarily committment her former

brother. Deirdre was involuntarily detained at the behest of twice and

both attempts to involuntarily committment and " treat " him for his " illness "

failed. McCloskey is unique among the biographical sketches by Szasz for she is

the only person biographically treated in his book whose freedom has

been violated by psychiatry. Szasz also documents the involvement of prominent

members of the psychiatric profession in the persecution of McCloskey. In his

review of McCloskey's ordeal Szasz offers up his own views on transsexuality

that are sure to upset modern sexologists.

I've never believed one has to be in complete agreement with Szasz on economic

issues to be on the same page with him regarding psychiatric slavery and the use

of coercion to force people into psychiatric treatment. Many progressives (I use

the term " progressive " here to describe anybody who we might call a liberal or

leftist) who support the public funding of coercive psychiatry no doubt will

write Szasz off as a " reactionary right-winger. " Those progressives who profess

a love of freedom, but consistantly support increased public spending for mental

health services, have a lot to more to answer for than Szasz does when it comes

to their claims of being supporters of the human rights of others.

It's been obvious to me for some time that the practice of involuntary

psychiatry is inimical and irreconcilable with the professed love of nonviolence

and non-violent conflict resolution made by progressives. Try to attend a

progressive rally without hearing and reading platitudes to nonviolence and

non-violent conflict resolution being bandied about by the organizers and

participants. You'll also likely find progressive organizers putting on

non-violence trainings when large demonstrations are being organized, and you'll

find that their non-violence credo doesn't apply when it comes to deploying

psychiatric violence against family members. Try to find one progressive

anywhere at a meeting, rally or other social gathering who doesn't support

funding what McCloskey did to Dierdre McClosky, or Betrand did to

.

McCloskey used involuntary committment laws and publicly funded police

officers to detain her former brother in her attempts to get him locked up and

treated against his will. The public funds used by McCloskey to detain her

former brother are public funds progressives always insist we must spend and we

always must spend in greater and greater amounts. We're never spending enough

public money on what McCloskey did to Deirdre McCloskey according to many

a progressive. Progressive supporters of publicly funded coercive psychiatry

need to take a close look at what McCloskey did to her former brother

before they open their mouths in support of publicly funding psychiatric

practices. It's not enough to say that what happened to Deirdre McCloskey was an

" abuse " of psychiatry. What happened to Deirdre McCloskey is a standard

operating procedure in psychiatric practices, which are per se major abuses of

medical ethics and human rights. .

Szasz's writings are also a call for family values in the face of a movement

that seeks to lock and forcibly treat family members against their will. The

mental health movement and psychiatry never tire of reminding the public of how

mental illness " devastates " families afflicted by it, and how psychiatry comes

to the rescue of the " devastated " family. Actually, it's the other way around.

It is involuntary committment proceedings and coerced psychiatric treatment that

the individuals accused of mental illness endure that his devastating. It is

psychiatry and the mental health movement who are the greatest fomenters of

domestic violence and the destruction of families today. Never in history has a

movement so brazenly called for the depravation of the liberty and humanity of a

class of people than the modern mental health movement and gotten away with it.

This is one of the most important aspects of Szasz's thought: Be especially nice

to your family members when you are annoyed and embarrassed by their actions.

Don't be like a Betrand or a McCloskey. Be big enough to walk away

from a family member you can't get along with no matter how much they annoy and

embarrass you. If it's come to the point to where you are actively contemplating

intiating involuntary committment proceedings against a family member, much less

actively doing so, then it clearly is time to divorce yourself from this person.

Nonviolence and non-violent conflict resolution starts at home.

Faith In Freedom represents a lifetime of thinking on a topic few people have

given much thought. Szasz demonstrates that both historically and today people

who profess a love of liberty have almost always conceded ground to the mental

health movement's demand that we deprive people accused of mental illness of

their personal liberty and responsibility. Szasz eloquently challenges his

readers to not abandon their libertarian principles in the face of relentless

propoganda demanding they do otherwise.

Rick Giombetti lives in Seattle and is a member of Mindfreedom Washington State,

a local branch of the internationally known Mindfreedom in Eugene, Oregon. His

blogsite is located at: http://rickgiombetti.blogspot.com/. He can be contacted

at: @speakeasy.org

F. Prior

Mental Health Advocate

Chicago, IL 60656-1639

T: 773/774-6696 or 800/654-1215 F: 801/848-3451

E: jprior@... W: www.lgln.com (under construction)

[Guest guest]

Hirschfeld <mhirschf@...> wrote:From: " Hirschfeld "

" Ben Hansen "

CC: " Carol Collier "

Subject: Fw: Giombetti reviews Szasz

Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 20:34:22 -0400

Sent: 31 July, 2004 8:00 PM

Subject: Giombetti reviews Szasz

http://www.counterpunch.org/giombetti07272004.html

Faith in Freedom

Szaz's Challenge to Libertarians

By RICK GIOMBETTI

In his latest book, Faith In Freedom: Libertarian Principles and Psychiatric

Practices, psychiatrist and long time advocate for the abolition of involuntary

committment Szasz challenges his fellow libertarians to apply the

libertarian credo of self-ownership and non-agression to people accused of

mental illness. While libertarians both past and present have expressed many

ideas concerning economic regulations Szasz agrees with, most have turned a

blind eye to, or even openly supported, the incaceration and forced treatment of

people accused of mental illness. Szasz argues that the detention and

inprisonment, plus forced treatment, of innocent people accused of mental

illness is a more egregious violation of libertarian principles than economic

regulations. Szasz argues that the regime of coercive psychiatry in Western

societies is a manifestation of what he calls a " therapeutic state, " and that

libertarians must recognize this and fight it if they are really interested in

creating a truly free society. Szasz scoffs at the ideas put forward by

mathematical economists and the embrace of mathematical economics by many

libertarians. Szasz compares the folly of the mathematical economists with the

folly of those who argue that the existential problems of those accused of

mental illness are problems that should and must be dealt with in a coercive

manner by modern medical science. Szasz characterizes the pronouncements of

modern economists and psychiatrists as examples of " scientism, " or imitations of

modern science.

Before reviewing the views of libertarians both past and present on the topic of

psychiatry Szasz offers some choice words for the refusal of the American Civil

Liberties Union (ACLU) to come out against involuntary committment in

psychiatry, or what he calls psychiatric slavery. Forty years after his first

critcisms of the ACLU's position, or lack of a postion, on involuntary

committment were published, Szasz demonstrates that the ACLU as an organization

has evolved into fully devoted supporter coercive psychiatry. While not a

libertarian organization, the ACLU's influence and claims of supporting the

right to free speech for everybody, accept psychiatric patients, has perhaps

done the most damage to the cause of the battle for abolishing involuntary

committment. Over the past four decades the ACLU has helped give an institution

that is an egregious violator of liberty the image of a profession that " helps "

people, and, thus, has helped butress the idea that the forced " reception "

of psychiatric " help " is a " civil right, " not an egregious violation of a

person's human rights. Szasz's words ring true for those of us organizing to

abolish involuntary committment. The ACLU can be counted on to not only not help

us, but to work against us. For me the reason why the ACLU won't take any stand

against involuntary committment is obvious. The ACLU's liberal base of financial

supporters are mostly staunch believers in psychiatry and the public promotion

of mental health. The ACLU wouldn't be caught dead taking a position that would

likely alienate most of the organization's financial base.

The most interesting biographical outline offered by Szasz is the one that deals

with Bertrand in Chapter 6. Szasz reviews 's relentless campaign

to have his son permanently locked up in a psychiatric institution in the

'50s, despite the willingness of 's mother, 's second wife Dora

Black, to take her son in. raised his two children he had with Dora

Black (They also had a daughter named Kate who didn't grow up to disappoint

) to be super children and grew up to be an embarrassing

disapointment to . Szasz concludes that 's relentless campaign to

lock up and silence as an alternative to disowning was because

, and other parents like him, don't want their children to be " free to

embarrass the parent, precisely what the parent wants to avoid; it (divorce)

also leaves the parent open to censure by kin and friends for 'abandoning' his

own child. Psychiatric disposition protects the parent at the expense of

the child. " What we see with is the prototype of the modern National

Alliance of the Mentally Ill parent, who insists on disposing of an unwanted

child under the guise of a getting said child " medical treatment. " Szasz argues

knew full well that the practice of psychiatry had nothing to do with

modern medicine. Given how used psychiatry against suggests to me

Szasz is right. 's use of coercive psychiatry within his family certainly

should give persons pause whenever they read any of his pronouncements about his

love of freedom. If couldn't trust to be free and embarrassing to

him, then who else would not trust to be free as well?

Szasz offers up biographical sketches of eight prominent libertarian thinkers

both present and past, and presents his criticisms of where they have been

wrong, and where they have been right, on psychiatric slavery. The most

interesting biographical sketch among libertarians is the story of libertarian

economist and transexual Dierdre McCloskey, author of Crossing: A Memoir, and

the deployment of psychiatric violence against Dierdre by her sister. Deirdre

was born McCloskey and 's mid-life decision to transform himself

legally into a woman led his sister McCloskey, a psychology professor at

the University of Arizona, to attempt to involuntarily committment her former

brother. Deirdre was involuntarily detained at the behest of twice and

both attempts to involuntarily committment and " treat " him for his " illness "

failed. McCloskey is unique among the biographical sketches by Szasz for she is

the only person biographically treated in his book whose freedom has

been violated by psychiatry. Szasz also documents the involvement of prominent

members of the psychiatric profession in the persecution of McCloskey. In his

review of McCloskey's ordeal Szasz offers up his own views on transsexuality

that are sure to upset modern sexologists.

I've never believed one has to be in complete agreement with Szasz on economic

issues to be on the same page with him regarding psychiatric slavery and the use

of coercion to force people into psychiatric treatment. Many progressives (I use

the term " progressive " here to describe anybody who we might call a liberal or

leftist) who support the public funding of coercive psychiatry no doubt will

write Szasz off as a " reactionary right-winger. " Those progressives who profess

a love of freedom, but consistantly support increased public spending for mental

health services, have a lot to more to answer for than Szasz does when it comes

to their claims of being supporters of the human rights of others.

It's been obvious to me for some time that the practice of involuntary

psychiatry is inimical and irreconcilable with the professed love of nonviolence

and non-violent conflict resolution made by progressives. Try to attend a

progressive rally without hearing and reading platitudes to nonviolence and

non-violent conflict resolution being bandied about by the organizers and

participants. You'll also likely find progressive organizers putting on

non-violence trainings when large demonstrations are being organized, and you'll

find that their non-violence credo doesn't apply when it comes to deploying

psychiatric violence against family members. Try to find one progressive

anywhere at a meeting, rally or other social gathering who doesn't support

funding what McCloskey did to Dierdre McClosky, or Betrand did to

.

McCloskey used involuntary committment laws and publicly funded police

officers to detain her former brother in her attempts to get him locked up and

treated against his will. The public funds used by McCloskey to detain her

former brother are public funds progressives always insist we must spend and we

always must spend in greater and greater amounts. We're never spending enough

public money on what McCloskey did to Deirdre McCloskey according to many

a progressive. Progressive supporters of publicly funded coercive psychiatry

need to take a close look at what McCloskey did to her former brother

before they open their mouths in support of publicly funding psychiatric

practices. It's not enough to say that what happened to Deirdre McCloskey was an

" abuse " of psychiatry. What happened to Deirdre McCloskey is a standard

operating procedure in psychiatric practices, which are per se major abuses of

medical ethics and human rights. .

Szasz's writings are also a call for family values in the face of a movement

that seeks to lock and forcibly treat family members against their will. The

mental health movement and psychiatry never tire of reminding the public of how

mental illness " devastates " families afflicted by it, and how psychiatry comes

to the rescue of the " devastated " family. Actually, it's the other way around.

It is involuntary committment proceedings and coerced psychiatric treatment that

the individuals accused of mental illness endure that his devastating. It is

psychiatry and the mental health movement who are the greatest fomenters of

domestic violence and the destruction of families today. Never in history has a

movement so brazenly called for the depravation of the liberty and humanity of a

class of people than the modern mental health movement and gotten away with it.

This is one of the most important aspects of Szasz's thought: Be especially nice

to your family members when you are annoyed and embarrassed by their actions.

Don't be like a Betrand or a McCloskey. Be big enough to walk away

from a family member you can't get along with no matter how much they annoy and

embarrass you. If it's come to the point to where you are actively contemplating

intiating involuntary committment proceedings against a family member, much less

actively doing so, then it clearly is time to divorce yourself from this person.

Nonviolence and non-violent conflict resolution starts at home.

Faith In Freedom represents a lifetime of thinking on a topic few people have

given much thought. Szasz demonstrates that both historically and today people

who profess a love of liberty have almost always conceded ground to the mental

health movement's demand that we deprive people accused of mental illness of

their personal liberty and responsibility. Szasz eloquently challenges his

readers to not abandon their libertarian principles in the face of relentless

propoganda demanding they do otherwise.

Rick Giombetti lives in Seattle and is a member of Mindfreedom Washington State,

a local branch of the internationally known Mindfreedom in Eugene, Oregon. His

blogsite is located at: http://rickgiombetti.blogspot.com/. He can be contacted

at: @speakeasy.org

F. Prior

Mental Health Advocate

Chicago, IL 60656-1639

T: 773/774-6696 or 800/654-1215 F: 801/848-3451

E: jprior@... W: www.lgln.com (under construction)

[Guest guest]

Hirschfeld <mhirschf@...> wrote:From: " Hirschfeld "

" Ben Hansen "

CC: " Carol Collier "

Subject: Fw: Giombetti reviews Szasz

Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 20:34:22 -0400

Sent: 31 July, 2004 8:00 PM

Subject: Giombetti reviews Szasz

http://www.counterpunch.org/giombetti07272004.html

Faith in Freedom

Szaz's Challenge to Libertarians

By RICK GIOMBETTI

In his latest book, Faith In Freedom: Libertarian Principles and Psychiatric

Practices, psychiatrist and long time advocate for the abolition of involuntary

committment Szasz challenges his fellow libertarians to apply the

libertarian credo of self-ownership and non-agression to people accused of

mental illness. While libertarians both past and present have expressed many

ideas concerning economic regulations Szasz agrees with, most have turned a

blind eye to, or even openly supported, the incaceration and forced treatment of

people accused of mental illness. Szasz argues that the detention and

inprisonment, plus forced treatment, of innocent people accused of mental

illness is a more egregious violation of libertarian principles than economic

regulations. Szasz argues that the regime of coercive psychiatry in Western

societies is a manifestation of what he calls a " therapeutic state, " and that

libertarians must recognize this and fight it if they are really interested in

creating a truly free society. Szasz scoffs at the ideas put forward by

mathematical economists and the embrace of mathematical economics by many

libertarians. Szasz compares the folly of the mathematical economists with the

folly of those who argue that the existential problems of those accused of

mental illness are problems that should and must be dealt with in a coercive

manner by modern medical science. Szasz characterizes the pronouncements of

modern economists and psychiatrists as examples of " scientism, " or imitations of

modern science.

Before reviewing the views of libertarians both past and present on the topic of

psychiatry Szasz offers some choice words for the refusal of the American Civil

Liberties Union (ACLU) to come out against involuntary committment in

psychiatry, or what he calls psychiatric slavery. Forty years after his first

critcisms of the ACLU's position, or lack of a postion, on involuntary

committment were published, Szasz demonstrates that the ACLU as an organization

has evolved into fully devoted supporter coercive psychiatry. While not a

libertarian organization, the ACLU's influence and claims of supporting the

right to free speech for everybody, accept psychiatric patients, has perhaps

done the most damage to the cause of the battle for abolishing involuntary

committment. Over the past four decades the ACLU has helped give an institution

that is an egregious violator of liberty the image of a profession that " helps "

people, and, thus, has helped butress the idea that the forced " reception "

of psychiatric " help " is a " civil right, " not an egregious violation of a

person's human rights. Szasz's words ring true for those of us organizing to

abolish involuntary committment. The ACLU can be counted on to not only not help

us, but to work against us. For me the reason why the ACLU won't take any stand

against involuntary committment is obvious. The ACLU's liberal base of financial

supporters are mostly staunch believers in psychiatry and the public promotion

of mental health. The ACLU wouldn't be caught dead taking a position that would

likely alienate most of the organization's financial base.

The most interesting biographical outline offered by Szasz is the one that deals

with Bertrand in Chapter 6. Szasz reviews 's relentless campaign

to have his son permanently locked up in a psychiatric institution in the

'50s, despite the willingness of 's mother, 's second wife Dora

Black, to take her son in. raised his two children he had with Dora

Black (They also had a daughter named Kate who didn't grow up to disappoint

) to be super children and grew up to be an embarrassing

disapointment to . Szasz concludes that 's relentless campaign to

lock up and silence as an alternative to disowning was because

, and other parents like him, don't want their children to be " free to

embarrass the parent, precisely what the parent wants to avoid; it (divorce)

also leaves the parent open to censure by kin and friends for 'abandoning' his

own child. Psychiatric disposition protects the parent at the expense of

the child. " What we see with is the prototype of the modern National

Alliance of the Mentally Ill parent, who insists on disposing of an unwanted

child under the guise of a getting said child " medical treatment. " Szasz argues

knew full well that the practice of psychiatry had nothing to do with

modern medicine. Given how used psychiatry against suggests to me

Szasz is right. 's use of coercive psychiatry within his family certainly

should give persons pause whenever they read any of his pronouncements about his

love of freedom. If couldn't trust to be free and embarrassing to

him, then who else would not trust to be free as well?

Szasz offers up biographical sketches of eight prominent libertarian thinkers

both present and past, and presents his criticisms of where they have been

wrong, and where they have been right, on psychiatric slavery. The most

interesting biographical sketch among libertarians is the story of libertarian

economist and transexual Dierdre McCloskey, author of Crossing: A Memoir, and

the deployment of psychiatric violence against Dierdre by her sister. Deirdre

was born McCloskey and 's mid-life decision to transform himself

legally into a woman led his sister McCloskey, a psychology professor at

the University of Arizona, to attempt to involuntarily committment her former

brother. Deirdre was involuntarily detained at the behest of twice and

both attempts to involuntarily committment and " treat " him for his " illness "

failed. McCloskey is unique among the biographical sketches by Szasz for she is

the only person biographically treated in his book whose freedom has

been violated by psychiatry. Szasz also documents the involvement of prominent

members of the psychiatric profession in the persecution of McCloskey. In his

review of McCloskey's ordeal Szasz offers up his own views on transsexuality

that are sure to upset modern sexologists.

I've never believed one has to be in complete agreement with Szasz on economic

issues to be on the same page with him regarding psychiatric slavery and the use

of coercion to force people into psychiatric treatment. Many progressives (I use

the term " progressive " here to describe anybody who we might call a liberal or

leftist) who support the public funding of coercive psychiatry no doubt will

write Szasz off as a " reactionary right-winger. " Those progressives who profess

a love of freedom, but consistantly support increased public spending for mental

health services, have a lot to more to answer for than Szasz does when it comes

to their claims of being supporters of the human rights of others.

It's been obvious to me for some time that the practice of involuntary

psychiatry is inimical and irreconcilable with the professed love of nonviolence

and non-violent conflict resolution made by progressives. Try to attend a

progressive rally without hearing and reading platitudes to nonviolence and

non-violent conflict resolution being bandied about by the organizers and

participants. You'll also likely find progressive organizers putting on

non-violence trainings when large demonstrations are being organized, and you'll

find that their non-violence credo doesn't apply when it comes to deploying

psychiatric violence against family members. Try to find one progressive

anywhere at a meeting, rally or other social gathering who doesn't support

funding what McCloskey did to Dierdre McClosky, or Betrand did to

.

McCloskey used involuntary committment laws and publicly funded police

officers to detain her former brother in her attempts to get him locked up and

treated against his will. The public funds used by McCloskey to detain her

former brother are public funds progressives always insist we must spend and we

always must spend in greater and greater amounts. We're never spending enough

public money on what McCloskey did to Deirdre McCloskey according to many

a progressive. Progressive supporters of publicly funded coercive psychiatry

need to take a close look at what McCloskey did to her former brother

before they open their mouths in support of publicly funding psychiatric

practices. It's not enough to say that what happened to Deirdre McCloskey was an

" abuse " of psychiatry. What happened to Deirdre McCloskey is a standard

operating procedure in psychiatric practices, which are per se major abuses of

medical ethics and human rights. .

Szasz's writings are also a call for family values in the face of a movement

that seeks to lock and forcibly treat family members against their will. The

mental health movement and psychiatry never tire of reminding the public of how

mental illness " devastates " families afflicted by it, and how psychiatry comes

to the rescue of the " devastated " family. Actually, it's the other way around.

It is involuntary committment proceedings and coerced psychiatric treatment that

the individuals accused of mental illness endure that his devastating. It is

psychiatry and the mental health movement who are the greatest fomenters of

domestic violence and the destruction of families today. Never in history has a

movement so brazenly called for the depravation of the liberty and humanity of a

class of people than the modern mental health movement and gotten away with it.

This is one of the most important aspects of Szasz's thought: Be especially nice

to your family members when you are annoyed and embarrassed by their actions.

Don't be like a Betrand or a McCloskey. Be big enough to walk away

from a family member you can't get along with no matter how much they annoy and

embarrass you. If it's come to the point to where you are actively contemplating

intiating involuntary committment proceedings against a family member, much less

actively doing so, then it clearly is time to divorce yourself from this person.

Nonviolence and non-violent conflict resolution starts at home.

Faith In Freedom represents a lifetime of thinking on a topic few people have

given much thought. Szasz demonstrates that both historically and today people

who profess a love of liberty have almost always conceded ground to the mental

health movement's demand that we deprive people accused of mental illness of

their personal liberty and responsibility. Szasz eloquently challenges his

readers to not abandon their libertarian principles in the face of relentless

propoganda demanding they do otherwise.

Rick Giombetti lives in Seattle and is a member of Mindfreedom Washington State,

a local branch of the internationally known Mindfreedom in Eugene, Oregon. His

blogsite is located at: http://rickgiombetti.blogspot.com/. He can be contacted

at: @speakeasy.org

F. Prior

Mental Health Advocate

Chicago, IL 60656-1639

T: 773/774-6696 or 800/654-1215 F: 801/848-3451

E: jprior@... W: www.lgln.com (under construction)

[Guest guest]

Hirschfeld <mhirschf@...> wrote:From: " Hirschfeld "

" Ben Hansen "

CC: " Carol Collier "

Subject: Fw: Giombetti reviews Szasz

Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 20:34:22 -0400

Sent: 31 July, 2004 8:00 PM

Subject: Giombetti reviews Szasz

http://www.counterpunch.org/giombetti07272004.html

Faith in Freedom

Szaz's Challenge to Libertarians

By RICK GIOMBETTI

In his latest book, Faith In Freedom: Libertarian Principles and Psychiatric

Practices, psychiatrist and long time advocate for the abolition of involuntary

committment Szasz challenges his fellow libertarians to apply the

libertarian credo of self-ownership and non-agression to people accused of

mental illness. While libertarians both past and present have expressed many

ideas concerning economic regulations Szasz agrees with, most have turned a

blind eye to, or even openly supported, the incaceration and forced treatment of

people accused of mental illness. Szasz argues that the detention and

inprisonment, plus forced treatment, of innocent people accused of mental

illness is a more egregious violation of libertarian principles than economic

regulations. Szasz argues that the regime of coercive psychiatry in Western

societies is a manifestation of what he calls a " therapeutic state, " and that

libertarians must recognize this and fight it if they are really interested in

creating a truly free society. Szasz scoffs at the ideas put forward by

mathematical economists and the embrace of mathematical economics by many

libertarians. Szasz compares the folly of the mathematical economists with the

folly of those who argue that the existential problems of those accused of

mental illness are problems that should and must be dealt with in a coercive

manner by modern medical science. Szasz characterizes the pronouncements of

modern economists and psychiatrists as examples of " scientism, " or imitations of

modern science.

Before reviewing the views of libertarians both past and present on the topic of

psychiatry Szasz offers some choice words for the refusal of the American Civil

Liberties Union (ACLU) to come out against involuntary committment in

psychiatry, or what he calls psychiatric slavery. Forty years after his first

critcisms of the ACLU's position, or lack of a postion, on involuntary

committment were published, Szasz demonstrates that the ACLU as an organization

has evolved into fully devoted supporter coercive psychiatry. While not a

libertarian organization, the ACLU's influence and claims of supporting the

right to free speech for everybody, accept psychiatric patients, has perhaps

done the most damage to the cause of the battle for abolishing involuntary

committment. Over the past four decades the ACLU has helped give an institution

that is an egregious violator of liberty the image of a profession that " helps "

people, and, thus, has helped butress the idea that the forced " reception "

of psychiatric " help " is a " civil right, " not an egregious violation of a

person's human rights. Szasz's words ring true for those of us organizing to

abolish involuntary committment. The ACLU can be counted on to not only not help

us, but to work against us. For me the reason why the ACLU won't take any stand

against involuntary committment is obvious. The ACLU's liberal base of financial

supporters are mostly staunch believers in psychiatry and the public promotion

of mental health. The ACLU wouldn't be caught dead taking a position that would

likely alienate most of the organization's financial base.

The most interesting biographical outline offered by Szasz is the one that deals

with Bertrand in Chapter 6. Szasz reviews 's relentless campaign

to have his son permanently locked up in a psychiatric institution in the

'50s, despite the willingness of 's mother, 's second wife Dora

Black, to take her son in. raised his two children he had with Dora

Black (They also had a daughter named Kate who didn't grow up to disappoint

) to be super children and grew up to be an embarrassing

disapointment to . Szasz concludes that 's relentless campaign to

lock up and silence as an alternative to disowning was because

, and other parents like him, don't want their children to be " free to

embarrass the parent, precisely what the parent wants to avoid; it (divorce)

also leaves the parent open to censure by kin and friends for 'abandoning' his

own child. Psychiatric disposition protects the parent at the expense of

the child. " What we see with is the prototype of the modern National

Alliance of the Mentally Ill parent, who insists on disposing of an unwanted

child under the guise of a getting said child " medical treatment. " Szasz argues

knew full well that the practice of psychiatry had nothing to do with

modern medicine. Given how used psychiatry against suggests to me

Szasz is right. 's use of coercive psychiatry within his family certainly

should give persons pause whenever they read any of his pronouncements about his

love of freedom. If couldn't trust to be free and embarrassing to

him, then who else would not trust to be free as well?

Szasz offers up biographical sketches of eight prominent libertarian thinkers

both present and past, and presents his criticisms of where they have been

wrong, and where they have been right, on psychiatric slavery. The most

interesting biographical sketch among libertarians is the story of libertarian

economist and transexual Dierdre McCloskey, author of Crossing: A Memoir, and

the deployment of psychiatric violence against Dierdre by her sister. Deirdre

was born McCloskey and 's mid-life decision to transform himself

legally into a woman led his sister McCloskey, a psychology professor at

the University of Arizona, to attempt to involuntarily committment her former

brother. Deirdre was involuntarily detained at the behest of twice and

both attempts to involuntarily committment and " treat " him for his " illness "

failed. McCloskey is unique among the biographical sketches by Szasz for she is

the only person biographically treated in his book whose freedom has

been violated by psychiatry. Szasz also documents the involvement of prominent

members of the psychiatric profession in the persecution of McCloskey. In his

review of McCloskey's ordeal Szasz offers up his own views on transsexuality

that are sure to upset modern sexologists.

I've never believed one has to be in complete agreement with Szasz on economic

issues to be on the same page with him regarding psychiatric slavery and the use

of coercion to force people into psychiatric treatment. Many progressives (I use

the term " progressive " here to describe anybody who we might call a liberal or

leftist) who support the public funding of coercive psychiatry no doubt will

write Szasz off as a " reactionary right-winger. " Those progressives who profess

a love of freedom, but consistantly support increased public spending for mental

health services, have a lot to more to answer for than Szasz does when it comes

to their claims of being supporters of the human rights of others.

It's been obvious to me for some time that the practice of involuntary

psychiatry is inimical and irreconcilable with the professed love of nonviolence

and non-violent conflict resolution made by progressives. Try to attend a

progressive rally without hearing and reading platitudes to nonviolence and

non-violent conflict resolution being bandied about by the organizers and

participants. You'll also likely find progressive organizers putting on

non-violence trainings when large demonstrations are being organized, and you'll

find that their non-violence credo doesn't apply when it comes to deploying

psychiatric violence against family members. Try to find one progressive

anywhere at a meeting, rally or other social gathering who doesn't support

funding what McCloskey did to Dierdre McClosky, or Betrand did to

.

McCloskey used involuntary committment laws and publicly funded police

officers to detain her former brother in her attempts to get him locked up and

treated against his will. The public funds used by McCloskey to detain her

former brother are public funds progressives always insist we must spend and we

always must spend in greater and greater amounts. We're never spending enough

public money on what McCloskey did to Deirdre McCloskey according to many

a progressive. Progressive supporters of publicly funded coercive psychiatry

need to take a close look at what McCloskey did to her former brother

before they open their mouths in support of publicly funding psychiatric

practices. It's not enough to say that what happened to Deirdre McCloskey was an

" abuse " of psychiatry. What happened to Deirdre McCloskey is a standard

operating procedure in psychiatric practices, which are per se major abuses of

medical ethics and human rights. .

Szasz's writings are also a call for family values in the face of a movement

that seeks to lock and forcibly treat family members against their will. The

mental health movement and psychiatry never tire of reminding the public of how

mental illness " devastates " families afflicted by it, and how psychiatry comes

to the rescue of the " devastated " family. Actually, it's the other way around.

It is involuntary committment proceedings and coerced psychiatric treatment that

the individuals accused of mental illness endure that his devastating. It is

psychiatry and the mental health movement who are the greatest fomenters of

domestic violence and the destruction of families today. Never in history has a

movement so brazenly called for the depravation of the liberty and humanity of a

class of people than the modern mental health movement and gotten away with it.

This is one of the most important aspects of Szasz's thought: Be especially nice

to your family members when you are annoyed and embarrassed by their actions.

Don't be like a Betrand or a McCloskey. Be big enough to walk away

from a family member you can't get along with no matter how much they annoy and

embarrass you. If it's come to the point to where you are actively contemplating

intiating involuntary committment proceedings against a family member, much less

actively doing so, then it clearly is time to divorce yourself from this person.

Nonviolence and non-violent conflict resolution starts at home.

Faith In Freedom represents a lifetime of thinking on a topic few people have

given much thought. Szasz demonstrates that both historically and today people

who profess a love of liberty have almost always conceded ground to the mental

health movement's demand that we deprive people accused of mental illness of

their personal liberty and responsibility. Szasz eloquently challenges his

readers to not abandon their libertarian principles in the face of relentless

propoganda demanding they do otherwise.

Rick Giombetti lives in Seattle and is a member of Mindfreedom Washington State,

a local branch of the internationally known Mindfreedom in Eugene, Oregon. His

blogsite is located at: http://rickgiombetti.blogspot.com/. He can be contacted

at: @speakeasy.org

F. Prior

Mental Health Advocate

Chicago, IL 60656-1639

T: 773/774-6696 or 800/654-1215 F: 801/848-3451

E: jprior@... W: www.lgln.com (under construction)