tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post3160578641674647506..comments2024-03-18T03:28:36.581-04:00Comments on Shrink Rap: Is it Ok to Shrink your Sister in an Emergency?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-45400478711137595352014-10-14T22:35:26.230-04:002014-10-14T22:35:26.230-04:00Since I am not a doctor, but the son of a doctor, ...Since I am not a doctor, but the son of a doctor, I can only speak based on lots of knowledge. Dad giving me Darvon samples or a valium in the 70's is different. Than prescribing Zoloft by any family member except to avoid symptoms of withdrawal. Zoloft is a fast acting SSRI. The sister was only on for a short time, starting a new dose is irresponsible without appropriate supervision eg Maniac episode, suicide, titration. Using narcotics is somewhat 19th century better than nothing. WHY FOR HIPPOCRATES SAKE HAS NO ONE GIVEN THIS WOMAN A BENZIODIAZEPAM. As a lawyer who understands these medications, my gut tells me not giving sister Xanax, which she had success with is far below the standard of care I expect and it doesn't take a psychiatrist (a doc in the box) to prescribe Xanax for a Panic attack. Compassion and Morality trump rules and regulations and protocols. The Zoloft could be dangerous. The benzos compassionate and safer than narcotics. Do no harm and do the right thing. If a doctor was not giving a family member of yours medication that you believe was warranted, you might suggest that they consider there responsibility under Tarazoff.<br /><br />A Woody Allen movie had a funeral scene where there was a question because someone was having a panic attack. Anyone got any Valium? Docs if your children have toothaches an Advil doesn't work, give up something stronger. If your spouse is having a panic attack after a family funeral give em a benzo... 1. Do no harm. 2. Allievate pain. Great hypo. Sounds like Brother shrink may need a benzo.Steve C. Bentonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09146512910416587881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-72770240656021032582014-06-30T18:44:36.560-04:002014-06-30T18:44:36.560-04:00panic attacks , also
called anxiety attacks are a...panic attacks , also <br />called anxiety attacks are a false triggering of the fight or flight response, <br />google fight or flight response for all the possible effects of it. panic <br />attacks often are inherited. they cant harm anyone so should not be feared. when <br />feeling stressed or panicky simply relax and breathe deep and slow. dont tense <br />up or fight back against it. do disolve any mid range valium type pill under <br />tongue for fastest help, google sublingually. agoraphobia is avoiding or <br />fearing places or situations likely to cause a panic attack. Ive found that the <br />best advice in overcoming both is in cheap self help books from internet <br />bookstores, order a few to be delivered to you by mail. therapists, especially <br />psychiatrists often give little advice and consider the panic attacks as <br />unimportant. they waste time and are often expensive, also their advice is hard <br />to remember as most patients are very nervous. valium type meds are still <br />the best for reducing or stopping a panic attack, if taken to hospital, the <br />usual treatment is an injection of valium. antidepressant meds help some a lot <br />but sufferers can have severe early side effects so start at much less than the <br />min dose range and slowly work dose up, google the antidepressant dose range for <br />guidance. valium reduces early side effects. antidepressants take from 2 to 6 <br />weeks to start working and occasionally never help. the prozac or SSRI type are <br />popular but other types also help and so can be tried. older sedating <br />antihistamines calm some. valium type must be used sensibly but its been my long <br />experience that few sufferers have addictive type personalitys,t he main problem <br />being to get them to take a large enough dose rather than stopping them from <br />taking too high a dose the fight or flight response can become a strong <br />addiction, people activate it with dangerous sports, downhill skiing, bungee <br />jumping, parachute jumping, etc so some panic attack sufferers refuse to make <br />any attempt to recover or to take helpful meds. panic attack and agoraphobia <br />sufferers dont usually lead very stressfull lives. they become expert at seeming <br />calm and relaxed whan actually panicky I had panic attacks and severe <br />agoraphobia for 20 years before diagnosing myself and am now completely recovered<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-23784373596612090312014-06-27T08:41:24.391-04:002014-06-27T08:41:24.391-04:00I wrote about the responses to this article on CPN...I wrote about the responses to this article on CPN here:<br /><br />http://www.clinicalpsychiatrynews.com/views/shrink-rap-news/blog/prescribing-psychotropics-to-family-members/de89a27dc297194d342d43f78da377c9.htmlDinahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09227988351623862689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-57813674989597698592014-06-19T23:05:03.191-04:002014-06-19T23:05:03.191-04:00PK: It is like I said. It's best explained as ...PK: It is like I said. It's best explained as a math problem. Shrink Rap post+Joel inflaming readers=Angry anti-psychiatrists complaining about Joel.<br /><br />Seriously, I know Joel complains on his blog that it's not his fault this stuff happens, and it's all these Axis 2 weirdos coming out of the woodwork causing issues...but at some point it needs to be acknowledged that he does attract these kinds of people. He goes on their blogs, provokes them, writes condescending comments everywhere he goes on the internet.<br /><br />Regardless of whether everyone who argues with Joel is Axis 2 or not, he attracts those kinds of people like moths to a flame. And I will give them this, he is somewhat provoking them.Borderlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10583635462258613228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-36790709461479642102014-06-19T21:58:10.499-04:002014-06-19T21:58:10.499-04:00P-K: Me, too.
P-K: Me, too.<br /><br /> Dinahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09227988351623862689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-1794389038184983012014-06-19T21:15:45.712-04:002014-06-19T21:15:45.712-04:00The post is about a woman who wants treatment and ...The post is about a woman who wants treatment and cannot get it. <br /><br />There is no reason to start ranting about psychiatry being quackery and so forth. My psychiatrist is no quack. That's unfair, and frankly it's rude. He is very judicious with medications and has always treated me with respect and kindness. I am lucky to have him as my physician.<br /><br />I'm having trouble understanding why the comments have devolved into rants against psychiatry. Treatment has been helpful to Lucy. She wants treatment. What's to be angry about? She is not being forced to do anything.<br /><br />Good grief.<br /><br />P-KAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-54876857087076441472014-06-19T03:40:35.547-04:002014-06-19T03:40:35.547-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11708398102654526740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-15108644506732280232014-06-15T22:33:26.724-04:002014-06-15T22:33:26.724-04:00Again, cannotsay here.
Joel,
You have an uncanny...Again, cannotsay here.<br /><br />Joel,<br /><br />You have an uncanny ability to always take your posts to inflammatory territory even when you seem more conciliatory. Take this,<br /><br /><b>"Really, what do you folks fear from being a bit more transparent?"</b><br /><br />You see, for all your complex of feeling like a Jew prosecuted by Nazis, it is those of us have been labeled as "mentally ill" and abused by psychiatry (in my case, I was involuntarily committed and forcibly drugged) who DO HAVE to adopt the same tactics of anonymity that prosecuted minorities adopt everywhere, not only Jews in Nazi Germany.<br /><br />As I said a while back, your profession might consider us "mentally ill" but it doesn't mean we are stupid :). <br /><br />BTW, I am also glad to read that you admit to practice psychiatry now mostly for the money. Ie, you know you practice a quackery but you know you cannot be retrained to do something else that allows you to keep your current income level, so you do continue to do what you do with intention of quitting in 2018. I made this precise point -ie that those who defend psychiatry/psychology while admitting to its failings are basically defending their livelihoods- yesterday in the MIA post that you have pointed to in your website! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-82986251053658532052014-06-15T21:01:32.725-04:002014-06-15T21:01:32.725-04:00I do thank Dr Hickey for commenting here, he must ...I do thank Dr Hickey for commenting here, he must realize by now I will not be back to the other blog he seems to write at with some regularity. Your reply is the most respectful and civilized of those who follow you with blind allegiance? I stand by my point of view, but appreciate you seem to relate there are others in my profession who do not worship at the aisle of "better living through chemistry".<br /><br />Exiting from the profession will happen in 2018, and I have distanced myself from the mainstream while still practicing for years now, but I need an income right now, so I can't just sit in front of a computer screen all day and taunt colleagues and expect to feed and house my family. Not as lucky as some of the others here at this thread, I guess.<br /><br />The other anonymous commenters who are solely out to bait and project, well, good luck with that, I have better things to do with my time. Strange you don't offer something at my blog.<br /><br />To the last anonymous who calls me "Mr Hassman", your maturity and respect defines you in your writings. Still wish there was a sarcasm font.<br /><br />Sorry Dinah, your blog risks the takeover other sites have unfortunately allowed in too much tolerance and over compassion.<br /><br />Philip Dawdy of Furious Seasons had a somewhat decent site when I started commenting there back in 2009-10, and it regressed to ugliness beyond recognition, but, he admitted he wanted the hits and the action.<br /><br />Which is what the trolls do at threads. See John Grohol's post from a few months ago at www.psychcentral.com/blog to document I am not making that up.<br /><br />Hey, at least I admit who and what I am. There is only so much respect from being anonymous. Really, what do you folks fear from being a bit more transparent?<br /><br />Oh, and which one of you anonymous folks wanted the thread back about medicating family? Or is it really words, not deeds that drive most of you?<br /><br />Again, cheers.Joel Hassman, MDhttp://cantmedicatelife.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-10618575963561355912014-06-15T16:39:48.099-04:002014-06-15T16:39:48.099-04:00This is to Mr Hassman.
The comparison relating ge...This is to Mr Hassman.<br /><br />The comparison relating generalizations about Jewish people in Nazi Germany to attitudes about psychiatrists, only hammers home the point that being a psychiatrist is no insurance against irrationality, and his further comments on here also go to show that it is not just the patient who often has trouble containing his emotions within judicious limits.<br /><br />Firstly, you are comparing apples and oranges. <br /><br />The term "state psychiatrist" denotes an occupational identity, not ethnic or religious identity.<br /><br />For this reason, it would be more accurate to compare state psychiatrists to, for example, the secret police, in all its many manifestations in communist Russia, or torturers, and also because the content of one's work utlimately makes generalizations acceptable in a way that they would never be based on a link as tenuous as ethnic or religious identity, for reasons that should be self-evident.<br /><br />If the institution is a rotten barrel, then all the apples it contains will rot. You may as well tell me not to generalize about executioners or slavemasters. <br /><br />It is true that the work of state psychiatrists does not remain constant in all particulars due to historical, geographic and legal differences, and there have been epistemological shifts in the history of psychiatry, nevertheless certain aspects transcend these discontinuities.<br /><br />Throughout the history of institutional psychiatry one of the main functions of the state psychiatrist has been to uphold the status quo and the interests of individuals and institutions implicated in the very suffering of the patient whose interests the profession purports to be the agent of.<br /><br />Psychiatrists throughout history have also attached consequential labels to their patients for the purpose of social-control, the reverberations of which throughout the social, interpersonal, biological, mental and occupational spheres of the existence of the individual so-labelled can, in the aggregate, rarely be said to have been to his advantage. Indeed, it wouldn't be going to far I think to say that such diagnoses have resonated negatively and destructively throughout the lives of countless millions of people, rendered dispensable by psychiatric theory. <br /><br />Coercion and violence, albeit concealed behind the bricks and mortar of the hospital and the idiom and imagery of medicine and medical practice respectively, have run like a thread through the historical tapestry of the profession, with psychiatrists having been granted dispensation, in the maintenance of the status quo and the war on heresy, to torture (historically the profession has drawn upon the state's wide-ranging repertoire of torture mechanisms, harnessing them to the purpose of modifying aberrant behaviour under the pretense of treating an illness) society's deviants and enemies.<br /><br />For these reasons, and many more, I feel more than justified in my generalizations about state psychiatrists.<br /><br />A man is the sum of his actions, because of the reciprocity of the relation between conduct on the one hand and our character and our ideas on the other. The character and the thought of the state psychiatrist is corrupt because his conduct is corrupt, conduct circumscrbed within the limits of the laws of his profession and his society and which he is duty bound to observe. This, further justifies genralization; complicity in the same crimes amongst a group of individuals often serves to unite them in thought, spirit, and character.<br /><br />Mr Hassman really does seem to have an attitude problem. I find it very disturbing that patients have to deal with a person who responds so childishly to criticism (with adolescent sarcasm and the kind of conventional formulas one regularly encounters amongst the least sophisticated, puerile writers who sully cyber space with their splenetic effusions, seeking to compensate for the weakness of their arguments through sheer vituperation), unwittingly endorsing my belief that many psychiatrists are just intolerant control freaks who enjoy the heady stimulus their power affords.Cledwynnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-36675542667710737232014-06-15T13:10:07.317-04:002014-06-15T13:10:07.317-04:00Can't Say here :).
Phil,
Great to see you he...Can't Say here :).<br /><br />Phil,<br /><br />Great to see you here! I believe you are being too kind with Joel. Remember the discussion with Bernard Carroll, in which he bailed out when he couldn't coherently defend his psychiatric nonsense? Joel is like him, except he is less polite, you'll see.<br /><br />Joel,<br /><br />So much garbage in what you say that it would take a lot time to address each point with a decent amount of discussion.<br /><br />Let's start with the continuous appeal to seeing yourself and other psychiatrists as Jews prosecuted by Nazis. Not sure if this is a psychiatric joke, but checking the civil commitment laws at the state level (both patient and inpatient) or the Murphy bill, I see that the DSM is referred to explicitly as the gold standard to delineate who is human from who is subhuman (to whom standard civil rights protections against coercive treatment and incarceration without the commission of a crime do not apply). I haven't seen in any of those laws references to manuals written by survivors of psychiatric abuse saying that it is psychiatrists who should have their civil liberties restricted. <br /><br />Perhaps you are suffering form delusions that would qualify you for a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder???<br /><br />Then, it is funny that your last post confirms Borderline's analysis how you make every single thread about yourself after making some inflammatory comment. So here we are again, you making an inflammatory comment...<br /><br />With respect to homosexuality. I agree that people should be free to express their views without fear of retribution, but that is not what psychiatry does. Psychiatry does not "express views". It maligns millions of Americans with invented diseases and then it lobbies for having the people who exhibit the patterns of behavior psychiatrists dislike lose civil rights through the coercion of government. <br /><br />That is very different from the campaigns against the Duck Dynasty or Brendan Eich. In each case you had free speech protected by the first amendment. In the first case , A&E did the right thing, in the second case the board of Mozilla cowardly bowed to pressure. In NEITHER case, the pro gay marriage zealots used the coercion of government in their campaigns, as organized psychiatry does.<br /><br />Again, you seem deluded to me. If I were you, I would check with one of your psychiatric peers to see whether you can be officially diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia. <br /><br />Finally, you say, "you are more than welcome to bring it on at my site", you forgot to add "only if you agree with my views". I have posted there before and I was moderated and insulted, which is why I know that you are the kind of "victim complex" megalomaniac psychiatrist that gives your profession the bad reputation it deserves.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-51728394162087869302014-06-15T11:18:00.818-04:002014-06-15T11:18:00.818-04:00This is in response to the first comment left by D...This is in response to the first comment left by Dr. Hassman on June 13.<br /><br />Dr. Hassman is making a fair point. Obviously there are <i>some</i> psychiatrists who practice in accordance with different concepts and procedures. I frequently note that fact in my writings, but did not do so on this occasion. Sometimes I use the term "organized psychiatry" or "mainstream psychiatry" instead of just "psychiatry."<br /><br />On the other side of the coin, however, it needs to be acknowledged that there are extremely few psychiatrists who challenge or operate outside of the standard model. And secondly, very few psychiatrists speak out against the standard model.<br /><br />Finally, there is, in my view, a measure of reasonableness in conceptualizing psychiatry as a unified entity. The vast majority of psychiatrists subscribe to the position that all significant problems of thinking, feeling, and/or behaving are medical illnesses, and they look to the DSM for guidance as to what these "illnesses" are and how they should be diagnosed.<br /><br />In addition, psychiatrists have organized themselves at state and local levels, and more recently at the international level (World Psychiatric Association. But I have never been aware of a single psychiatric association (other than the British splinter group Critical Psychiatry Network) that has spoken out against the standard model.<br /><br />The passage of my writing quoted by Dr. Hassman is extremely critical of psychiatry. By objecting only to my failure to note the few exceptions, Dr. Hassman is implicitly endorsing these criticisms – or so it seems to me. He faults me for tarring all psychiatrists with the one brush, but if my criticisms are valid, aren't there only two courses of action open to an ethical person who belongs to this group: either exit the profession, or distance oneself literally and conceptually from the spurious and disempowering practices.Philip Hickeynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-9698666389247446492014-06-15T11:17:55.882-04:002014-06-15T11:17:55.882-04:00You really have to both laugh and be astonished w...You really have to both laugh and be astonished with how hypocritical and projective people are in their attacks not just on me, but anyone who speaks even remotely positively about psychiatry.<br /><br />Yes, I have a tactic, which I clearly stated above, calling psychiatry a monstrosity of the world is no different than the Nazis calling the Jews the evil of the world. <br /><br />But, I leave readers with this thought, which will inflame the usual suspects, but perhaps give some pause and reflection to those who genuinely and respectfully want the debate to not only continue but have resolution so care is maximized and protection of rights is respected:<br /><br />What is going on with getting Gay rights respected in society with the extremists who are out to destroy anyone who dares to speak against "the cause", is there really no difference with the extremists here that define outwardly the antipsychiatry movement?<br /><br />Yeah, making people lose their jobs and be ostracized is really going to gain respect and admiration from the general public.<br /><br />For every "Victory" extremists allegedly gain by harassing and vilifying people who are holding true to core beliefs but also do respect the public around them, the "Defeats" will be coming.<br /><br />You antipsychiatry zealots need to remember the adage of "see the forest for the trees".<br /><br />Oh, and I did reference the more recent post at my blog noted above by anonymous/Can't say here per Schroeder. Hey, the thread does not dissuade any attentive and responsible reader from my interpretation of how MadInAmerica operates.<br /><br />And to end this last comment by returning to the point of medicating a family member, again, it is NOT a black or white issue overall, but, my point I first made was be careful at least in writing for controlled substances, that is a loser much more often than a winner. Yeah, it is nice Dinah sets up the vignette to know how it will play out in her case, but, I still know from my experiences out there from the alleged "compassionate and concerned" physicians and family members that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". <br /><br />Maybe the better future vignette from the authors here should be "what do you do when you are asked to see a patient who a family member as well as a colleague started treatment first and has possibly created complications while intending to be helpful"?<br /><br />Been there, had it done to me.<br /><br />See ya at another blog or future post here, psychiatry haters. You are more than welcome to bring it on at my site.<br /><br />Oh, moderation does take away from instant gratification, but know this, I have only deleted two comments in my history there, one for just repeating the same thing in different words, which the commenter agreed in follow up, and the other who was incoherent in commentary, and I did acknowledge the effort by the writer, who did not come back to clarify.<br /><br />Cheers.Joel Hassman, MDhttp://cantmedicatelife.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-38999165164133197572014-06-14T23:12:17.996-04:002014-06-14T23:12:17.996-04:00Why not spend a few minutes with your sister... &q...Why not spend a few minutes with your sister... "What's going on in your life?"<br /><br />Just askin'<br /><br />AnonymousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-26500245962462370152014-06-14T20:40:03.028-04:002014-06-14T20:40:03.028-04:00Borderline,
This is how Joel operates in all his ...Borderline,<br /><br />This is how Joel operates in all his interventions, either here, the old boring man, his own website and recently in Mad In America. <br /><br />In all cases too, he likes to portray himself and psychiatrists in general as victim(s).<br /><br />And yet, I am happy that he does what he does. Nothing makes the case stronger against the psychiatric quackery than a "victim complex" megalomaniac shrink.<br /><br />You can always tell friends who have doubts about whether they would benefit from a contact with psychiatry: gee, see for yourself what you are getting yourself into. Your shrink might be somebody like Joel (or Moffic).<br /><br />Joel, please continue with your tactics. You are doing a fantastic job!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-6818236629895729052014-06-14T20:22:46.197-04:002014-06-14T20:22:46.197-04:00It's almost like a formula now. Dinah posts bl...It's almost like a formula now. Dinah posts blog entry. People quickly hone into off topic matters. Joel makes an inflammatory comment. Multiple readers respond to Joel. The thread becomes entirely about Joel and readers' reactions to him. It's mind boggling.Borderlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10583635462258613228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-19275524393026888512014-06-14T14:15:21.283-04:002014-06-14T14:15:21.283-04:00Can't Say here :).
AA,
Thanks for your very...Can't Say here :).<br /><br />AA, <br /><br />Thanks for your very thoughtful comment. As expected, Joel's response is disappointing. <br /><br />Joel,<br /><br />There is a discussion going on at MIA in a blog by <a href="http://www.madinamerica.com/2014/06/proliferation-elimination-mental-illness-clinging-slopes-everest/" rel="nofollow">James Schroeder</a> on what's the point of psychiatry/psychology. I am not going to repeat every argument here (interested readers can go there) but my understanding is that James Schroeder has basically conceded that "psychiatry/psychology" are professions attempting to do "mind control for the benefit of humanity". He justifies both with a utilitarian appeal to "natural law", in the same way theologians appeal to "the moral law", to justify why the APA version of what "behavioral orthodoxy" should be is THE RIGHT ONE. <br /><br />While I am happy to have read what he said, the argument is self defeating. The first amendment of the US constitution, a breakthrough in the development of Western civilization, exists precisely so no holistic version of what "behavioral orthodoxy/morality should be" is adopted by the state. Individual issues (like homosexuality whose criminalization was declared unconstitutional in 2003) can only become law if adopted by the representatives of the people not because a group of "self appointed, unaccountable, mind guardians" push it top down through the force of government. <br /><br />This sad state of affairs, that Thomas Szasz called "The Therapeutic State", is what we have today. Except for the issue of involuntary treatment, where our side won significant battles in the US during the 1970s, I see the Therapeutic State pushed forward by the mind guardians of the tow APAs stronger than ever. In 2008 GW Bush signed into law the "mental health parity act". Obamacare contains the APAs vision of "mental health" as one of the essential benefits all plans have to offer to Americans (who are by law mandated to have one). Measured by the expenditures in psychotropic drugs, the "Therapeutic State" has a size unimaginable by Thomas Szasz or R D Laing in the 1970s.<br /><br />We won some important battles on the matter of involuntary treatment (at least for now), but everywhere else, I see psychiatry subjugating more innocent victims than ever. <br /><br />This is why people like me will continue to denounce the psychiatric quackery. Not because it is a quackery -I have no problem with people who believe in quackeries and fund them with their own money-, but because of its undue and unconstitutional influence in the lives of innocent Americans. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-87567028274804050402014-06-14T13:16:29.440-04:002014-06-14T13:16:29.440-04:00As I said earlier, you, AA, are the most respectfu...As I said earlier, you, AA, are the most respectful and willing to dialogue of those who are reflecting an outward harsh and pervasive disdain of psychiatry as a near whole, but, I "take on the antipsychiatry crowd" at other sites outside my own blog because of basically two reasons:<br /><br />1. the extremist, polarized, and overgeneralized attitudes of such commenters that go on without challenge will be accepted by readers who do not see there are others who do not embrace the behaviors and attitudes the antipsychiatry critics HAVE SOME legitimacy to attack per specific providers, and<br />2. A lot of these other blogs just want the traffic, want the hits, want the dialogue to be seen as some popular and /or allegedly valuable site for information and authority. This specific opinion is not outwardly directed to Shrink Rap, but, there are past threads you have to wonder why there has been such pervasive silence or minimizing of harsh commentary by those who just viciously hate all psychiatrists. <br /><br />Yes, blogs do what they want, but, I am not going to just sit in front of the screen reading such vile and venom saying everyone who is a psychiatrist should be exempt from the world. So, I write what I write, the authors can call me out or just delete it, but, it is similar to rhetoric by disgusting past examples of polarized and destructive entities like the political examples I noted at MIA.<br /><br />Case in point here TODAY in American, the polarized views by Democrats and Republicans are the largest margin of difference seen in over 30 years. There is little to any interest in moderation or honest and fair debate by the public as a majority. Fits consistently with what I say repeatedly at my blog, yes, the politicians stink as they are elected and reelected for decades by a sizeable percentage of ignorant, selfish, and inconsiderate electorate. That is not directed to any one person here, but, tell me I am genuinely wrong in that appraisal when you look who leads the two parties today.<br /><br />As per your example with Ms Dundas, I don't know her situation to comment with any authority, but if she was mistreated, abused, or just neglected by specific providers, she has every right to be offended and outraged with THEM, not me, nor anyone else who did not interact with her nor reflexively defend her mistreatment experiences. <br /><br />Sorry, you might not accept this comment, but I am NOT the typical psychiatrist of 2014. I embrace my training and focus on individuality and a multifactorial treatment intervention process, but, as my current "incarceration" nears completion with the Locum job at now, I am forced to prescribe until proven otherwise if I want to be employed. <br /><br />But, I don't do it without challenge or debate, and frankly, I meet people every day who don't want to problem solve, just stick with the status woe and don't give a rat's buttocks what happens at the end of the day, both patients and colleagues/administration.<br /><br />Which is why I do Locum work now, stick with it for 2-3 months and then get the hell out. I'll be posting about this at my site later today, but, since you asked here I write it here first.<br /><br />I think what readers and commenters should be asking both of other blogs and commenters who seem to defend the status woe of psychiatry today is simply this:<br /><br />"As a provider/clinician, if you just take a stance that psychiatry is 'that's the way it is, some things will never change' or an alternative of 'I hear you and empathize but there is nothing I can do besides print your outrage and complaints, but I won't take on the negligent/uncaring authority that rules psychiatry', then what is your agenda in blogging?"<br /><br />Let's be honest, if I don't write exactly what the antipsychiatry crowd wants as choir echos, I am a villain. I have been reading it for 4 plus years now. Isn't that how tyranny grows and thrives?Joel Hassman, MDhttp://cantmedicatelife.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-77093370062321416922014-06-14T09:10:52.448-04:002014-06-14T09:10:52.448-04:00Can't Say, good to see you here.
Dr. Hassman,...Can't Say, good to see you here.<br /><br />Dr. Hassman, have been thinking alot about your last response. I am probably an idiot but I am going to try another way to respond to you in the hopes that I receive a respectful reply.<br /><br />Regarding your feeling that people are unfair to psychiatry, let me ask you this. There is one writer on the MIA site, Dorothy Dundas, who underwent 40 insulin coma treatments which many people would equate to torture. Even if psychiatrists don't agree that it was, I think everyone, no matter what you currently think of psychiatry, is pretty horrified these treatments were used. In your opinion, should Ms. Dundas be required to take a moderate view of psychiatry in light of the horrific experiences she had?<br /><br />I guess my point is if someone has had a horrific experience in any area, is it really fair to ask them to be moderate? Personally, I don't think it is but if you feel differently, I would love to hear why. <br /><br />On a less serious note, you seem to despise politicians on both sides of the aisle. I will bet if I told you that you shouldn't stereotype all politicians as bad, you would be livid. But yet you want to do this to people who have had horrific experiences with psychiatry. Why?<br /><br />And by the way, I know this may shock you but psychiatrists aren't the only group of people who are demonized.. On the apnea board I hang out at, it is the durable medical equipment companies who are the villains. They have more than earned that reputation in my opinion. But no one posts on the board criticizing people for being anti DME and needing to moderate their position. I don't understand why people who have had a horrific experience with psychiatry should be treated differently.<br /><br />Regarding comments being off topic, actually, when I mentioned you posting on MIA, I was using that to make a point that related to this blog post. Unfortunately, that did result in off topic discussions but that happens. I do realize this post is off topic and I think the shrink rappers for their patience regarding this. But I did want to try one more time to respond to you which I realize may be very short sided on my part.<br /><br />AAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-47878723559042332652014-06-13T12:08:59.717-04:002014-06-13T12:08:59.717-04:00I checked out Minute Clinic from CVS, and I didn&#...I checked out Minute Clinic from CVS, and I didn't know they will give you a one time refill of up to 90 days on a prescription. I just thought I would post it as knowledge for people to have besides the zocdoc reccomendation.<br /><br />http://www.minuteclinic.com/services/wellnessandprevention/medrenewal/Borderlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10583635462258613228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-84257903504232645062014-06-13T09:53:13.125-04:002014-06-13T09:53:13.125-04:00Just a patient. When my doc was not around, I had ...Just a patient. When my doc was not around, I had to go to an urgent care center, and they gave me a prescription to tide me over.I went back a few times until my doc became available. Since Lucy has directions from the hospital as well as directions regarding which meds to take until her appointment in three weeks, she can certainly haul herself back to the center and get refills to get her through to the time she sees the psychiatrist. There is no need for her brother to become involved. In fact, if you were dealing with an individual who did not have a shrink family member, that is exactly what they would do--go back to the urgent care center once or twice more. I am going to bet that if Lucy had an urgent gynecological problem and her brother was a gynecologist, she would choose to go to a clinic over having her brother examine/treat her. This is about poor boundaries and people who need to put up with a bit of inconvenience, but it does not sound like any kind of emergency that would necessitate a family member getting involved.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-26603147822046591232014-06-13T09:46:44.209-04:002014-06-13T09:46:44.209-04:00AA,
I just read the exchange in the Hickey thread...AA,<br /><br />I just read the exchange in the Hickey thread. Priceless. Very Hassman like (or Moffic like since it is difficult to tell the difference between the two).<br /><br />I found particularly offensive his "blame the victim" line of argument and his reference to psychiatrists as Jews prosecuted by Nazis when in fact,<br /><br />a) Action T4 is there to remind everybody what German psychiatrists did during Nazi Germany<br /><br />b) The legal power to lock up people that his guild finds distasteful via the bigotry manual known as DSM belongs to psychiatrists no to their victims. Joel, I trade places any time. There are a few psychiatrists that I would love to recommend for involuntary inpatient treatment :-).<br /><br />BTW, this is cannotsay from MIA (also the anonymous above). Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-65797594994892973842014-06-13T09:37:29.650-04:002014-06-13T09:37:29.650-04:00Yeah, I am so out of line in challenging the antip...Yeah, I am so out of line in challenging the antipsychiatry folks who "peruse" these blog sites.<br /><br />This is something Dr Hickey wrote earlier this year, really dispels my opinion if he is a regular writer at MIA:<br /><br />"Psychiatry has damaged and killed human beings who came to them for help. They have routinely disempowered people,<br />and have spuriously equated all human distress to their confidently-touted, but fictitious, chemical imbalances, and, more<br />recently to the twitching of aberrant neural circuits. They have arrogantly promoted themselves as the arbiters of<br />normalcy and the healers of emotional pain. They have systematically undermined the notion of self-improvement<br />through effort, and through natural social support networks. They have enslaved millions to their toxic psychotropic<br />chemicals. And we haven’t hit bottom yet."<br /><br />from this site:<br /><br />http://survivingantidepressants.org/index.php?/topic/5962-benzodiazepines-dangerous-drugs/<br /><br />Wouldn't it have been more responsible and respectful to say "Too many in psychiatry...". But, no, damn away everyone, guilty for simply being in the profession.<br /><br />As AA notes above, if other readers are interested, read that post by Dr Hickey and the thread, and not just my mistaken efforts to add, but the WHOLE thing.<br /><br />http://www.madinamerica.com/2014/06/psychiatry-promote-chemical-imbalance-theory/<br /><br />Just to clarify from Dinah, was the intention of this post to illicit colleague feedback primarily, or just be completely open ended from any perspective?<br /><br />It is like witnessing a car crash, depending on where you are at the intersection, who is at fault?Joel Hassman, MDhttp://cantmedicatelife.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-25966448470546035572014-06-13T06:13:17.283-04:002014-06-13T06:13:17.283-04:00Last anonymous before me, to be honest, I was pret...Last anonymous before me, to be honest, I was pretty shocked I was about to get an appointment so quickly with a PCP when I thought I needed a preop evaluation. And it wasn't a fluke because when I needed a followup, I got in very quickly. I feel very lucky because I really like this doctor and plan to keep her as my PCP.<br /><br />I don't know if that is an aberration or not as I live in a large metropolitan area. I suspect I was very lucky based on previous experiences in getting an appointment with a new doctor.<br /><br />Anonymous who wrote response to Dr. Hassman, thank you so much for what you said. You nailed it precisely. <br /><br />Dr. Hassman posted on the Philip Hickey blog entry about psychiatry and chemical imbalances. Anyone who goes to that thread can make up their own mind as to what happened. In my opinion, people were quite respectful to him and asked some good questions that he conveniently never addressed.<br /><br />AAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666124.post-36679727247575156522014-06-13T01:32:32.593-04:002014-06-13T01:32:32.593-04:00Patient--just chiming in because I cannot believe ...Patient--just chiming in because I cannot believe there are so many people who think you can always get a new patient appointment with a PCP so quickly. I have decent insurance but recently when faced with finding a new PCP I had to sift through a list of doctors, make calls only to be told that even though the insurance company provided their name they're not actually accepting new patients, and when I did FINALLY find a PCP on my insurance who was accepting new patients it was a THREE MONTH wait for the appointment. I'm sure I could have kept making phone calls and found someone with a slightly shorter waiting time, but the process was so stressful and frustrating that there was only so much of it I could handle. I ultimately took the 3 month appointment and used an urgent care center for my needs until I could get re-established with a PCP. And no, I do not live in a rural community...a fairly large city actually.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com