Order the summer edition here

Amnesty for the patients

Psychiatry's new openness does not include its dark contemporary history.


[psychiatry] I really wish it was unnecessary to write this chronicle. But if one wants to have greater transparency in psychiatry, this must also apply to the negative aspects of the treatment system. Only then can one hope for positive change: How many do not struggle with trauma and anxiety as a result of inhumane and unethical "treatment"? And why does psychiatry's power elite react as it does to criticism and loss of power in a more patient-friendly psychiatry? Why are professional interests and collegiate camaraderie at the expense of patients?

So far, patients have been powerless in the face of psychiatry's (mis) use. Several of us have experienced being "imprisoned" or imprisoned without law and judgment, deprived of the possibility of assistance from a lawyer, and refused contact with the Control Commission, which is supposed to be a body of complaints that will improve patients' legal security.

In addition, the control committees may not appear to function independently, but have been put together in a way that keeps them on the agenda for professionals and institutions. You have often listened to more

the treatment staff's version of the case rather than the patients to help.

Authoritarian. When an adult, intellectual person with a broad background of experience loses his ability to function, he is subjected to and given up assessments. . .

Dear reader.
To continue reading, create a new free reader account with your email,
or logg inn if you have done it before. (click on forgotten password if you have not received it by email already).
Select if necessary Subscription (69kr)

You may also like