| Author |
Message |
J. Swift
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 8429
Location: 100 Swift Street
|
 Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 10:17 pm Post subject:
Scientology Does Not Want Violent Criminals Given ECT
Subject description: Why?
|
|
|
In extreme cases of violent mental illness that manifests itself in murder, child molestation, rape, and other sadistic acts, the State can order offenders to involuntarily undergo the application of very serious psychiatric medications and techniques including ECT. Under the law, this is done following an evaluation by doctors, input from the criminal's state-appointed advocate and a state-appointed, or private attorney.
Scientology screams about the State's application of psychiatric medications and techniques to people such as murderers, child molesters, and rapists and yet CoS is unwilling to process the insane. Scientology only wants the "able" who have money and will pose no PR risks to the church.
The State and taxpayers must bear the expense and problems of handling the violently mentally ill and mentally deranged. Given that Scientology refuses to have anything to do with the violently insane, why should it care how the State handles them? Why should Scientology care if a murderous, mentally ill pedophile or an insane serial rapist is given a lobotomy or kept drugged and thus rendered harmless while locked behind the walls of a high security facility? Why does Scientology have sympathy for such people and insist that they remain untreated by Psychiatry? This is one of the reasons that I do not understand CCHR's screeching rants against the State handling people that Scientology won't touch.
What does Scientology propose for violent and incurably mentally ill criminals?
/////
_________________
Back to Basics! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Judith Anderson
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 824
|
| Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 11:50 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| Swift, the thing is..when it comes to violent criminals and ECT the Scientologists are bleating about nothing. It is my understanding that ECT is only used as a last resort for severely depressed patients, so severely depressed that they are wracked by pain body and soul and nothing else works...nothing. Even so, the patients still have to give their consent. Violent criminals are more of the paranoid, psychopathic, borderline personality type and they would be candidates for heavy duty psychotropics, not ECT. Lobotomies, for God's sake haven't been used for decades, but the hard-core Scientologists would have us all believe that there is a rabid pro-lobotomy evil psych behind every bush just salivating at the prospect of dragging people into psycho-surgery. It's beyond crazy. Where do they get these ideas from? Textbooks? Classes? Seminars? Panel Discussions? Conferences? No, they are all based on "RON SAID" their founder's lunatic ravings based on his experiences with psychiatry back in the 1950s. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuzanneMarie
Joined: 25 May 2006
Posts: 2938
Location: Pacific Northwest
|
Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 9:14 am Post subject:
Re: Scientology Does Not Want Violent Criminals Given ECT
Subject description: Why?
|
|
|
| J. Swift wrote: |
The State and taxpayers must bear the expense and problems of handling the violently mentally ill and mentally deranged. Given that Scientology refuses to have anything to do with the violently insane, why should it care how the State handles them? Why should Scientology care if a murderous, mentally ill pedophile or an insane serial rapist is given a lobotomy or kept drugged and thus rendered harmless while locked behind the walls of a high security facility? Why does Scientology have sympathy for such people and insist that they remain untreated by Psychiatry? This is one of the reasons that I do not understand CCHR's screeching rants against the State handling people that Scientology won't touch. |
The patients who are given involuntary ECT are not murderers or child molesters. They are usually indigent women who have been committed to state hospitals. In some cases these women are given 200 or more shock treatments over their own protests and those of their attorneys.
For some reason, New York is one of the states where this happens a lot.
http://www.ect.org/involuntary-electroshock-in-new-york-state/
http://www.astm.org/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/JOURNALS/FORENSIC/PAGES/JFS15338J.htm
http://www.mindfreedom.org/kb/mental-health-abuse/electroshock
It really sounds as though you are unaware that 1) ECT has been proven to cause memory loss and mental impairment. 2) It isn't an effective treatment for any disorder. 3) Most of the people who receive involuntary ECT are not criminals, but poor old ladies.
You also don't seem aware that Scientologists are not the only people who object to involuntary ECT. Patients' rights organisations, ombudsmen, many social workers and doctors have objected to involuntary ECT.
Why are you posting here pretending that ECT cures child molesters and murderers?
Why are you pretending that CoS is protesting such a use of ECT, when it isn't even being used on such people? Only one such case was found in the study I cited.
This looks to be another meritless thread of yours.
The passage of yours that I cited above is very telling.
It does look as though you understand that lobotomies and ECT are punitive, not therapeutic.
And you think that no one should care about it if violent prisoners get permanently disabled via lobotomy or ECT; you are fine with that.
javascript:emoticon(' ') |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Judith Anderson
Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 824
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 1:57 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
SM - Sometimes the things you post on this board are just plain silly. Why would "old ladies" and "poor women" be the ones singled out for ECT? Seems sexist to me. And capricious. You say that they receive up to 200 shocks treatments? C'mon. Even if it were so that would be more than enough to kill an elephant.
You seem unaware that many state hospitals throughout this country have been closed down. In Florida G. Pierce Wood Memorial Hospital was closed because of patient abuse some years ago, evidence that the system has been and still is reforming itself. The Baker Act was passed in this state decades ago which gave patients the right to refuse treatment unless they were a danger to themselves and others. Also that they could not be held in a receiving facility for more than 72 hours following involuntary admission without a judicial hearing. Scientology had nothing to do with that.
Why do you persist in your belief that lobotomies still exist? Give me some proof. Otherwise I will have no choice but to believe that you are not quoting from a reliable source. I don't consider RON SAID to be a reliable source. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hubbard's Mushroom
Joined: 25 Mar 2004
Posts: 8290
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 3:08 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
I think it's wonderful that "Suzzannemarie" has resorted
to spewing desperate anti-psych rants.
It just proves the point that scientology is based on
outdated 1950's schlock. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedPill
Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Posts: 1015
|
Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 5:02 pm Post subject:
Re: Scientology Does Not Want Violent Criminals Given ECT
Subject description: Why?
|
|
|
| J. Swift wrote: | In extreme cases of violent mental illness that manifests itself in murder, child molestation, rape, and other sadistic acts, the State can order offenders to involuntarily undergo the application of very serious psychiatric medications and techniques including ECT. Under the law, this is done following an evaluation by doctors, input from the criminal's state-appointed advocate and a state-appointed, or private attorney.
Scientology screams about the State's application of psychiatric medications and techniques to people such as murderers, child molesters, and rapists and yet CoS is unwilling to process the insane. Scientology only wants the "able" who have money and will pose no PR risks to the church.
The State and taxpayers must bear the expense and problems of handling the violently mentally ill and mentally deranged. Given that Scientology refuses to have anything to do with the violently insane, why should it care how the State handles them? Why should Scientology care if a murderous, mentally ill pedophile or an insane serial rapist is given a lobotomy or kept drugged and thus rendered harmless while locked behind the walls of a high security facility? Why does Scientology have sympathy for such people and insist that they remain untreated by Psychiatry? This is one of the reasons that I do not understand CCHR's screeching rants against the State handling people that Scientology won't touch.
What does Scientology propose for violent and incurably mentally ill criminals?
///// |
Swifty,
In addition to a small handful of legitimate situations where some sort of psychiatric intervention is called for, there is another agenda afoot regarding the state and forced psychiatric treatment, which is the Soviet model. Don't think for one minute that it can not or has not happened here because it can and it has, and have personal knowledge of this via the brother of someone who was a victim of this sort of psychiatric "treatment". The victim's alleged "insanity"? He was a forensic dentist who decided to go with the evidence in a particular and very well known case and let the chips fall where they may instead of attempting to shoehorn the evidence into the version of events that the government wanted.
Bottom line ... to allow ANY sort of treatment against patient consent or without patient consent must be extremely limited and must have some sort of safeguards built in, i.e., someone other than the govt. to watch out for the best interests of the patient. This is an area that is definitely on a "slippery slope".
Pete |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J. Swift
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 8429
Location: 100 Swift Street
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 10:34 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
SuzanneMarie if Scientology is truly opposed to these helpless indigent women receiving ECT, then where are the Scientology Convalescent homes that will care for these women free of charge? This is a major part of Scientology's hypocrisy about Psychiatry: It criticizes Psychiatry while offering zero legal, financial, or room and board for an entire class of people it pretends to defend.
Suzie: Why is Ken Moxon fighting teenagers in masksinstead of fighting for these indigent women? Why doesn't Scientology run shelters where it can help such defenseless women? This huge, yawning gap between what CoS says and what it does reveals the fact that it is unwilling to do anything in the nature of practical charity -- which costs money -- to help the very people it pretends to defend.
Just as CoS VM's walk over the backs of the dead at mass murders and natural disasters to get in front of cameras, we see that CCHR uses these helpless victims of Psychiatry as poster children for its Hate Campaign against Psychiatry. CoS does not help these people; the Cult simply uses their horror stories for propaganda. We also don't know the full story: Why did Adam Szyszko do to get himself committed to Pilgrim Psychiatric Center in New York? Was he a danger to himself or society? If so, where we CoS attorneys to defend him? God forbid that some Anons step on the flowerbeds at Gold Base! That gets Scientology to spend endless money on attorneys and the usage of Jeff Stone's time tp raise holy hell in Riverside County. But what did Scientology do to help Adam Szyszko and all of these other victims aside from exploiting them for PR purposes?
Why doesn't Scientology use its empty Ideal Orgs and Super Power Building to house and care for these helpless people who would otherwise undergo ECT at the hands of the State?
Scientology is pitiless and brutal when it comes to the treatment of the mentally ill and insane. Scientology refuses to treat such people and yet it insists that these people cannot have Psychiatric drugs or treatments such as ECT. What would Scientology have Society do with these people? Will exercise, fresh air, and vitamins help the incurably insane? What would Dr. Tom Cruise recommend in his wisdom?
What is society to do with "sick beings" who are incurably depressed or insane?
Suzie, given Scientology's opposition to medication and ECT -- and Scientology's refusal to treat the incurably depressed or insane -- what is Scientology's answer to helping such people? I hear Scientology/CCHR's outrage about Psychiatric solutions but I have never read of any Scientology solution to these profound problems.
What have you to say Suzie?
/////
_________________
Back to Basics!
Last edited by J. Swift on Sun May 31, 2009 10:56 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sponge
Joined: 10 Apr 2006
Posts: 8443
Location: U.K.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hubbard's Mushroom
Joined: 25 Mar 2004
Posts: 8290
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 10:46 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
"Why doesn't Scientology run shelters where it can help such
defenseless women?" - J Swift
++++++++++++sacred Cult Scripture++++++++++++++++++
Fighting this battle for survival, and fight it he must, a being
in the MEST universe cannot seem to afford decency or charity
or ethics; he cannot afford any weakness, any mercy.
— L. Ron Hubbard
Journal of Scientology Issue 17-G June 1952:
The Limitations of Homo Novis
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J. Swift
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 8429
Location: 100 Swift Street
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 10:51 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
ECT is a last resort after a person has failed on three or more psychiatric medications. A psychiatric medication has to be used for about 60-90 days to see it is helping. It can take well over a year for ECT to even be discussed. There are legal safeguards in place. A judge, and not a psychiatrist, is the only person allowed to order ECT on an involuntary basis. CCHR's biggest lie is that psychiatrist's can order involuntary ECT. A judge must issue an order after a hearing in which the patient's family, a patient advocate, and the patient's attorney are present.
Scientology's cartoonish view of sadistic psychiatrists swooping into back alleys to kidnap and electroshock indigent woman is absurd, irresponsible journalism. The crazies at CCHR have so irrationally hyperventilated on this important social issue that they have been marginalized as crazy cultists.
ECT does cure people of mental problems in many cases. However, like a lung-heart transplant, it is a draconian cure. No one likes the idea of ECT. But what else can be done when everything else has failed? In many cases, ECT is given to suicidal people against their will; is this wrong? Would Scientology call for the legalization of assisted suicide for the incurably depressed or insane? Is Scientology's position is that such people are <2.0 and should therefore be disposed of quietly and without sorrow because they are out exchange or Degraded Beings?
This is where Scientology fails: The Cult criticizes the imperfect solution of ECT while offering no solutions of its own. In view of the fact that Scientology cannot produce a true Clear or OT, it is remarkable that it would criticize anyone about anything. I think Scientology should first deliver the "spiritual results" it promises before casting stones at scientists and doctors.
/////
_________________
Back to Basics! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J. Swift
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 8429
Location: 100 Swift Street
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:06 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Excerpts from Ethics in electroconvulsive therapy, by Jan-Otto Ottosson and Max Fink:
/////
_________________
Back to Basics! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J. Swift
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 8429
Location: 100 Swift Street
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:07 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
/////
_________________
Back to Basics! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J. Swift
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 8429
Location: 100 Swift Street
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:10 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
These next two sections mention Scientology and the fact that the Psychiatric community itself is divided over ECT:
/////
_________________
Back to Basics! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J. Swift
Joined: 28 Apr 2005
Posts: 8429
Location: 100 Swift Street
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:13 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Drug companies are big opponents of ECT as they see it as competition to the psychiatric medications they sell.
/////
_________________
Back to Basics! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hubbard's Mushroom
Joined: 25 Mar 2004
Posts: 8290
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:23 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
"Drug companies are big opponents of ECT as they see it as
competition to the psychiatric medications they sell."- J. Swift
Hubbard didn't like competition either...
++++++++++++ SACRED CULT SCRIPTURE +++++++++++++
Our war has been forced to become "To take over absolutely
the field of mental healing on this planet in all forms.
-- L. Ron Hubbard
"The WAR", 2 Dec 69
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
OCMB FAQ
FAQ
Search
Register
Last Hour
Operation Clambake
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
General Topics
»
Opinions & Debate
