From: Martin Kessler
Well done, Rob. I might add that almost none of the so-called psychiatric
critics refer to Szasz. That's because Szasz said it first and better. I
think Szasz in one of his aphorisms in "The Second Sin" said that in
psychology forgetting the past was not only pardonable but a necessity to
standing out and getting noticed. (I think Szasz said it better - see it
under Psychology in the above book).


>From: "Rob Ryley" <KingoWellness@...>
>Reply-To: thomasszaszdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
>To: thomasszaszdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [ThomasSzaszDiscussion] The Manufacture of Madness and the Modern
>Media
>Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:26:35 -0000
>
>There appears to be a new trend starting in publishing when it comes
>to books dealing with mental health, psychiatry, or self-help. It
>may be more correct to say the pendulum is swinging back from the
>extreme of uncritical acceptance of biopsychiatric speculation, to
>one of skepticism regarding the value of the so-called helping
>professions (psychotherapists, psychiatrists, etc.)
>
>Paradoxically, the difference of opinion between those on the
>political left and right is growing more shrill and harsh, to the
>point where questions regarding the opponent's sanity are brought up.
>
>A few books now on the shelves:
>
>1. SHAM: How the Self-Help Movement Made America Helpless: I
>mentioned this book a few weeks ago. Writer Steve Salerno takes to
>task both the empowerment and victim wings of the self help
>movement for not only encouraging people to be irresponsible, but
>reaping obscene profits from it.
>
>2: One Nation Under Therapy: How the Helping Culture is Eroding Self-
>Reliance is a typical conservative attack on the victim ethic that
>appears to be promoted by members of the helping professions.
>
>Unfortunately, author Sally Satel (a psychiatrist) fails to look at
>the damage done by psychiatric coersion. Quite the contrary, Satel
>is a big fan of coerced treatment, particularly for drug offenders;
>she is the author of _Drug Treatment: The Case for Coercion_
>published with the help of the American Enterprise Institute--a
>conservative think tank.
>
>3. Selling Sickness: How the World's Biggest Pharmaceutical
>Companies Are Turning Us All into Patients: Not to be outdone by
>the conservatives, the anti-market left decided to get into the game
>and describe the allegedly evil plot of huge drug companies to boost
>profits by convincing the rest of us that we are sick and need one
>of their wonder drugs.
>
>Apparently, it is OK for therapists and MD wannabees to profit from
>the manufacture of madness, but pharmaceutical companies are evil
>for doing so. Despite this reservation, I do believe there is merit
>to the idea that drug companies are taking advantage of the
>confusion people have when it comes to disease, disorder, and just
>not feeling well.
>
>I can't help but be amused at the entire situation. Szasz has been
>warning the rest of us for 50+ years about medical megalomania, and
>its eventual effects.
>
>The problems these authors all describe stem from a single issue:
>the failure of the medical profession to strictly limit their area
>of expertise to demonstrable malfunction and death of the cells,
>tissues, and organs of the human body (including the brain).
>
>Szasz's critics are all over the map. They all agree he is wrong,
>but taken in toto, they mutually contradict each other.
>
>Some say disease is more than just demonstrable malfunctions of
>cells and organs. They point to conditions such as migraine
>headaches, which have no know pathophysiological explanation.
>Others (ie. E.F. Torrey), claim that schizophrenia IS cause by
>chemical imbalances , (although they are vague as to what a proper
>chemical balance is), and that those diagnosed have brain
>abnormalities, and that Szasz is being willfully stubborn by
>ignoring this evidence.
>
>Schizophrenia, Bipolar disorder, etc. are a very strange diseases,
>in that research for these conditions, as well as treatments for
>them are called neuroscience disorders as opposed to the rather
>unambiguous, diseases of the brain.
>
>It is as if these proponents have read a few too many Norman Vincent
>Peale books, and hope that by the power of positive thinking alone
>will convert misbehavior into a legitimate disease of the brain.
>But the fact they use the term neuroscience disorders suggests to
>me that, deep down, they aren't convinced. Maybe they are afraid
>neurologists will either start to ask too many uncomfortable
>questions, or invade their turf.
>
>The tap dancing psychiatrists have done around the entire concept
>of disorder and disease suggests to me that deep down, they know
>they are being intellectually dishonest.
>
>
>
>