citizens commission on human rights - urantia-gaiaelse. in its place are words like disease,...

A Public Service Report from Citizens Commission on Human Rights

PSYCHIATRY’S DRUG SCAMREHAB FRAUD

CCIITTIIZZEENNSS CCOOMMMMIISSSSIIOONN OONN HHUUMMAANN RRIIGGHHTTSS

The Citizens Commission on HumanRights (CCHR) was established in 1969 bythe Church of Scientology to investigateand expose psychiatric violations of humanrights, and to clean up the field of mentalhealing. Its co-founder is Dr. ThomasSzasz, professor of psychiatry emeritus andan internationally renowned author. Today,CCHR has more than 130 chapters in over30 countries. Its board of advisors, calledCommissioners, includes doctors, lawyers,educators, artists, business professionals,and civil and human rights representatives.

CCHR has inspired and caused manyhundreds of reforms by testifying beforelegislative hearings and conducting publichearings into psychiatric abuse, as well asworking with media, law enforcement andpublic officials the world over.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:CCHR International

6616 Sunset Blvd.Los Angeles, CA, USA 90028

Telephone: (323) 467-4242(800) 869-2247 • Fax: (323) 467-3720

www.cchr.orge-mail: [email protected]

®

19137 CCHR Pamphlet - Rehab 10/28/04 5:29 PM Page 2

1. Richard Hughs and Robert Brewin, TheTranquilizing of America (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,Inc., New York, 1979), p. 291.2. Louis J. West, “Lysergic Acid Diethylamide: ItsEffects on a Male Asiatic Elephant,” Science, Vol. 138,No. 3545, 7 Dec. 1962, pp. 1100–1102.3. Lee Dembard, review of “Intoxication, Life inPursuit of Artificial Paradise by Ronald K. Siegel,”Los Angeles Times, 23 July 1989. 4. Mark Ehrman, “The Heretical Dr. X; The PersistentVoice of Harbor-UCLA Psychiatrist Charles Grob IsRising Against the Chorus That Has Made EcstasyOne of the Most Demonized Drugs in America.Have Its Potential Benefits Been Lost in the Din?” Los

Angeles Times, 2 Mar. 2003.5. Joseph Glenmullen, M.D., Prozac Backlash (Simon &Schuster, New York, 2000), p. 310.6. Thomas Szasz, Ceremonial Chemistry (LearningPublications, Inc., Florida, 1985) pp. 54, 55.7. Tana Dineen, Ph.D., Manufacturing Victims (RobertDavies Multimedia Publishing, Montreal, 2001), pp.214–215.8. “Cutting Out Addiction,” The Observer, June 1999. 9. Eugenia Rubtsova, “They Drilled My HeadWithout Any Anesthetic,” Novie Izvestia, 19 June2002.10. Narconon International, Internet address:http://www.narconon.com/narconon_results.htm.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1 Drug rehabilitation programs should be based onproven, workable results that return the addict tosociety, drug-free and productive within the com-munity.

2 Remove psychiatrists and psychologists as advisorsor counselors from the police forces, prisons, crimi-nal and drug rehabilitation and parole services.

3 If you or a family member have been abused by apsychiatrist, seek legal advice about filing a civilsuit against any offending psychiatrist and his orher hospital, associations and teaching institutionsfor compensatory and punitive damages.

Caution: No one should stop taking any psychiatric drug without the adviceand assistance of a competent non-psychiatric medical doctor.

PHOTO CREDITS: Cover: Ed Kashi/Corbis; 6: Ed Kashi/Corbis; 9: Hugh Burden/Getty.

15© 2004 CCHR. All Rights Reserved. CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, CCHR and theCCHR logo are trademarks and service marks owned by Citizens Commission on Human Rights. Printedin the U.S.A. Item #FLO 19137

This publication was made possible by a grant from the United StatesInternational Association of Scientologists Members’ Trust.W ould a universal, proven cure for

drug addiction be a good thing?And is it possible?

First, let’s clearly define what is meant by“cure.” For the individual, a cure means noth-ing less than complete and permanent absenceof any overwhelming physical or mentaldesire, need or compulsion to take drugs. Forthe society, it means the rehabilitation of theaddict as a consistently honest, ethical, pro-ductive and successful member.

Twenty-five years ago, this first questionwould have seemed rather strange, if not

IINNTTRROODDUUCCTTIIOONNWHAT HOPE IS THERE?

2


help patients in order to legally push drugs.While billions in tax dollars are paid each yearto fight drug abuse, psychiatrists and theirinstitutions and associations devote their ener-gy and resources to promoting extremelydestructive, addictive and mind-altering drugsas the “solution.”

Thankfully, not all rehabilitation programsare based on the psychiatrist’s fictitious chronicbrain disease, or the idea that addiction is incur-able. In Spain, an independent sociology group,the Tecnicos Asociados de Investigacion y Market-ing, conducted a study of such a program, which

is available in many coun-tries, including Australia,Europe, South Africa andthe United States. Priorto starting the rehabprogram, over 62% ofthe subjects had com-mitted robberies and73% had been sellingdrugs to support theirhabits. The success ofthe non-drug rehab pro-gram was significant:78% of the graduatesremained drug-freeyears after finishing theregimen, with no subse-quent criminal activity.10

Mental healingtechnology, treatmentsand drug rehabilita-tion methods shouldbe gauged on howthey improve andstrengthen individu-als, their responsibility,

their spiritual well-being, and thereby society.Treatment that heals should be delivered in acalm atmosphere characterized by tolerance,safety, security and respect for people’s rights.

Not all rehabilitationprograms are based on

the psychiatrist’s fictitious brain diseasetheory or the idea thataddiction is incurable.

“Here was a program thatdidn’t have me admit I

was powerless anddiseased or want me

to take ‘medication’ formy ‘manic depression.’

This program not onlyshowed me how to stayoff drugs, it did just what

it promised, it gave me a new life.”

— Former addict

14

absurd. “Of course that would be a goodthing!” and “Are you kidding?” would havebeen common responses.

Today, however, the responses would be con-siderably different. A drug addict might answer,“Look, don’t talk to me about cures, I’ve triedevery program there is and failed. None of themwork.” Or “You can’t cure heredity; my father wasan alcoholic.” A layperson might say, “They’vealready cured it; methadone isn’t it?” Or, “They’vefound it’s an incurable brain disease; you know,like diabetes it can’tbe cured.” Or even,“Science found itcan’t be helped; it’s something to do with a chemicalimbalance in thebrain.”

Very noticeablewould be the com-plete absence of theword, even the idea,of cure, whetheramongst addicts,families of addicts,government officials,media or anywhereelse. In its place arewords like disease, illness, chronic, management,maintenance, reduction and relapse. Addicts inrehab are taught to refer to themselves as “recover-ing,” never “cured.” Stated in different ways, theimplicit consensus that has been created is that drugaddiction is incurable and something an addict willhave to learn to live with—or die with.

Is all hope lost?Before considering that question, it is very

important to understand one thing about drugrehabilitation today. Our hope of a cure for drugaddiction was not lost; it was buried by anavalanche of false information and false solutions.

First of all, consider psychiatrists’ long-term propagation of dangerous drugs as “harmless”:

“It is very important tounderstand one thingabout much of the drug rehabilitation field today.Our hope of a cure for drugaddiction was not lost. It was buried by anavalanche of psychiatry’sfalse information and falsesolutions. Drug addiction is not a disease. Realsolutions do exist.”

— Jan Eastgate

3


I n 1986, the French Minister of Justice, M. Chalandon, was shocked by “the atti-tude of some psychiatrists who arranged

a monopoly over the treatment of drugaddicts and practiced a kind of intellectualterrorism in this area.”

Psychiatrists are failed medical practi-tioners who have betrayed their pledge to

CCHHAAPPTTEERR TTHHRREEEEA HOPE OF A CURE

13

❚ In the 1960s, psychiatrists made LSD notonly acceptable, but an “adventure” to tens ofthousands of college students, promoting thefalse concept of improving life through “recre-ational,” mind-altering drugs.

❚ In 1967, New York psychiatrist NathanKline, who served on committees for the World Health Organization stated, “In prin-ciple, I don’t see that drugs are any more abnor-mal than reading, music, art, yoga, or 20 otherthings—if you take a broad point of view.”1

❚ In 1973, University of California psychiatrist, Louis J. West, wrote, “Indeed adebate may soon be raging among some clinical scientists on the question of whetherclinging to the drug-free state of mind is not anantiquated position for anyone—physician orpatient—to hold.” 2

❚ In the 1980s, Californian psychiatricdrug specialist, Ronald K. Siegel, made theoutrageous assertion that being drugged is abasic human “need,” a “fourth drive” of thesame nature as sex, hunger and thirst. 3

❚ In 2003, Charles Grob, director of childand adolescent psychiatry at HarborUniversity of California Medical Centerbelieved that Ecstasy (hallucinogenic streetdrug) was potentially “good medicine” fortreating alcoholism and drug abuse.4

The failure of the war against drugs islargely due to the failure to stop one of themost dangerous drug pushers of all time: thepsychiatrist. Governments, groups, familiesand individuals that continue to accept his false information and drug rehabilitationtechniques, do so at their own peril.

Clearing away psychiatry’s false informa-tion about drugs and addiction is not only a fun-damental part of restoring hope, it is the firststep towards achieving real drug rehabilitation.

Jan EastgatePresident, Citizens Commissionon Human Rights International

4


MORE PSYCHIATRIC FAILURESSince the 1950s, psychiatry has monopolized the

field of drug rehabilitation research and treatments. Itslong list of failed cures has included lobotomies, insulinshock, psychoanalysis and LSD.

“Ultra Rapid Opiate Detoxification,” a more recentexample, uses narcotics to keep an addict unconsciousfor about five hours, during which withdrawal suppos-edly takes place. One recipient of this treatment told ofawaking, her mouth and throat blood-filled, with bro-ken capillaries in her face, and tremendous cramping,nausea and convulsions.

In Russia, between 1997 and 1999, one hundred psychosurgery operations were conducted on teenageaddicts in St. Petersburg.8 “They drilled my head with-out any anesthetic,” Alexander Lusikian said. “Theykept drilling and cauterizing [burning] exposed areasof my brain … During the days after the operation …the pain in my head was so terrible, it was as if it hadbeen beaten with a baseball bat. And when the painpassed a little, I felt the desire to take drugs.” Withintwo months, Alexander had reverted to drugs.9

The last thing any psychiatric treatment hasachieved is rehabilitation. But its failures notwith-standing, psychiatry plows ahead with another justifi-cation—“harm reduction”—the idea that “drug abuseis a human right and that the only compassionateresponse is to make it safer to be an addict.” This hasled to such infamous developments as Australia’s“shooting galleries,” Switzerland and Germany’s “nee-dle parks” and Holland’s needle exchange programs.

Dr. Tana Dineen, Ph.D., states: “It seems, whateverthe results,” addiction treatment in psychology andpsychiatry’s hands, “is identifiably a business thatignores its failures. In fact, its failures lead to morebusiness. Its technology, based on continued recovery,presumes relapses. Recidivism is used as an argumentfor further funding.”

Harm reduction and psychiatric or psychologicaldrug rehab programs overlook the real victims—themother who loses a child through a drug overdose, thefamily that can’t go out at night because of neighbor-hood drug gangs and the many others who live in fearof drug violence.

12

CCHHAAPPTTEERR OONNEETHE SELLING OF ‘INCURABILITY’

A close review of drug rehabilitation todayshows it is a field nearly monopolized by psy-chiatry.

In a 1998 article published in the NationalJournal of Justice, Dr. Alan I. Leshner, professor ofpsychology and then head of the National Instituteof Drug Abuse (NIDA) stated, “Addiction is rarelyan acute illness. For most people, it is a chronic,relapsing disorder.” One of today’s top “authori-ties” in the field of drug rehabilitation is teachingthat, for most people, addiction is a “disease” thatthe individual will never overcome.

5


DSM-IV, is quoted assaying that the DSM“provides a nice, neatway of feeling youhave control overmental disorders,” buthe confessed this is“an illusion.”

In 2001, Canadianpsychologist TanaDineen, author ofManufacturing Victims,said, “Addiction treat-ment is a cash cow of the PsychologyIndustry, which hasargued, in most casessuccessfully, that treat-ment of the ‘disease’ought to be covered byhealth insurance.”7

As for Leshner’sclaim that addiction is a“brain disease,” in his2001 book, Pharmacracy,Professor Szasz says,“Psychiatrists maintainthat our understandingof mental illnesses asbrain diseases is basedon recent discoveries in neuroscience, madepossible by imagingtechniques for diagnosisand pharmacologicalagents for treatment.This is not true.”

The obvious con-clusion, then, is that due to their drug rehabilita-tion failures, psychiatry redefined drug addictionas a “treatable brain disease,” making it conve-niently “incurable” and requiring massive addi-tional funds for “research” and to maintain treat-ment for the addiction.

“[T]here is not one iota of evidence” thataddiction is a braindisease. “Psychiatristsmaintain that ourunderstanding of mental illnesses asbrain diseases is madepossible by imagingtechniques for diagnosisand pharmacological agents for treatment. This is not true.”

— Dr. Thomas Szasz, professor of psychiatryemeritus, author ofPharmacracy

11

Leshner’s most revealing statement tells usexactly where curing addiction fits into psychi-atric drug rehabilitation. He says, “…a reason-able standard for treatment success is not curingthe illness but managing it, as is the case for otherchronic illnesses.” Actually curing drug addic-tion doesn’t enter into it at all.

Not surprising, drug abuse is rampant. In2001, an estimated 5% of the world population,age 15 and above, abused drugs.

Psychiatry’s flagship drug treatment pro-gram is methadone maintenance for heroinaddicts. Just how effective has this been?

According to available literature, the pro-gram involves the use of a “medication” calledmethadone, to rebalance brain chemistry, blockthe effects of heroin, and reduce craving. Butthere are other lesser-known facts to be examinedwhen evaluating this program.

While drug addiction can be overwhelming, it is important toknow that psychiatry, its diagnoses and its drugs, are not working.Their drugs and methods only chemically mask problems andsymptoms; they cannot and never will be able to solve addiction.

6


The American Psychiatric Association’s Diag-nostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV(DSM-IV) lists “Substance Dependence,” “SubstanceAbuse,” and “Substance Intoxication” to cover thevarious types of “mental disorders” related to thesesubstances.

However, in their book Making Us Crazy, profes-sors Herb Kutchins and Stuart A. Kirk say, “DSM isused to directly affect national health policy and pri-orities by inflating the proportion of the populationthat is defined as ‘mentally disordered.’” The num-bers are also used to “shape mental health policy andthe allocation of federal and state revenues.”

Michael First, one of the developers of the

WHAT EXPERTS SAYABOUT BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY

Psychiatry and psychology’s addiction treatment “ is identifiably a business that ignores its failures. Infact its failures lead to more business.Its technology, based on continuedrecovery, presumes relapses.Recidivism is used as an argumentfor further funding.”

— Tana Dineen, Ph.D., authorManufacturing Victims

“There is no evidence confirming‘brain disease attribution.’”

— Loren Mosher, M.D.

“Biological psychiatry has yet to validate a single psychiatric condition/diagnosis as an abnormality/disease,or as anything ‘neurological,’ ‘biological,’ ‘chemically imbalanced’or ‘genetic.’”

— Fred Baughman Jr., Pediatric neurologist

10

Calling methadone a “medication” obscuresthe fact that it is an addictive drug; in fact,methadone is at least as addictive as heroin.Worse still, methadone withdrawal is eventougher than heroin withdrawal, with the symp-toms lasting for six weeks or more. As early as1971, it was known that babies born tomethadone mothers suffered withdrawal symp-toms, including convulsions.

Methadone literature warns of the drug’slife-threatening risks, including cardiac arrest,respiratory and circulatory depression, andshock. Overdose and death can occur.Between 1982 and 1992, deaths frommethadone in England increased by over 710%,from 16 deaths to 131. In New South Wales,Australia, there were242 deaths related tomethadone between1990 and 1995.

Aside from metha-done, there is alsobuprenorphine, a nar-cotic used to treatheroin addiction. Bu-prenorphine, like mor-phine, can cause respi-ratory depression and,used on already drugdependent individu-als, can result in withdrawal side effects.

Joseph Glenmullen of Harvard MedicalSchool says that potent prescription drugs merely“numb feelings just as the addictive behavioronce did” and won’t enable the person to suc-cessfully overcome his or her addiction.5

In reality, all the methadone programachieves is a reduction in heroin usage, and itachieves this through an increase in methadoneusage. A legal and highly addictive drug—euphemistically called a medication—has substi-tuted for an illegal and highly addictive drug.

The following are statements from addicts whohave been through methadone programs:

“Methadone maintenance is institutionalized

“Calling it [methadone] a medication obscuresthe fact that it is an addictive drug; in fact,methadone is at least as addictive as heroin.”

— Dr. Miriam Stoppard,National Drugs Helpline,United Kingdom

7


Aclose review of drug rehabilitation today showsit is a field nearly monopolized by psychiatry.

According to renowned Professor ofPsychiatry Emeritus, Thomas Szasz, “[T]here is notone iota of evidence” that addiction is a brain dis-ease. Prof. Szasz says that by defining the use orabuse of illegal drugs as a “disease,” this placed thetreatment for it within the province of the psychia-trist. Psychiatrists then describe the course of this“untreated disease”—“steady deterioration leadingstraight to the insane asylum”—and prescribe its“treatment”: “psychiatric coercion with or withoutthe use of additional, ‘therapeutic’ drugs (heroin formorphine; methadone for heroin).”6

CCHHAAPPTTEERR TTWWOOHARMFUL DIAGNOSTIC DECEPTIONS

misery. It does not address the emotional andspiritual disease that drug addiction is. Theheroin addict who finds his way to methadonetreatment and does nothing else is only switch-ing seats on the Titanic.” — Sam, former heroinaddict.

“Methadone is probably the worst thingthat can be given to somebody becauseyou’re saying it’s okay to get high.” — Scott,heroin addict who spent two years on methadone.

While celebrated as a success by psychia-trists, the truth is that their methadone programis no more than an unmitigated failure for the

individual drug addictand for society.

Drug addiction canbe overwhelming but it isimportant to know thatpsychiatry, its diagnosesand its drugs, are unwork-able. Their drugs andmethods only chemicallymask problems andsymptoms; they cannotand never will be able tosolve addiction.

“There are a great manyways to do science badly,and the junk science that

makes up the bulk of the body of ‘knowledge’

of clinical psychologymanages to exemplify

every one of them.” — Dr. Margaret Hagen, Ph.D.

8 9


citizens commission on human rights - urantia-gaiaelse. in its place are words like disease,...

Documents