The Stock Response.
When I say I am in agreement with Szasz to psychiatrists I am very often countered not with an engagement with Szasz's views, but with the following:
"But what do I do about situation x,y,z?? - eg. a man who thinks he's Napoleon."
My answer would be:
A man who thinks he is Napoleon......... thinks he is Napoleon. If he is not Napoleon then he is mistaken.
Someone who is mistaken is not ill.
What is the problem? You do absolutely nothing. For the man is obviously free to believe this and also his belief as such harms no one. You can't necessarily stop him believing this anyway.
ANYONE at all can have a belief. ANYONE at all can have an incorrect belief."
OR:
"What do I do about situation x,y,x?? - e.g. a man who thinks he is Napoleon with a knife."
An answer would be:
"You do nothing. Or nothing other than what you would do about a man who (thinks he) is a policeman and who has a gun.
And who may also think a Brazilian man is a terrorist. In this case latter case you would try and persuade the man to act well."
It is high time people engaged with Szasz's views rather than made excuses.
I admit that "a man who thinks he is Napoleon with or without a knife" may be in a considerably confused state, and may be more confused than a policeman.
The answer again is "So what?" You have no right to interfere. He is possibly less harmful than the policeman though he may be more confused. If he needs help, help him. Confusion is not an illness. Confusion can be a normal human state. Confusion is not a crime.
There are thousands of homeless people in this country who are harming themselves and who are homeless by choice and not by necessity.
These people are never incarcerated because they are not "mentally ill".
Yet they are harming themselves more than thousands of supposedly "mentally ill" people who are harming neither themselves nor others.
--------
I would say to psychiatrists - try and think of actually helping the person you are supposedly "treating" for "an illness."
Things would be very different indeed if pychiatrists were to set about actually helping people.
------
I am proud that I am not and could not be a "psychiatrist" as currently conceived.
I would rather have the label "mentally ill" than the label "psychiatrist" as currently conceived.
------
Psychiatry as a subject and entity is possibly fundamentally and irredeemably flawed.
When I say I am in agreement with Szasz to psychiatrists I am very often countered not with an engagement with Szasz's views, but with the following:
"But what do I do about situation x,y,z?? - eg. a man who thinks he's Napoleon."
My answer would be:
A man who thinks he is Napoleon......... thinks he is Napoleon. If he is not Napoleon then he is mistaken.
Someone who is mistaken is not ill.
What is the problem? You do absolutely nothing. For the man is obviously free to believe this and also his belief as such harms no one. You can't necessarily stop him believing this anyway.
ANYONE at all can have a belief. ANYONE at all can have an incorrect belief."
OR:
"What do I do about situation x,y,x?? - e.g. a man who thinks he is Napoleon with a knife."
An answer would be:
"You do nothing. Or nothing other than what you would do about a man who (thinks he) is a policeman and who has a gun.
And who may also think a Brazilian man is a terrorist. In this case latter case you would try and persuade the man to act well."
It is high time people engaged with Szasz's views rather than made excuses.
I admit that "a man who thinks he is Napoleon with or without a knife" may be in a considerably confused state, and may be more confused than a policeman.
The answer again is "So what?" You have no right to interfere. He is possibly less harmful than the policeman though he may be more confused. If he needs help, help him. Confusion is not an illness. Confusion can be a normal human state. Confusion is not a crime.
There are thousands of homeless people in this country who are harming themselves and who are homeless by choice and not by necessity.
These people are never incarcerated because they are not "mentally ill".
Yet they are harming themselves more than thousands of supposedly "mentally ill" people who are harming neither themselves nor others.
--------
I would say to psychiatrists - try and think of actually helping the person you are supposedly "treating" for "an illness."
Things would be very different indeed if pychiatrists were to set about actually helping people.
------
I am proud that I am not and could not be a "psychiatrist" as currently conceived.
I would rather have the label "mentally ill" than the label "psychiatrist" as currently conceived.
------
Psychiatry as a subject and entity is possibly fundamentally and irredeemably flawed.