Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
If by politics you mean learning to set and respect and have each others boundaries respected (personal, not necessarily just politically).
Also, if your anything boundaries demand the overruling of others' personal soverignty, then go fuck yourself.
Pretty please and thanks for this prompt 😇
Ending the drug war would help psychiatrisy move forward with some excellent meds (psilocybin, MDMA). It would also let a lot of innocent people avoid the six year prison stint I did for growing my own medication.
So, I don't see it as not political. But I also don't see it as not psychiatric.
Have a friend administering psilocin/4-HO-DMT to patients for one of those psychedelic startups in Canada. Thought it was cool because the first serious psychedelic research also began in Canada in the late 40s-50s, Humphrey Osmond even coined the term "psychedelic" while experimenting with them at a mental hospital in Weyburn, Saskatchewan, in a letter addressed to Huxley. They first used them as "psychomemetics" with the understanding they mimicked the symptoms of schizophrenia, to better sympathize with the patients (this was in the days of mental institutions.) They used it for alcoholism as well apparently, Osmond said it would reveal to them how their behavior was affecting other people etc.
Well, do you need a psychiatrist if your life isn't completely fucked by a drug possession conviction?
Psychiatrists are the ones doing a lot of the research.
I get your point but I find the research still important for harm reduction even if I don't think these medicines should only be available with a prescription.
MDMA got submitted to the FDA recently. They’ll have to reschedule MDMA and I don’t see that happening easily even with evidence it has medical uses.
Considering cannabis is still illegal federally, I'd agree with you.
Although we desperately need better medications (that are affordable), this covers treatment. What's being pointed out here is that we're not addressing the causes. Legalization certainly helps with one cause, but there's clearly way more contributing to the rise in mental illness which is largely being ignored.
I agree with what you're saying and probably mostly agree with the article.
But the headline pitched it as an either/or thing (not psychiatry but politics!). My comment was meant to highlight the impact politics has had, and continues to have, on psychiatrists being able to use medicines that Western science has been well aware of the potential for in the treatment of mental illness for 50+ years.
There's similarities in regards to body autonomy and Dr/patient autonomy with abortion access and psychiatric medicine that many people are ignorant too because of oppressive policies on the part of the Nixon administration that continue to be the status quo.
Public policy changes to address systemic causes of mental illness are absolutely needed. But pitching it in this sort of binary as the headline does misses the mark imo.
How about just make life worth living for more people?
Instead of trying to help people after they've gone down ... why not prevent them from falling in the first place.
That sounds like preventative care and we don't do that in America!
Now you eat these micro plastics so we can sell you pills.
Fun fact;
In war zones rates of depression and anxiety drop down to statistically zero.
There's no time for ennui, to much shit is going on that you can admit you have no control over and every decision you make could potentially mean life and death for anyone around you.
People find their purpose. It's just that it's usually "survive", and might develop into "revenge".
How is that tracked?
So our mental health crisis ain't gettin' solved, then.
Not when there's so much money to be had with people's sufferings. :-(
Let me introduce you to the concept of the polycrisis.
The movies for which Guy Ritchie remains best known, Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, both have this bit in which all the chickens to whom he's spent the past hour patiently getting us acquainted all come home to roost at the same time in the same place, and it's marvelous and hilarious.
It's not so great in the moment, is it?
This reads like the first two (officially released) Fantastic 4 movies. Oh my god! Those heros saved us! That's fine, Susan, but they only had to save you because they caused the bridge to collapse in the first place! Quit praising people for picking up the milk bottle they knocked over, they didn't even clean up the mess!
Politicians want to improve our worsening mental health with big psychiatric initiatives. The problem with this model, says historian of neuroscience Danielle Carr, is that it ignores the social and structural forces causing widespread mental suffering.
I actually think this is true for everybody diagnosed with a "mental illness". Society wants to push you to a psychiatrist as an easy fix. But in reality, there are social and emotional pressures that have caused the patient to become distressed. It could be bullying, or financial worries, or the loss of a relative, or other big worries. Psychiatry invents "diagnoses" so that the true social and environmental pressures get swept under the rug. Because they don't care about you, they just believe that you might turn dangerous (even if you have no history of doing anything wrong), so they'll drug you to reduce what they think is a risk.
Edit: Thinking about it more, maybe we should get rid of the biopsychosocial model that doctors love to talk about. Just have a psychosocial model instead (getting rid of the bio bit, where they drug the patient). Because nearly all of the time, they never prove any biological fault with the patient's brain. And yet they're still happy to drug the patient.