I was travelling to work in the chaos of London when I got a text from Elizabeth. She is being allowed to stay at a placement but I cannot say where this. There were meant to be 3 choices but I was concerned that this was not being done fairly and so I contacted social services. They told me that Elizabeth was not sure about 1 placement she went to see which I thought was brilliant. However today I have changed my mind about this after the tone in which I was spoken to. Anyway there is one more placement that Elizabeth should see and I am waiting to hear whether this is going to be arranged. There needs to be choice for Elizabeth and then it is up to her of course. I then telephoned the GP as I am waiting for some information but this was not able to be provided as yet.

Anyway I had a shocking time getting to work today and arrived about midday and then in the evening I decided nothing was going to stop me from doing my favourite classes at my gym. So I took part in these and by the time they had ended the traffic had got better. I then got more than one bus all the way home and arrived home at 11.00 pm. To think I have the same thing tomorrow and Friday as well – plus next week.

Anyway it was certainly a very scenic journey back through London tonight on the buses whereas I would normally travel on the underground. Elizabeth has said she would tell me about her stay at the placement and whether or not she liked it but so far so good. However it is every bit possible for her to be able to stay at the other place and all I want is fairness for my daughter – she should be allowed choice. On the subject of choice so should every patient be allowed choice – choice in treatment and choice in care and from April it is a good thing that you can choose a psychiatrist. I am hoping the new psychiatrist will be just like Dr Joanna Moncrieff.

Is nonconformity and freethinking a mental illness? According to the newest addition of the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual ofRead More… http://themindunleashed.org/2013/11/nonconformity-and-freethinking-now.html

Negotiation and the Power of Finding Alternative Options
Total freedom for everyone is a dangerous myth. In pursuit of absolute freedom, we will all end up feeling like “slaves” of one kind or another. The answer to feelings of “oppression” is for everyone to always have plenty of options.
So, when negotiating with anyone, including psycho-social service professionals and including clients, one should always solicit at least 2 alternative options from the other person, and always suggest as least 2 options of your own, and always negotiate at least 2 compromise options in any difficult negotiation situation.
Person-to-Person Therapy
Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is a modern therapy that has the objective of achieving as much “psychological flexibility” as possible. It basically aims to undo the obsessive, compulsive and addictive patterns that result from past trauma and too much worrying about further future traumas. So, modelling “psychological flexibility” in one’s own behaviour, and actively contradicting one’s own obsessions, compulsions and addictions makes complete sense.
Peter K. Gerlach, author of the “Break the Cycle” programme, gives a good explanation as to how “addictive personalities” gets passed down from one generation to the next, so I recommend studying his work and working through his programme.
John Bradshaw, author of “Healing the Shame That Binds You”, also has much to say on the subject of “addictive personalities”, their roots in “being excessively shamed”, and how to recover.
Another therapy that is calling out for more attention is Schema Therapy which explains that we see the world through “filters” (called “Schemas”) that have arisen as a result of past traumatic experiences, and the way that one sees the world has to be adjusted if one is ever to recover.
Then there’s my invention which I call “Modality Therapy”. In this therapy I have found it extremely simple and helpful to label, as well as possible, everyone’s “operational mode” (though perfection in such labelling is not required). See Appendix 3 for full details.
Then there’s my variation of the “Open Dialogue” group therapy process which is a facilitated group healing process. See Appendix 4 for my “Open Dialogue Group Guidelines”.
Meditation
If you have stumbled across a kind of meditation that produces positive results for you, then that’s all very well and good. But, I personally dislike most off-the-shelf versions of meditation as they all seem very unnatural to me.
My own version of “meditation” involves “tuning in” to one’s own inner “tinnitus”, as and when, in any idle moment.
“Tinnitus” is the whistling sound that can sometimes, if not often, be noticed in one or both ears behind the sounds of the everyday world. I find that when I “tune in” to my inner “tinnitus”, I get to notice it more clearly and more loudly. And, this technique requires no special position, and it doesn’t matter at all whether one shuts one’s eyes or keeps them open.
“Tune in” whenever you think to do so, whenever you can do so, whilst you get on with your life, whatever you happen to be doing at the time. It can do no harm, and is likely to do much good.
The Healing Power of “Being There for Another Person”
“Being there for another person” can be done in many ways. I will list some of the most beneficial ways here:
1. Providing low-key company (relaxing together, parallel activity, occasional inconsequential conversation).
2. Witnessing (being with and just paying attention to what is going on for the other person, noticing the client’s existence for more than a few minutes at a time).
3. Listening (being with and gently encouraging the other person to do as much or as little talking as they need to, as and when it suits them).
4. Hearing/Understanding (trying to make some sense of some of what is being said and showing some understanding, support and encouragement only when we sense that that understanding, support and encouragement is likely to be welcomed).
5. Making it as easy as possible for a client to process what needs to be processed in the service of “going through” with as little “interference” as possible, where “interference” is any communication or intervention generated by any agendas other than the client’s agenda.
6. Making it easy for client to “get things off their chests” with as little “interference” (see above) as possible.
7. Talking to the client with thoughtfulness, consideration, kindness, care and helpfulness, even when that client is so preoccupied with his or her inner life that he or she is verbally silent, only uttering the occasional word or phrase, or communicating in any way that makes him or her hard or even impossible to understand with any clarity.
[Such thoughtfulness, consideration, kindness, care and helpfulness is always noticed by the client, even when it looks like it has not been noticed, and it provides the client with a incentive to express himself or herself better which is an essential part of his or her journey towards some kind of recovery].

The healing process of “going through” proceeds at a pace that is inversely proportional to the amount of “interference” given, and so one should always be mindful of putting downward pressure on “interference”, so as to facilitate as much “going through” as possible.
However, perfection in this area is not required because a client that has a great deal of support in “going though” what he needs to “go through” will quickly become more tolerant of a modest degree of “interference”, especially when that “interference” is perceived as occurring for good reason and/or as a result of necessity.
It should be noted, however, that in the early stages of “going through” some clients will become more “difficult to manage” and not less, but patience and professionalism are recommended because the dividends associated with “being there” for clients in the “bad times” as well as the “good” are always great.
Also, on the subject of “interference”, when aiming to provide “therapeutic engagement” with anyone, one should be cautious about interrupting any silence. Silence can be therapeutic because it gives the client a space in which to work things out for himself or herself in the absence of “interference”. Too much silence can also be anti-therapeutic when the client is prone to feeling, unsupported, misunderstood and/or abandoned (left to do everything on his or her own). So, a balance needs to be struck, knowing that too much silence is always better than too little. Therefore the rule of thumb should be: If in doubt about whether to interrupt a silence, then don’t interrupt it.
More about the Value of Understanding, Support and Encouragement
What is written here applies to clients regardless of their degree of “emotional disturbance”, but the effects of good practice with more disturbed clients will be noticed more clearly, although good effects will show up more quickly with some clients as opposed to others.
Many clients talk unintelligibly for some of the time, if not much of the time. Some clients hardly talk or communicate at all. The problem here is that as a result of this “acquired behaviour” they rarely or almost never get any feedback from others showing that even parts of “their story” have been well understood by another human being. This is unfortunate because the resultant “isolation” forces them deeper into a chaotic inner world that is disconnected from present time reality to some degree, maybe to a severe degree. The chaotic inner world of such people is held in place by a network of past traumas and future fears which may be beyond “unpicking” even with the help of the most experienced of therapists.
The answer is to spend a lot of time with such clients providing them with company, waiting patiently to pick up as many verbal clues as possible, observing patiently to pick up as many non-verbal clues as possible, and deducing what patterns of thoughts and feelings might be turning up for the client, repeating themselves in the client’s inner life, and doing battle in the client’s present time reality.
And, as part of this process, as much feedback as possible should be given to the client to show some understanding, support and encouragement of a kind that the client welcomes, whilst being very mindful of the problem of too much “interference” (see above).
And, one should typically communicate with “emotionally disturbed” clients as if there’s nothing concerning about their presentation (this is the opposite of “pathologisation” — see below). Some nurses do this instinctively. Others do this to a lesser degree. But, sadly, psychiatrists see no point in hiding their absurd prejudices, and they see every point in treating their prejudices as incontrovertible facts that, when “challenged” by others (they say “denied” by others) are taken to be clear evidence of those others’ insanity.

I am waiting to hear from the GP who is prescribing Metformine for  Elizabeth.  He has had to contact the hospital for their records. .  Metformine is prescribed for Type II Diabetes however the team say it is being given for weight loss.  Drugs are recommended short term – but where is the evidence that given long term they are any good?   As a mother I’ve seen such substantial decline in my daughter and wish this to be addressed.    A GP should take great interest regarding the physical health of my daughter,  whereas the psychiatrist tend to dish out drugs after drug  in such a way that they do not take into consideration physical health.  It is of no consolation that they claim to carry out tests on the physical well being – the fact is I have more than proven what they are doing is totally wrong.  When I produced the private reports from Bio Lab I’d had done years ago these reports showed substantial deficiencies/decline  yet were ignored by the team.  I have since had more of these tests done for Dr Walsh when he comes over here.    It is not a good situation that a GP has to revert to the hospital asking for files/records which they should have been given in the first place in my opinion.  The last time I questioned prescriptions from GP v psychiatrist  was when the local GP gave Lymececlyn for skin problems.  The drugs had caused my daughter to have terrible skin irritation and led to her scratching and this in turn led to infection. This drug was supposed to relieve the symptoms of the other drugs being prescribed and  I looked up this drug and was horrified –  I questioned with the previous GP why they were still prescribing it after so long when it clearly said on the leaflet that it should only be used short term.  The drug was then immediately stopped.  I am now doing the same with the Metformine –  if there is any problems with my daughter’s physical health then we as a family need to know because she may have to be put on a different diet – this could be life threatening if say she is diabetic.  I am sure that no one – neither psychiatrist or GP really looks at adverse drug reactions, especially in instances where more than one drug is being prescribed.  This is totally wrong and could be life threatening to the patient and new measures need to be put in place.  The GP will not interfere with the treatment from a psychiatrist – why not if the drugs are harmful!( I do not think psychiatrists are that knowledgeable about the full workings of the psychiatric drugs and how they interact with other drugs.  I do not think they have ever done a reduction properly as I know that this needs to be done very carefully and very slowly.).  I have been amazed at some of the psychaitrists comments regarding these drugs and have questioned whether in fact they do have enough knowledge on the workings of these drugs, having read up so much myself and sought specialist advice from leading experts.  As I said to Mr Burstow I doubted whether  all of these psychiatrists really know the full workings of the drugs let alone the correct way to withdraw someone which leads to failure and do they monitor properly the taking of these drugs or withdrawals from them in the community – well I VERY MUCH DOUBT IT.  I have seen nothing done properly as far as reductions are concerned re Elizabeth and this has led me to doubt the competence of some of these professionals.  Someone like Dr Ann Blake Tracy would know exactly how to do things properly for instance and should be invited to the UK along with Dr Walsh and Dr Shaw and every expert in this country should be brought together to determine what should be done about the current crisis situation in the UK where wards are overflowing and patients returning time and time again.      At the Bethlem Royal Hospital for instance the Psychiatrist there said I should sit back and relax and let the experts to their jobs – so the Professor and Pharmacist were the experts in terms of knowledge of prescribing and the psychiatrist just came with out with the reduction would be done over 2 weeks when it should  have been over several years so this was doomed to failure.  The Pharmacist could not stop smugly smiling throughout the meeting and this so called specialist hospital was meant to give “best treatment” ie drug free period as recommended by Professor Murray who even defended them by saying that I should give them a chance.  The pharmacist stopped smiling when I questioned what was so amusing but I find this kind of arrogant behaviour as unacceptable by professionals who truly think they are above the law but they are certainly not above God and it is awful to experience this and be threatened but I am not the kind of person to be intimidated.     It was at the Bethlem she was given contra indicated drugs of Metformine and Clozapine and my daughter was so ill she experienced strain to her heart and could barely walk. In the first instance my daughter gave authority for the family to be able to freely discuss the care with the professionals and be included and she signed an Advanced Declaration with the instructions of no more experimentation but the Advanced Declaration and consent to the team were both ignored and then on the drugs what they did was turn around and say she had changed her mind and did not wish for family to be included or have any real information.  All you got was a weekly phone call from the lead nurse who talked about nothing really – the minute you asked a question – the question was unanswered  They meddled with the drugs leading to adverse behaviour mixing one with another leading to Section 2 and then I was subject to bullying by legal representatives in order that I agreed to a Section 3 or else be replaced as Nearest Relative. Where are the regulations in place? – it is no wonder some psychiatrists and other MH  professionals can sit there laughing/smugly smiling.

Who Really Cares?

The easiest option is to ignore whether a patient has a physical problem such as Diabetes which is CAUSED BY THE DRUGS and I would not be surprised if things are covered up should they find anything serious.   Some psychiatrists receive funding from the pharmaceutical industry and they do not care about the wellbeing of patients –  the patients are there to be used a human guinea pigs whilst they get the funding.

I have been critical about the Government’s spending of £25,000,000 on MH professionals working alongside police.  I have commented that some patients could have a valid role.  However some think it a good idea but  I know for a fact that if a patient has psychosis they can snap out of it when the right approach is given and if for instance 6 police officers approach someone in terrible distress this is bound to cause more distress to the patient. The right approach is far too often not given and if someone is dealt with humanely then they will respond likewise. It is the same for MH professionals who descend upon a patient in a crowd just to give a drug injection and this goes on in the shocking acute wards where I have heard patients begging to be released to go to prison instead of. An acute ward has not worked for my daughter and whilst there may be some patients who do not mind being treated this way I as a mother am not happy at this treatment of my daughter.   At least in prison you are told when you are being released. In the MH you have to fight for release under a system/law that can be easily usurped. I can quite understand a patient’s reluctance to go on these wards having visited so many times where drugs are given as a means of control and every time I visited I saw the same faces back on the ward.  The drugs do not erase someone’s painful memories as in some cases they do not work at all yet no alternatives are given.  The side effects of the drugs can be hallucinations and akathisia amongst other terrible things yet experts link this with the illness rather than with the drug. When a patient seems to be progressing OK temporarily the drugs are praised but when things do not go well the illness is blamed rather than the drugs.  It is when someone stops taking the drugs that there are complications.  The Psychiatrist said to Elizabeth and the family that she had a diagnosis of Schizophrenia and would have to take the drugs for the rest of her life.  Totally untrue!  He not only got the diagnosis wrong but what he said is wrong too – however a reduction needs to be done correctly and if not done correctly due to lack of knowledge of the drugs then this is bound to fail and it should be done in a safe environment. I was against the drugs back then but other members of the family felt here was a professional doctor who should be listened to – however it is only now that the rest of the family are questioning and are concerned of the decline in appearance and physical health in Elizabeth.  She now needs 24 hour care.

There can be recovery if given the right treatment and someone who has withdrawn from the drugs can experience “never having felt better” – my daughter withdrew from a small dosage of Aripraprazol (her idea, not mine as she was suffering terrible side effect on this drug) but this was done wrongly and if you do a reduction too steeply then it will fail and can lead to psychosis which would also apply to any changes in drugs – also I knew nothing about the drugs at the time.   If my daughter had been able to go into a facility back then and have the expert assistance needed, she could have got off the drugs much easier but now is a very different matter and I would not attempt to do this yet still the team use this as an excuse against me to try and get rid of me as Nearest Relative. 

By the way the new diagnosis which is being kept from my daughter by the team is PTSD.  The treatment should be INTENSIVE TRAUMA THERAPY.  The drugs given are CONTRA INDICATED.     I must speak to Sir Simon Wessely about this who wishes to improve the image of psychiatry. With his military background he would be well aware of the condition of PTSD and of the research by Professor David Healy.   Well this condition does not just apply to military and in that case I as a mother want to make sure that my daughter has the correct treatment which is certainly not a lifetime of drugging. Article 33 of Good Practice says “you must be considerate and listen to the views of family members” – this is something he and other professionals can also note and especially the success of Finland (Tornio) where I would like to go with Elizabeth one day.

Tomorrow I will write more shocking revelations as there are just too much to put on one blog and also I have not finished featuring my guest blogger with his brilliant piece THE NEW PSYCHIATRY.

My Daughter who was once physically well and fit, is in bed at 7.00 pm,  feels tired, dizzy and confused and needs 24 hr care. I am ashamed of the fact that the UK has such a cruel system in place.

In the words of some of my readers – here are some very true comments “we have never felt listened to”.  “we were controlled and put on the drugs” when someone is vulnerable the patient can be easily manipulated.  How about this  “Incurable but treatable”  –  this is laughable because the treatment they dish out leads to physical health problems and that goes against the professionals role of “DO NOT HARM ” – I do understand that if anyone in the profession dares to speak out, the system is rife with bullying and I understand someone can be ridiculed, lose their jobs, be bullied and harassed however there was talk at the IOP last time I went on resilience – I think I come into that category. Having been a carer for everyone in my family and seeing certain family members go downhill with say cancer and Alzheimers, a child drugged, other people – well I am certainly resilient and what is more I do not care if I am ridiculed and I do not care if nasty comments are said because it would be cowardly not to come out and say this to my face. Also I wish to point out that if anyone tries to give a diagnosis to me I would never accept it having read so many books, watched dvds etc.