Article by Kieron McFadden
It is a basic human right, upheld so far as I am aware by the constitutions, laws and customs of all civilized nations, that anyone should be able to refuse any treatment he or she does not want.
One has the right to do so on religious grounds, on grounds of personal conviction or simply because one considers the treatment to be harmful or dangerous.
Psychiatric treatment is a case in point: brutal, invasive and physically and mentally debilitating, psychiatry’s three main therapies of lobotomy, electro shock and drugging have become increasingly discredited, as has the bogus “science” that sought to justify the harming and even killing of hundreds of thousands of people in the name of healing. As a result a large and rapidly growing number of people would not let a psychiatrist anywhere near them with his scalpel, electrodes or brain-and-nerve-damaging drugs – given the right to refuse.
It is their right, being of sound mind, to refuse such treatment and opt for safe and effective solutions for whatever may be troubling them and thus turn instead to their nutritionist, dianeticist or religious pastor or whomsoever they wish, for help.
There is a problem however, a nicely laid little trap, that can take their basic right to choose away from them.
If they are unlucky enough to have fallen into psychiatric hands and been labeled “mentally ill” that basic human right can be denied them. Psychiatric “diagnosis” is notoriously arbitrary; it can vary according to the opinion of the individual psychiatrist and is based on no scientifically established diagnostic criteria. The very “disorders” or “mental illnesses” that psychiatrists “diagnose” have been exposed as bogus and shown to be essentially invented concepts, labels appended to varieties of human behavior, which can yet be used as justifications for what can only be described as “brain tinkering” – frequently with catastrophic damage done to the patient.
Nevertheless, in many countries, once some psychiatrist has labeled you mentally unfit, you can be regarded as not competent to make decisions about your own treatment and your freedom of choice is gone.
However, what if you make the decision before anyone has any excuse or pretext for taking your right to choose away from you, while you are manifestly of sound mind? And what if you were able to enshrine that decision in a legal document?
Under British law at least – the Mental Capacity Act of 2005 – one can do so: one can make an advance decision to refuse a treatment one does not desire to receive, should one later become “unfit” to decide. This is called a “living will.”
I suspect that in other countries there are similar laws that would in one form or another also give one that right and certainly any government that purports to uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights should provide it.
The medical profession generally does not enforce on someone an operation, drug or other treatment they expressly do not want, whatever the personal opinion and sincere advice of the doctor may be. A surgeon, for example, who removed a kidney or a medical practitioner who injected you with something or other or gave you a blood transfusion against your will would receive very short shrift indeed. Being physical treatment, the same right therefore extends to that branch of medicine which administers brain operations, electric shock “treatments” and drugs.
In Britain, if one wishes to protect oneself against possible future psychiatric abuse and refuse physically invasive treatments such as mentioned above, one therefore can simply make such a legally binding “living will” through the services of one’s lawyer.
One public spirited lawyer has responded to the high demand for the service by providing it FREE online and I would urge any Brit to visit his website as soon as possible and get that living will made. If you visit my own Freedom Plaza website (see below) and click on “free living will” in the left side bar, you’ll find it.
If you are not British, I would urge you to investigate the possibility of similar protections under the laws of your own country.
It is not clear how long it will be now before we see the back of psychiatry as its charlatanry and brutality become increasingly exposed to the glare of public scrutiny, its scientific dishonesty and un-workability laid bare.
Certainly the end is near and one witnesses the medical profession and even many psychiatrists jumping ship or distancing themselves from it and even government agencies are catching on and starting to investigate the systemic abuse of their citizens.
Probably the only reason psychiatry is still with us at all, given the advances in proper medicine and the science of nutrition and the arrival on the scene of Dianetics that provide safe and incomparably more workable solutions, is the protection afforded this decrepit and dangerous eighteenth-century dinosaur by its proxies in government.
But while the ailing beast still lives, albeit in its death throes, we would be wise to protect ourselves and keep a safe distance from its snapping jaws and thrashing tail.
