Last night a group of us were having twitter discussions around the opportunity to have CBT for psychosis rather than forcibly treated with psychiatric drugs. One of our cohort was a professor who kept saying that CBT was of no use whatsoever for a person experiencing psychosis. My task? To disabuse him of his notion.
Others of us were psychiatric survivors who have been at the sharp end of psych drugs and daddy knows best, patriarchal psychiatry. Fairy tales of anosognosia, non-compliance and incapacity. The ways in which they make us do what they want and call it medicine.
There was a toing and froing of tweets. And into the breach came a fellow pro, the means by which the prof had got into the fray. The fellow pro at one point used the word "amateur" as if to describe any of us with no qualifications or academic knowhow. Whereas I tend to think that if you can't do then you teach, sort of a thing.
The prof soon resorted to trolling when he got annoyed and his partner in crime retreated from the battle after failing to dent our armour with his research "evidence" that was nothing of the sort, rather a means to an end which I see as proving a point. By people who have a vested interest in the "point".
Keeping psychiatric drugs as the main tool of psychiatry. For how can you force talking therapy on to a person? Talk them into a stupor? Give them words by syringe? Read them a lecture until they obey?