Stop Shock National Call Notes January 20 2016

January 20, 2016 Stop Shock National Call
New Hampshire and Virginia now added to the list of states participating in the calls. (California; Colorado; Idaho; Illinois; Kansas; Massachusetts, Michigan; Minnesota; New Jersey; New York;  Vermont; and Washington, D.C..)
The call started out with the expression of some frustration of having to jump through the hoops that the FDA and government are putting up — more as obstacles than anything else, and how it is intentional on the part of the government to wear down the people so the response gets watered down.
There was a commitment expressed on the call for us to work in solidarity with each other and support the work that others are doing — that not everyone has to do everything.
If people are feeling bogged down by the idea that the FDA is part of the problem we face – how do you communicate with them when they are the “fox in the hen house”? Something to have in mind, explained, was that we do not need to be winning them over or talking with them rationally–as if they are rational. We are the opposition that they must face and perhaps, if we cause them enough trouble, they will not do/continue to do it. While the FDA is doing this on purpose, and using the administrative power in a way that is probably overstepping its intent, we need to also be purposive in our response and have a coordinated effort and collection of information available for people who may not have the time or energy to figure out a response.
People must beware the therapeutic state. This is about more than just shock treatment. It’s about the FDA, the medical industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and what they can do to us, the public. Behavioral health is social control. This move to downgrade the shock device will make it much easier to use force on someone to get shock — especially through the idea of “requires rapid response”. Court orders, coercion will become much more frequent.
If in the 80s it was estimated 7 million people had been subjected to shock treatment, and now it is accepted that about 100,000 people are subjected to shock treatment each year, there are many people who are shock survivors amongst us. We are here reaching out for shock survivors and those who are subjected to shock come out and speak out about their experiences.
Not everyone will engage in activism. But the activists need people who are going to support them, behind them, when we act.
Here are some ideas that came out of the call today – We are starting work on a national campaign to educate people and call for action. We are putting together a template letter with exact information of where people can send info; etc.
Beware the Therapeutic State
New FDA Assault on Public: Shock Treatment is “Safe”
Yes, They’re Still Doing Shock
Now They Want to Call Shock Treatment Safe
Shocking FDA Proposal
Shock is a Crime Against Humanity
Shock Treatment (ECT) is Still Brain Damage.
Calling All Shock Treatment Survivors: The FDA Wants to Call it Safe. What Say You? Contact MindFreedom International
Shock is not the answer
Shock: few benefits, multiple harms
Shock: another ineffective and harmful intervention of psychiatry
Shock: normalizing the harm and targeting the most vulnerable
Shock machine: upgraded by psychiatric consensus, not evidence
Shock: once a last resort, now proposed as acceptable with no new evidence
Shock: can be accepted only by offering selective evidence and ignoring harms
Shock: ignoring the harm, blaming the vulnerable
Shock: another harmful and ineffective intervention after other multiple harmful and ineffective interventions of psychiatry
Shock: another punishment for those not responding to psychiatric “treatments”
Shock: respond to an so-called “emergency” by harming a person’s cognitive ability
Shock: punishment for those who dare to be treatment-resistant to psychiatry
Shock: harms outweigh benefits in short, medium and long terms

Moratorium on All Shock Treatment Until Banned

Shock:  manufacturers of shock machines defend them as safe and effective

Shock machines: conflict of interests in rapid, and biased upgade

Shock: another example of psychiatric consensus over actual evidence

Shock machines: are the same people manufacturing, testing and approving them?

Shock: since drugs don’t usually work long term, shock steps into the picture again

Shock: after drug-induced mania, psychosis, metabolic syndrome (or obesity or whatever) and suicidality, let’s try shock

Shock: if your drugs never work or stop working, you may be in for the shock of your life

Shock: denying first person testimony, accepting psychiatric biased anecdotes

Shock:  substituting brain damage for social inclusion and gender equity

Shock: do repeated seizures help fetal development and maternal capacities?

Shock: neurologists try to prevent all seizures, why are psychiatrists inducing repeated seizures?


We also need a national strategy on how to respond to the FDA requests for feedback on the terms “REQUIRES RAPID RESPONSE” and “TREATMENT RESISTANT”. We want to include as many perspectives in the template as possible. Please give examples of what you think these terms mean or ideas to be included in the template such as:
Rapid response – pseudo-scientific – 6 -12 shocks to have any “effect” – requires rapid response scientifically absurd even under their own premises, if they want rapid response they should try Ketamine.
Treatment reisitant – what would you include for this in the template? example . . . One or two drugs that are known to make one feel like ending one’s own life “fail” and the solution in electricity coursed through the brain?
Finding out about cost, etc. for local ad campaigns at local radio station, or better yet, public radio, and other media that is free to advertise.
Development of press releases
Development of call to action
Development of social media kits (memes, groups, etc)
Wednesday, January 27 @ 2pm eastern time, 1 pm central time, 11 am pacific time, 12 pm mountain time.
1-605-475-2090 pin code: 873270

%d bloggers like this: