Articulating replies to voices

J

John A

Well-known member
Founding Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
207
Location
Launceston, Cornwall, United Kingdom
#1
I guy has just joined our "community" who articulates his replies to what his voices say to him. He has a rationale for doing this, which is flawed, and resistant to argument. This behaviour is very disruptive in meetings, or even when people are watching a movie. He seems to be compelled to do it, no matter how people plead for him to talk back to his voices silently, if he finds talking back to them helpful.

Has anybody else come across this phenomenon? Should we get tough on him, letting him know more and more firmly that his behaviour is unacceptable?

I am looking at this as anti-social behaviour, rather than as a symptom. Most voice-hearers articulate back at their voices some of the time, I imagine. I have had hour long conversations with them in the distant past, until I realised that rewarding attention-seeking behaviour with attention was going to make it more assertive, not less so. (Nowadays, most of my voices are delivered subliminally, and have very little impact on my consciousness, because I figured this out.) But this is the first voice-hearer I have come across who lack the social skills to inhibit self-defensive articulation in company, and I am at a loss to understand why he seems almost unable to talk back silently to his voices, if he feels the need to talk back to them at all.
 
A

Apotheosis

Guest
#2
Maybe he is finding his own path & way of recovery for his "condition".

Being unwell & suffering as he is, I would think understanding & compassion are the ways to go.
 
J

John A

Well-known member
Founding Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
207
Location
Launceston, Cornwall, United Kingdom
#3
Maybe he is finding his own path & way of recovery for his "condition".

Being unwell & suffering as he is, I would think understanding & compassion are the ways to go.
Thank you for replying. I agree with everything you say, but it doesn't go far enough to be of much practical help in my present situation, alas.

My agenda for this one message? Your key words: unwell ... suffering ... understanding ... compassion.

The consensus in our group is that the person who articulates his replies to voices in company is indeed, at least metaphorically speaking, "unwell". (I used the word "metaphor" about the phrase "mental illness" after reading Tom Szasz, before Szasz used it himself. I don't really believe, speaking for myself, that the coining, late in human history, of the metaphorical phrase "mental illness", and the birth thence of a new branch of medical "science" with statutory powers of judge, jury and executioner in its own court, was the great advance it's often cracked up to be. I was first called by this guy cos he'd read that I was a wiz of an expert witness at appeals against section, and he'd been sectioned.)

I've taken stick for bringing an obvious schizo into our midst, but I'm defending my decision against all takers.

Yes, I would estimate that he is suffering. (And so are we all, the rest of us more so because he won't button his lip out of ordinary common-or-garden politeness.)

Next I'll take your appeal for compassion. That is something everybody has from me, because it's compulsory in my faith community, and heeps more fun than the absence of compassion. Some people have sent me hate mail here to the effect that I lack compassion, because I am harming "vulnerable" people, but nobody actually wirtes to me saying, "You harmed me, and this is how you did it", so I take it all with a pinch of salt.

Last, you want me to treat this fellow with understanding. That is exactly what I want to do. But the problem is that I don't understand his behaviour, so I cannot. I posted this thread hoping that somebody here would post a reply that would help me to understand his behaviour. Was there anybody here, I wondered, who used to have the anti-social habit, of which they were now cured, of annoying a whole roomful of people, by talking loudly in response to voices they were hearing. If so, why used they to do that? What advice could they offer me, I wondered, to help me to discourage my friend from such disruptive, anti-social behaviour.

I am master of my trade when it comes to judging sick behaviour as unwell, recognising when somebody is suffering and practising compassion. That is why I posted this thread, hoping that somebody would reply helping me with the one thing that is still needful, my point of weakness, namely: understanding the outrageous behaviour that is driving some of my troops bonkers, and how this comes about, and how people who don't exhibit the behaviour, and who find it near-intolerable, can help the offender to reform.

Later replies may enhance my understanding, but I regret to inform you that yours hasn't. It's a good post, in that it fingers the one thing I'm still not doing well for this guy, understanding his behaviour well enough to help him to modify his behaviour, so that I don't get flack from people loyal to me, because I insist on remaining loyal to a client, even one who behaves like this guy does. But your post doesn't advance my understanding, so I'm left hoping that there will be other replies a bit later on, replies that address my inner question as to "What's going on here?".
 
A

Apotheosis

Guest
#4
I've taken stick for bringing an obvious schizo into our midst, but I'm defending my decision against all takers.
How much does he believe your "ethos" on voice hearing? Were you instrumental in getting him out of hospital? If he does go with you particular take on things & you have been influential in his "understanding" of his condition & you have "rescued" him from the system, then I would think you have a grave responsibility towards him.

I have lived John, & I have known some very unwell & damaged people. People who have suffered for want of a better word with Mental Health "problems" & drug problems as well. A significant number of people I have known have died, often tragically. I am today allot more careful in how I interact with others. In the past I would have sparked up a joint with them & got drunk, & not exhibited the most stable behavior myself. Today I do try as much as I can to do; not what I think is right for another from my perspective, but what might be right for them; from theirs.

It is very hard to truly understand another, we are all different & unique, with our own unique life circumstances. Although I do hold strong opinions on the psychiatric system, there are however aspects to my own treatment & the potential treatment of others which can & do benefit. I am more able to see a more well rounded view of medication, hospitals & orthodox treatment. In some cases maybe these things are the best course of action, & in some ways this is all we have. I no longer see certain institutions or organisations as "the enemy". I try to have as balanced an outlook as I can. There is no Golden Truth carved in stone; in my experience, & my life is no longer a crusade against the Forces that B.

As the other new thread exemplifies, "The Listening cure" - it takes time, patience, empathy, & kindness to begin to understand another, & to allow them to grow & find relief to their own "problems". There is no quick fix, we are not books that can be scanned through & a simple methodology applied to all. Understanding of another takes time & hard work.
 
Rorschach

Rorschach

Well-known member
Founding Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
1,149
Location
W2
#5
It sounds to me as if your faith community is not the place for him. Ironically it seems his condition places him within your community a little in the way you were percieved here; as an outsider not adhering to the script.

Did you get him released from section, and how long has he been living with the condition?
 
J

John A

Well-known member
Founding Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
207
Location
Launceston, Cornwall, United Kingdom
#6
How much does he believe your "ethos" on voice hearing?
Apparently completely, although it's not an ethos, it's a postulated mechanism.

Were you instrumental in getting him out of hospital?
Not unless the reason the hospital released him the day before he was supposed to have a MHRT hearing because they'd found out that his lawyer was calling me as a witness.

If he does go with you particular take on things & you have been influential in his "understanding" of his condition & you have "rescued" him from the system, then I would think you have a grave responsibility towards him.
That's a bit like arguing that the criminal lawyer who successfully defends your shoplifting charge is responsible for your subsequent commission of armed robbery of a bank.

Thank you for the rest of your message. I do take my responsibilities seriously.
 
A

Apotheosis

Guest
#7
That's a bit like arguing that the criminal lawyer who successfully defends your shoplifting charge is responsible for your subsequent commission of armed robbery of a bank.
We can argue the moral ethics of the legal system if you wish. However; when I have been represented in court by people in my service; it has not been a pre requisite that I - completely take on board the postulated mechanisms of the representation.

Thank you for the rest of your message. I do take my responsibilities seriously.
Thank you, I don't doubt that you do John, but with respect; I do question what you believe to be your Responsibilities - & the implications or consequences they might have, especially on someone who is obviously seriously mentally disturbed.
 
J

John A

Well-known member
Founding Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
207
Location
Launceston, Cornwall, United Kingdom
#8
It sounds to me as if your faith community is not the place for him. Ironically it seems his condition places him within your community a little in the way you were percieved here; as an outsider not adhering to the script.
My faith community, and the community of TIs are different, although there is some (but not much) overlap.

Did you get him released from section, and how long has he been living with the condition?
I didn't get him released. He was released the day before his appeal, whilst on leave and not taking his medication. His last incident that attracted police attention (albeit not for any crime) was earlier when he was on leave, and was taking medication, so the medication wasn't keeping him out the sights of the police.

The guy is lonely. I'm encouraging people to befriend him. I have stayed over at his place a few nights myself.

He says that he was targeted with street theatre 20 years ago, and first experienced what he attributes to V2K in 2003. He has a long history of interaction with the mental health industry, and it was his decision, before he'd heard of me, that this was something he preferred to do without in future. It would be wrong of me to decide otherwise for him. It would be like a defence lawyer deciding to lose a case for what he perceived was his client's "own good". I wouldn't dream of being so patronising to a fellow adult who wasn't particularly dangerous, just a bit menacing at times.

A TI asked me how I told the difference between a TI and somebody mentally ill jumping on the bandwagon. I pointed out that the absence of clinical tests to make that distinction was a core gripe of our movement. Until the mental health started to give potential TIs the benefit of any doubt in one direction, i.e. for as long as the system remained adversarial, I would continue not to entertain any doubt in the opposite direction, being the best possible "defence lawyer" for anybody who claimed to be a TI, however disturbed their behaviour. This guy's behavious isn't all that disturbed, just disturbing.

I'd prefer to have a co-operative relationship with the mental health, but the industry is in denial that alleged TIs are ever targeted, even with known bio-effects of elecromagnetic weapons known to exist, and even if the targeted individuals are whistle-blowers who have defected from (say) the intelligence industry, giving a very plausible motive for electromagnetic harassment. (Using mental health against whistle-blowers is a known modus operandi of the intelloigence industry - to wit, for example, the way in which the former head of the UK's Biological Weapons Research Establishment was described as a "Walter Mitty" character, and denied to the right to an coroner's inquest after his suspicious death!)

Adult people deserve information, and have the right to the respect for their ideation formed as a result of accommodating that information (or not) into their own insights into what they are experiencing, and which other do-gooders allegedly "trying" to help them by imprisoning and assaulting them can merely observe. I won't get a guilt trip for, on principle, respecting my fellow man who is able to form and communicate decisions as to what medical treatment, if any, he wishes to accept. I won't accept a guilt trip for the way that I have drafted my own "job description", or how other people fear I might do that job irresponsibly in theory; I shall be guilty of anything only if I do my job badly, and that's all.

One day, when about to be escorted from a crowded mental ward, bound for solitary confinement, I made a farewell speech, which was cheered loudly. I said that if ever I escaped, I would not forget my listeners, but would try to get something done politically towards their liberation too. I wasn't speaking to TIs. I was speaking to a variety of different victims of psychiatric abuse, of whom none but me claimed to be targeted with electromagnetic harassment. One example of how I kept that promise is recorded on www.AllianceForChange.org.uk (q.v.). See also http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200304/jtselect/jtment/1127/1127se15.htm .
 
J

John A

Well-known member
Founding Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
207
Location
Launceston, Cornwall, United Kingdom
#9
We can argue the moral ethics of the legal system if you wish. However; when I have been represented in court by people in my service; it has not been a pre requisite that I - completely take on board the postulated mechanisms of the representation.
I'm afraid I couldn't work out what point you were making.

I do question what you believe to be your Responsibilities
Please feel free to express your inner questionning of what I believe to be my responsibilities, for example by posing in writing some of your inner questions.

- & [I also question] the implications or consequences they might have, especially on someone who is obviously seriously mentally disturbed.
Good! Please let me have sight of these questions too, whatever they might be, because I posted this thread to learn something new here.

Please allow me to recap on the story so far ...

A stranger who'd read about what I sometimes did for other people, on the internet, or who'd maybe watched me on telly, or who somehow or other had learnt that I existed, contacted me unsolicited, at a time when he was being imprisoned without charge or trial, and forcibly poisoned daily, against his will. He had me chat with his lawyer who was trying to help him escape from this abuse.

The night I went to sleep over at my "client's" house with my fiancee (a thoroughly charming woman, with a history of similar abuse behind her), expecting to be called by his lawyer at the Mental Health Review Tribunal hearing the next morning, he told me that, at the last minute, the hospital had cheeted him of his long-awaited "day in court", by lifting the section voluntarily.

This stranger, I later discovered, has an annoying habit, that resembles his talking to himself audibly, even when in company. I posted here asking if anybody else had done that, ever, and, if so, how they managed to teach themselves not to do it any more.

So far, the main thrust of replies seems to be that I did something irresponsible, in responding exactly as requested to this most obvious need of an oppressed individual, by doing exactly what my "client" wanted me to do, up until the point when his jailors and torturers at the "hospital" backed down, and decided not, after all, to bother trying to defend, against his lawyer, with me as expert witness, their abuses of my client's liberties, in front of the tribunal the next day.

If somebody contacts me, out of the blue, saying that he has been imprisoned without charge or trial and administered scheduled poisons non-consensually, as an extra-judicial punishment merely for complaining about being molested by molesters armed with electromagnetic weapons, then I'm going to take his side every time without fail, unless and until his abusers explain to me how they proved that he wasn't being molested with electromagnetic weapons.

Listen: unless I'm having a very bad day, I am going to take my client's side with a passion and a conviction to the effect that God and I are on the same side, approaching that of Moses, when he said to Pharaoh, "Let my people go!". You can bet you ass on this, and if you've got a problem with this, it's time you stopped abusing words like "unwell", as a substitute for telling me exactly WHAT problem it is you have with this, because I don't have any problem with it, cannot see any problem with it.

I care about TIs and about underdogs in general. I always tell them to get a lawyer, and to instruct that lawyer to liaise with me. I always advise them to continue taking meds that make them better, and not to take meds that make them worse. But I always tell them that I believe in God, and that there are some laws certain legislatures passed that are against God's law (so to speak), and that the Mental Health Act is one of them.

My client talks out loud to his voices in company, but this isn't wicked on his part, merely bad manners. Suppose I had played a small role in getting this man UNsectioned, as mooted, though actually, I didn't (unless ...). I'd merely have played a small role in rescuing him from people who have abused him for decades without improving his life one iota (he says), in ways far more wicked than he "abuses" the potential new friends to whom I've introduced him, who merely find this bad habit of his annoying.

Now, can somebody, please, advise me how to help this client get rid of the bad habit he has of (apparently) "talking to himself", without trying to lay a guilt trip on me, for practising a "customer is always right" policy in the work to which I am called, that I perform for no pay, for clients who without exception express gratitude, of whom only one (so far) has contracted the antisocial habit of talking audibly to his voices whilst in company who'd like him please to stop this?
 
Last edited:
A

Apotheosis

Guest
#10
I'm afraid I couldn't work out what point you were making.
Nothing new here then! I don't think you can work out any of the points I have made to you so far.

Please feel free to express your inner questionning of what I believe to be my responsibilities, for example by posing in writing some of your inner questions.
No, given my large amount of previous posts on this subject explaining my thoughts & questions to you, I no longer wish to go over old ground or repeat myself unnecessarily. Re read or simply read my first replies to you in the "V2k we told you so" thread.

Good! Please let me have sight of these questions too, whatever they might be, because I posted this thread to learn something new here.

Please allow me to recap on the story so far ...

...........has contracted the antisocial habit of talking audibly to his voices whilst in company who'd like him please to stop this?
My above post is self explanatory; given what I have posted back to you in the Plethora of other "voice hearing" threads you have started. If you are interested in learning something new, then go back over what I have already written & with an open mind try to understand what I am saying. I have not written anything complicated or difficult to understand.

I am writing a more in depth reply in the other thread you started in this section of the site, in response to your reply to me. Bear with me until I have posted it; it may be rather long.