• Welcome! It’s great to see you. Our forum members are people, maybe like yourself, who experience mental health difficulties or who have had them at some point in their life.

    If you'd like to talk with people who know what it's like

Natural therapy psychiatrists

S

Squirrel1

Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2010
Messages
6
Location
Ontario, Canada
Some years ago, I was planning to do activism in an arena where psychiatric diagnoses are often used to suppress information. So I saw a lawyer with several subspecialties, one being mental health, to discuss what I should do before going public.

She suggested I ask a psychiatrist, whom she had known for years to be honest, for a mental evaluation before beginning the local activism.

As it turned out, I receieved a diagnosis of 'no signs of mental illness.'

But what I also learned might be useful to members of this forum. She overwhelmingly depended on naturopathic therapy, which includes changes in daily living and high quality nutrients. She was immensely popular, and the lawyer told me her patients really appreciated being free of the often serious side effects of psychiatric medication.

I had no way to locate such a doctor myself, but by going through a lawyer who had been face to face with doctors in court for years, serving as a 'mental health defence lawyer,' the lawyer knew who the 'honest brokers' in that city were. I located that lawyer in the yellow pages, in a city of about 500,000.

I would guess that even patients currently under treatment might be able to locate a natural therapy psychiatrist this way, with an idea to finding a way off, possibly, no guarantees, off of the psychiatric pharmaceuticals, and do so safely.

Squirrel1
 
v01ce5

v01ce5

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
152
Sounds good to me. anyone else know of psychiatrists who do not conform to the bio-bio model?
 
M

maudikie

Guest
maudikie.

This treatment may be O.K. for the minor mental illnesses, but if it is one of the more severe ones it is my opinion tht medication is an essential.
 
S

Squirrel1

Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2010
Messages
6
Location
Ontario, Canada
I'm describing a fully licenced and accredited psychiatrist. So if any of the pharmaceuticals are needed, she would recognize the need and act accordingly.

So these natural therapy psychiatrists are around. A city of 500,000 isn't particularly large.

I would not depend on medical society referrals because most doctors are seriously beholden to Big Pharma. A goodly chunk of their total income, in the form of expensive perks, comes to them as a reward for prescribing products. And the record of prescriptions is furnished to Big Pharma.

One could try medical societies and ask them outright if they will provide name(s) of psychiatrist(s) who favour natural therapy, but don't be suprised if they won't.

There's a chance that psychiatric nurses or social workers might help but I think a lawyer is better.

That's why I suggested a lawyer with mental health defence experience, or at least medical malpractice experience. Such lawyers know which doctors are honest and which are not.

Squirrel1
 
v01ce5

v01ce5

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2007
Messages
152
That is an open question. The research shows that for about 30% of voice hearers the meds significantly reduce the voices. Another 30% still hear their voices but they bother them less, the other 30% get no reduction n voices at all and the meds may actually be harmful. There is a variety of experience here.

Also meds can cause long term health problems.

I know many people who hear voices, had diagnoses for serious mental health probs who have overcome their problems, recovered and no longer use meds (or never have). There is a new book on the subject called
Living with Voices: 50 stories of recovery by Marius Romme et al. See info here which shows how they did this.
 
oneday

oneday

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
5,019
Location
London
Sounds good to me. anyone else know of psychiatrists who do not conform to the bio-bio model?
The psychiatrists that I've known or known of in London who don't do the old biopsychiatric thing have been associated with the Philadelphia Association (PA) (set up in the 1960s by radical psychiatrist RD Laing and colleagues) and the Arbours Association (originally a breakaway organisation from the PA, set up by psychiatrists Joseph Berke and Morton Schatzman) - most of them who'd left NHS psychiatry and worked as psychotherapists. Both the PA and Arbours run therapeutic community households in London, and Arbours a crisis house.

Oh, and used to go to an acupuncturist who was from Hong Kong and was trained as a psychiatrist there, but he didn't practice as one here... he dead now though.
 
oneday

oneday

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
5,019
Location
London
This treatment may be O.K. for the minor mental illnesses, but if it is one of the more severe ones it is my opinion tht medication is an essential.
:confused:

If antipsychotics work for only some people with psychosis, then why are they given to everyone?

From website: "Recovery from 'schizophrenia' and other 'psychotic disorders'....

http://recoveryfromschizophrenia.or...sychosis-then-why-are-they-given-to-everyone/

"Richard Bentall, in his book Doctoring the Mind: Is our current treatment of mental illness really any good?
(p. 222) points out that antipsychotics seem to be ineffective in reducing psychotic experiences for something like a quarter to a third of all those who are given them. And it is well known that antipsychotics come with many serious risks, including that of increased mortality, permanent movement disorders and others.

"So, given that these two things above are true, why is it that we never encounter anyone who has been told by his or her psychiatrist 'well it seems antipsychotics aren’t working for you and since they are dangerous, you may be better off doing without them.'?

"Psychiatry has shown almost no interest in trying to find out who might be better off not being on antipsychotics, either because they are one of those who might be able to recover adequately using healthier alternative methods, or because they are one of those for whom antipsychotics don’t work in the first place. In other words, while psychiatry claims to be working hard to protect people from risks caused by psychosis, it has been willing to do pretty much no work at all to protect people from the risks of what may be unnecessarily hazardous treatment for a particular individual. This is a strangely 'unbalanced' approach, especially from a profession that claims it is able to balance our minds and balance our biochemistry!" Ron Unger
 
Last edited:
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Hearing Voices Forum 2
J Hearing Voices Forum 8
Top