Thomas Szaz's Challenge to Libertarians (and liberals!)

[Mizmoon]

Thomas Szaz's Challenge to Libertarians

By RICK GIOMBETTI

In his latest book, Faith In Freedom: Libertarian Principles and Psychiatric Practices, psychiatrist and long time advocate for the abolition of involuntary committment Thomas Szasz challenges his fellow libertarians to apply the libertarian credo of self-ownership and non-agression to people accused of mental illness. While libertarians both past and present have expressed many ideas concerning economic regulations Szasz agrees with, most have turned a blind eye to, or even openly supported, the incaceration and forced treatment of people accused of mental illness. Szasz argues that the detention and inprisonment, plus forced treatment, of innocent people accused of mental illness is a more egregious violation of libertarian principles than economic regulations. Szasz argues that the regime of coercive psychiatry in Western societies is a manifestation of what he calls a "therapeutic state," and that libertarians must recognize this and fight it if they are really interested in creating a truly free society. Szasz scoffs at the ideas put forward by mathematical economists and the embrace of mathematical economics by many libertarians. Szasz compares the folly of the mathematical economists with the folly of those who argue that the existential problems of those accused of mental illness are problems that should and must be dealt with in a coercive manner by modern medical science. Szasz characterizes the pronouncements of modern economists and psychiatrists as examples of "scientism," or imitations of modern science.

Before reviewing the views of libertarians both past and present on the topic of psychiatry Szasz offers some choice words for the refusal of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to come out against involuntary committment in psychiatry, or what he calls psychiatric slavery. Forty years after his first critcisms of the ACLU's position, or lack of a postion, on involuntary committment were published, Szasz demonstrates that the ACLU as an organization has evolved into fully devoted supporter coercive psychiatry. While not a libertarian organization, the ACLU's influence and claims of supporting the right to free speech for everybody, accept psychiatric patients, has perhaps done the most damage to the cause of the battle for abolishing involuntary committment. Over the past four decades the ACLU has helped give an institution that is an egregious violator of liberty the image of a profession that "helps" people, and, thus, has helped butress the idea that the forced "reception" of psychiatric "help" is a "civil right," not an egregious violation of a person's human rights. Szasz's words ring true for those of us organizing to abolish involuntary committment. The ACLU can be counted on to not only not help us, but to work against us. For me the reason why the ACLU won't take any stand against involuntary committment is obvious. The ACLU's liberal base of financial supporters are mostly staunch believers in psychiatry and the public promotion of mental health. The ACLU wouldn't be caught dead taking a position that would likely alienate most of the organization's financial base.

TO READ THE REST FOLLOW THE LINK
http://www.counterpunch.org/giombetti07272004.html

[Mizmoon]

1. kick

someone say something interesting about this already :>)

[bemildred]

2. You first. nt

[antigone382]

3. The Psychiatric situation in this country seriously needs to be addressed

I won't go far as to say that *all* involuntary committment should be abolished; there are truly insane people who do not have the mental capacity to determine whether they need treatment or not, and who could cause harm to themselves or others. However, when the "treatments" used for these patients is often little more than a hospital bed equipped with leather straps, and enough sedatives to render them benign, there is a problem.

But besides that point, I do know of at least two cases in which mentally competent women were held unnecessarily in mental facilities, in one case for months. These facilities are, more often than not, understaffed, and what staff they do have is often burnt out and overworked, and in some cases sadistically cruel, arguably more disturbed than many of the patients they care for...I don't mean to say that there aren't good people working in mental hospitals, because there are. But I've heard too many horror stories to ignore.

There are huge systemic problems in psychiatric care, particularly in state run facilities, and for the most part they're being swept under the rug. I don't completely agree with all of Mr. Szaz's beliefs, but kudos to him for at least saying something.

[Sugarbleus]

4. BS.................n/t

[Mizmoon]

5. care to elaborate?