Intended for healthcare professionals

Rapid response to:

Practice A Patient’s Journey

Electroconvulsive therapy

BMJ 2008; 337 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a2998 (Published 30 December 2008) Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a2998

Rapid Response:

Denial and deceit

It seems psychiatrists never tire of rationalizing ECT based on
ancedotal reports of its short term efficacy. It should not be
necessary to point out that safety must also be a consideration.
Not just neurological and physical safety, but psychological safety:
the avoidance of psychological trauma and subsequent iatrogenic
post traumatic stress and depression. Given that pro-shock ancedotes
can be readily countered with anti-shock horror stories of broken
lives, including the lives of innocent and sane children whose
family situations led to their psychiatric pathologization and
stigmatization, and that psychiatry is still unable to predict
whether ECT will help or harm a patient in the long run, one must
question psychiatrists' motivations in continuing to push
this admittedly and demonstrably brain-damaging quackery on
unsuspecting patients and parents.

It's ironic how often psychiatry manifests psychopathology at an
institutional level. Compulsive "helpers" should be advised that
we have an institutional remedy analogous to shock treatment for
such refractory dysfunction: class-action lawsuits. Given the
incriminating admissions already published in psychiatric journals,
it's only a matter of time.

Competing interests:
None declared

Competing interests: No competing interests

19 January 2009
Richard J Winkel
Computer programmer
University of Missouri, 65211