80. Your Consent Is Not Required w/ Rob Wipond
Kel:
Welcome to the Radically Genuine Podcast. I am Dr. Roger McFillin. Rob Wipond is a freelance journalist and creative nonfiction writer who writes frequently at the interfaces between psychiatry, civil rights, community issues, policing, surveillance and privacy and social change. His articles have been nominated for 17 magazine and journalism awards, and he's author of the book, Your Consent Is Not Required, The Rise in Psychiatric Detentions, Forced Treatment, and Abusive Guardianships. Rob Wipon, welcome to the Radically Genuine podcast.
Rob Wipond:
Thank you, it's wonderful to be here.
Kel:
Congratulations on an outstanding contribution. This book is so well written and compelling. It really does shine a light on the shadows of psychiatry and the general mental health system. And the personal accounts and the stories, I think, are what really humanized the entire book. I'm sure many will be shocked by some of these stories and how you've been able to expose system, and it really does validate my concerns and the ethos behind our podcast. This really is a human rights issue. It impacts all of us. But I'm really first to start off interested in your story and the inspiration behind this book.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, really there's kind of two main threads. I always had an interest in these areas generally, even as a, by the time I was in my teen years, just sort of interested in reading kind of psychology, pop psychology of different kinds from that era, you know, legacy of the 60s and 70s. So I always had an interest in unusual states of consciousness and what happened to them and seeing it from a mystical perspective. So that was kind of a seed in my heart, you know. Understandably just had major surgery, prostate surgery, that had left him impotent and incontinent permanently at age 65, just as he was about to retire as a career college professor of computer engineering, a person with no mental health history per se. And yeah, so at
Kel:
And then, we have a question from the audience.
Rob Wipond:
one point he was really in distress around the cancer diagnosis and the repercussions
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
of the surgery and certainly did
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
start to talk and
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
say strange things. and feel
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
suicidal and stuff
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
like that. But overall for me it seemed
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
like, well, you know, this is understandable.
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
Like just stick with it. Maybe
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
you can see a therapist, you know,
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
what's going on. You know, I tried
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
to talk to him a lot, you know, that
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
sort of thing. But, you know, this sort of
Kel:
So, I'm going to ask you a question.
Rob Wipond:
escalated. I couldn't be around for a while. My
Kel:
I'm going to go to the bathroom.
Rob Wipond:
mother was becoming quite anxious
Kel:
I'm going to go to the bathroom.
Rob Wipond:
and she and my brother eventually
Kel:
I'm going to go to the bathroom.
Rob Wipond:
decided talking with my dad
Kel:
I'm going to go to the bathroom.
Rob Wipond:
that he would go where
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
they thought they should go to
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
seek help. And
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
very rapidly, the situation
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
just basically
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
spun out of control, it was
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
really shocking. And just,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
you know, it was a barren, ordinary
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
hospital setting. My dad was
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
thrown in a room with a,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
you know, a young kid essentially,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
and it's nothing to
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
do there. And then they're throwing
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
these drugs at him and he's
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
rapidly just getting worse, not better, to the
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
point where he's almost debilitated on these
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
heavy duty drugs that he's
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
on. And then they're, oh, well, that's
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
not working. Let's try electroconvulsive
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
therapy. And we're like, what,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
you know, what are you talking about?
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
And by that point, my dad was no longer in any way complying to this. He'd been certified and he was very clear on, I do not want electroconvulsive therapy. And they did it against his will. And yeah, it just became of devastating. And it was It was devastating. It was devastating to some degree for our whole family. It's just played out over a nine month period. He lost significant amounts of memory, a lot of which he never recovered again. Some of it he did. Um, and, and to some degree, I
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
think that the addendum is
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
he also didn't have the experience of recovering,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
even though he eventually did and he had
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
a good 10 more years, like it took years
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
and he kind of just
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
did things on his own and with the support of my mother got better. And. But. It was just,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
you know, he never even in his own mind had
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
that notion of his
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
own resilience because he'd
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
lost the memory of it. He lost that entire
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
year. He had very little memory of that year. So anyway, at the end of that story, I really started to go, wow, like if this can happen to my dad, college professor, family supportive, all the money you would need to support yourself in that situation, like really and what are their circumstances, and that got me on the journalism journey.
Kel:
Yeah, the book opens up with that story and it's very familiar to me from working in the mental health system for 20 years that you see an event that happens in somebody's life and their response to the event would be expected given the circumstances. So your father is somebody who was very high functioning, somebody who was a professor, engineer was somebody who was very active in his life. based on an illness or something that you're going through, it's kind of expected to struggle or maybe to adapt. And there can be situations or symptoms that one would experience that we would think are part of the wide adaptation to stress process that someone might, you know, have to be able to face in their life. And the way that it's interpreted or can be misinterpreted within psychiatry really stands out. So, the team that was working with your father was using certain language to describe what he may be going through. Can you share with us how that was all presented to you as a family for somebody who had no history of mental illness?
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, and as I show through the book, all of these things they were saying, I then learned a very, very common things for them to say. Well, he had a biochemical imbalance in his brain. No, yeah, when I asked, no, we didn't actually test for that. We can't test for that, but you know, that's why it's hard to get the right medication, but we will eventually. You know, then with the electroshock, they made comparisons like, well, you know, it's like a heart for the brain. The brain is shutting down and we just shock it back to life. Then, oh, it's like a gas tank that's gone empty and we fill it up with shocks. Things like this that started to really kind of unnerve us because both my brother and I have some background in kind of the sciences. So, we started researching through this period. These would be the pointed questions we would ask. Well, really? we got actually got kind of got worse rather than better. It was like they took it personally, like it was offensive to them that we would question their authority or their judgment. They started treating us really poorly. They treated my mother poorly. This was outrageous because my mother has always been the biggest support, always was for my father, the biggest support anyone could possibly have, just a loving, caring person. They started to regard her as, patterns using phrases like that. So we're going to like send them far away so he can't be around you. And I think it was just they were sick of us. You know, they're sick of us questioning things and caring about it, right? They just wanted to do whatever they wanted to do. So yeah, there was just that endless sort of pseudo scientific language that they were kind of thrusting upon us that we found increasingly kind of concerning.
Kel:
So Rob, I have a question. I think many of us that aren't in this field have an idea of what a forced forced treatment experience may be. But what exactly does the experience look like based on your experience and then based on your research or like what is the process? How does this unfold?
Rob Wipond:
That's a great question because when this gets talked about in the news media, I wonder what are people picturing here? I think they're picturing, and it does happen like this. Occasionally, people come in and they just, medical staff speak very respectfully, okay, what's happening for you? Hey, have you ever tried this drug? Would you like to try it? If it doesn't work, we could look at something else. People have had those kind of experiences, and I call that sort of a nominal involuntary experience. it's you know you're being detained but they're apologetic about it everybody's respectful and caring and you get what you want in the end right but within a couple of days you find a drug you like or at least makes you feel better for the time being and you're okay with it and they let you go again and that's some people's experience but that isn't at all I don't think the dominant and unfortunately we don't have great statistics and we can talk about that but essentially more And very often what I hear is an experience where you do put up some resistance. You kind of say, no, I've tried that drug. It didn't help me at all. I hate the adverse effects. Or you're just like, no, I want to process it my way. I believe I'm having a spiritual experience. I need to really think about it and explore it, things like this. And then the aggression comes out of the system very quickly. And so people will experience four-point restraints, forcibly stripped, security guards, threats, intimidation, just injections in your bare bottom that are powerful antipsychotics that kind of knock you out or just tranquilize you for days, weeks on end sometimes. People can be just pleading that they don't want this experience and that it's terrible and painful and they're ignored, So it becomes very personally humiliating on top of this, what can be very physically aggressive. And ultimately, people that I spoke with, yeah, they fought back because they didn't even understand why this was happening because maybe they were in a vulnerable state of mind and they didn't quite understand what was happening. And suddenly, four security guards are attacking them and dragging them off somewhere for an injection and they're thrashing and fighting it. and beaten as if it was a major police intervention. Ironically, part of that, a lot of people said to me, obviously we know police shootings occur and it's very, very tragic, but a lot of people did say to me, actually the police were among the most respectful people I dealt with in my journey through the psychiatric system when the medical staff and the security guards and the nurses were far more threatening to them.
Kel:
Hi. In your book, I'm imagining that's all about the power dynamics with the individual's ability to withhold consent and then this whole almost like back and forth, it's an us versus them. You know, and then you almost feel like you don't have the power, you're being bullied into agreeing with whatever they want to say. Is that correct?
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, and in fact, it would be great to track that, because my estimates are that probably 80% to 90% of people in psychiatric hospitals are really there involuntarily. The official numbers put us somewhere between 50% to 75%, depending on the hospital, the jurisdiction. But I think it's higher, because so many people talk about this, that they're just
Kel:
you
Rob Wipond:
told, well, sign in voluntarily, or else. We'll just make you involuntary. in most cases, but then they give you some little promise. And if you do that, we're more likely to let you go early or something, but if you make us go through the paperwork of making you involuntary, then for sure, we're keeping you for X number of weeks at a bare minimum. So a lot of people end up doing it. Also, I understand there's a difference as to the accessibility of the medical records, depending on whether you've been voluntary or involuntary, a lawyer, something like that, then the bar may have the right of access to your medical records if you've been an involuntary patient. So there can be other motivations why people say, yeah, I don't want that on my record. I'm going involuntary.
Kel:
So, Rob, your, your experience and your research kind of went across borders, your, your families in Canada, is that correct?
Rob Wipond:
Yeah.
Kel:
How is the Canadian system and the US system similar? And how are we different?
Rob Wipond:
So they're remarkably similar overall. And that's the reason the publisher went along with my argument that we should include them both, because that's interesting in and of itself, that the Canadian health care system and the American health care system are quite different overall. And Canada's a much more public health care system, universal health insurance for everybody. And America has a more complex system, much more privatized. Private insurers are involved. One of the main things in Canada is it's actually a little bit more aggressive because Insurance
Kel:
How
Rob Wipond:
never
Kel:
so
Rob Wipond:
runs out. Yeah,
Kel:
oh
Rob Wipond:
but
Kel:
yeah
Rob Wipond:
but
Kel:
good point
Rob Wipond:
yeah, yeah Because definitely I heard people in America Recounting that oh, yeah the day my insurance ran out they they were very quick at kicking me out on that day So so that's one of the difference the other big difference. I saw certainly the in the private sphere in America, there's a much greater motivation for fraudulent profiteering use of these powerful
Kel:
I'm going to do a little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
mental health laws that exist to just make a profit off of people because it's not that hard to diagnose somebody with something or other and say, oh, they seem to be some sort of a danger to themselves in some way or other, or they could deteriorate into that. And so we're going to lock them up. And so definitely I found more instances of that because the profit motive was much bigger. That said, as I show in the book, fraudulent as well. It's just you have to go, well, what's the motive there? The motive is often just a doctor thinking, oh, well, I know what's best here and I can't be bothered to actually do the paperwork or really prove that this person really does need it. I know they need it and that's all that really matters. When they do audits of these systems, they find that the vast majority, like not this isn't an incidental thing, the vast majority of psychiatric incarcerations in both countries out even though those legal criteria are so broad to begin with.
Kel:
Rob, there's a narrative that exists that for psychiatric hospitalizations have decreased due to elimination of state hospitals or the asylum system, along with some strict rights laws that are kind of protecting the individual. But in fact, those who believe the contemporary psychiatric health care system is rather safe and effective will often cite this as one of the reasons for rising rates of mental What have you learned about these statistics throughout your research?
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, I never believed that narrative, because as a community journalist, I was working on the ground, and I could just see people are being incarcerated in psychiatric hospitals left, right, and center here, and they're being coercively and forcibly treated in all sorts of different kinds of facilities. And so I was always questioning of it. In fact, that was the real inspiration for the book, because I knew, even before I looked into the data, that this is widespread.
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
This is being used as a major tool
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
for managing communities
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
institutions in all sorts
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
of different ways. And so yeah,
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
when I looked into the data, and we
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
have to say that the data is
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
terrible, governments
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
are not tracking this very well at
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
all. And most importantly, they're not tracking
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
outcomes at all. So we don't even know
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
the people who are being forcibly treated.
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
Are they getting better? Are they getting worse? What's
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
happening? The system
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit more specific.
Rob Wipond:
is not in any way got any evidence to show they're doing anything good
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
for anyone. They're not. It's all
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
anecdotal.
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
very clearly. The
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
numbers have been going up and up and up for decades. There's a direct clear reason for that, that the laws have been expanding and broadening for decades as well, right, in both in Canada and the United States. So we're far beyond the notion of what the Supreme Court in the US laid out years ago of very acute, imminent danger. We're far beyond that into a much more this notion that, well, if you can't care for yourself enough, that's somehow now a criterion. And then we're gone beyond that in many jurisdictions into a notion that, well, if you might, in future, mentally or physically deteriorate in some way that could make you committable in future, well, now you're committable now. So it's like a Orwellian or Kafka-esque kind of, you can be committed now because you might be committable in future notion. And this is what's actually on the book. it's very clear. So as a result of these expansions in law, we're seeing the numbers going up a lot. And by a lot, I mean doubling and tripling over a decade, some jurisdictions over five years. David Cohen's study at a UCLA showed that in 22 states in America, the psychiatric detentions had outpaced population growth by a factor of three. So going up consistently we get numbers. And a lot of places aren't even tracking them at all or only tracking small bits. And a little tidbit I'll throw in here that's not in the book that I just found out. For example, San Francisco in California, as far as we knew, they had a certain number of people they were detaining. And then a more robust investigation went in and found the number was 15 times higher than all the health care institutions had been reporting California is one of the better jurisdictions for tracking these numbers. Heaven knows what the real numbers are. We've got 1.2 million at a bare minimum in America every year that get psychiatrically detained. I put it more at about 2.3 million, but that's just the surface because as I show in the book, there's so many other types of coercion going on in the community.
Kel:
So Rob, I spent 16 years in Los Angeles and during that time, I witnessed this noticeable increase in homelessness, population and mentally ill out on the streets. Why aren't these individuals being hospitalized or forced into treatment?
Rob Wipond:
Well, they are, right? And a lot of them, we don't even know. Nobody, again, nobody's studying this actually. We're just having this kind of gut reaction. Oh, I'm seeing somebody behaving in a strange way in the street. They must be mentally ill. They need to be locked up, right? It's sort of like you see this coming out in these press conferences where somebody just has to say, oh, they were shouting on a street corner. That's enough to prove it. So we need to be really careful when we talk about this. I think it's unfortunate that certainly that's a demographic that does get. detained a lot, the homeless population, and they get churned in and out of that system and sometimes they end up in jail. And it's important to note most times it's not because they were assaulting someone. The vast majority of times it's like they were using drugs in a visible public space, they were somehow disturbing the peace. These are the charges that are usually leveled again. Basically because you're homeless we're gonna throw you in jail now. So that But the point is, it's not helping. Like a lot of those people have been exposed to psychiatric medications already. Many of them are on them already and mixing them with recreational drugs as well. And this whole situation is kind of out of control. And the other thing I want to highlight is all of these other types of people are being incarcerated. Consequently, those beds are often full. And there's been some amazing studies of this in Oregon and Washington the healthcare institutions don't want to deal with that homeless population because they know they can't really help. They know the person's real problem is affordable housing that they can't get, a job they can't get. And so as a result, they're often just giving them some drugs and spitting them back out again, or literally, and this is what these studies showed, calling the police on them to say, get them out of the waiting room. We don't care that they're seeking help. We out of here. And then there's this tension between police departments and hospitals around who really is going to manage these people or deal with them in some way. And so, you know, we've got this very complex social set of issues going on there, you know, and I just, I think that's important and needs investigation in each individual case. What's going on for that person? To what degree might some, you know, a drug issue they have or a psychological trauma history they might have be affecting their of stay in housing. That certainly happens, but we don't really have a handle on how much that's really going on versus how much is just an affordable housing problem. Clearly, it's the affordable housing that's at the root of this because we can show clearly that we've been detaining more people and forcibly drugging more people and more people than ever are voluntarily taking psychiatric medications.
Kel:
Yeah, Sean, in the way that you phrase that question, it's almost like the assumption is that someone can get forced in to treatment and a treatment safe and that treatment is effective and we have positive outcomes. The work of Robert Whitaker has really kind of shone a lot of light on where we are historically, the post drug era in a lot of senses just continues to demonstrate worsening outcomes. And my overwhelming experience within the psychiatric field is that spread use of drugs as healthcare is more about blind obedience to some pharmaceutical narrative and the medical authorities claims versus any real strong science and critical analysis of those outcomes. I mean, I know personally, I've been utterly shocked by some of the defensiveness and unwillingness to honestly look at these treatments and the impact that they're having. There's just an acceptance that pharmaceuticals are somehow medicinal. some underlying abnormality and outcomes are generally positive. But this is certainly not what the data is showing. This is not what research over the past 25 years is really indicating. I know I personally had to resolve that conflict. Um, in fact, I see many more people harmed by the overall model, the idea as well as the drug treatment, then people that are being helped. Um, and one of the things I'm always asking myself is, Why are the medical professionals so quick to minimize or deny the harms or even turn a blind eye? What's your experience there, Rob?
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, I struggle with this too, because I look at what's happening, and I go, how can any self-respecting, responsible, well-meaning mental health professional not look at the situation here and say, I'm against forced treatment? This is just not helping. Because how can you help somebody psychologically in an environment where they become increasingly afraid of the potential loss of their basic human rights in that situation? Why aren't they the ones out there campaigning for tracking of outcomes? Why is it me trying to raise this in a book to go, wait a minute, like what, you know, there's no end of psychiatrists will say to tell me some anecdotal story about somebody who thanked them
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
supposedly for forcibly treating them and supposedly
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
had a good outcome and I'm like, okay, well, are you encouraging
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
your institution to track that at a systemic
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
level so we know what's happening with these people? No.
Kel:
you
Rob Wipond:
I mean, I was asking everybody as I try to show in this
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
book, right, that most people don't even want
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
to talk about it. And that's
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
what concerns me. And I do think
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
that they know. They know that the outcomes
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
would not look well. They don't
Kel:
I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
even want this discussed publicly because as they'll tell me, oh, you're gonna scare people from seeking out treatment.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
And I'm like, well, that's a very paternalistic
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
attitude because you would want to know,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
I would want to know that this could happen.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
And I think the average citizen would
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
like to know that happen
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
if you voluntarily seek out
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
help, that you could end up losing your
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
basic rights so easily.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
So yeah, there's just so many ways
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
at that particular question you're raising. And I think it's foundational to this. In a way, I just say, yeah, it's not for me to answer like mental health professionals out there that support force. Tell me really why and grappling with some of the evidence that I'm showing in this book, please, because yeah, don't just sell us on a story. video.
Kel:
Yeah, Rob, you shared that anecdotal comment. And that's what I'm recalling is listening to a local radio broadcast. And there was an individual on who was homeless and out in the And he was went into an intervention. I don't know how the outreach happened, but he shared that his perspective was almost like he felt like he was being neglected and he wanted, and he thinks more homeless people, there needs to be an intervention to get them off the street, get them off drugs, and then, you know, return to a normal life. And it's almost like he wanted to be an advocate for almost more interventions in the homeless populations. And this was noticeably Los Angeles. So my question is, you know, navigate that compassion versus negligence.
Rob Wipond:
I mean, I think it's important that if, you know, for some people, as I said, they say, oh, I was involuntary, but then you listen to the story and you go, no, you weren't, not really, right? Like they were maybe at some point in the process strongly coerced or whatever, but then often they had a respectful experience, right? Where they were helped and assisted in a way that they appreciated and wanted and rapidly started to enjoy. Because nobody, I can guarantee you, Right? Because that's what it means. Force is against your will. And so that's what I try to parse out and you need to do that in the data when we look at these studies. There is always a group that for whatever reason because of the institution or the particular doctor or their own particular situation, their own personal response to the treatment they got offered, that they have an okay experience and that's great for them. I just say to them, don't be generally advocating this as an approach to people who've maybe tried these same drugs and gone through a similar experience as you, but ended up having a totally traumatizing and humiliating experience and one that was potentially even physically brutal. And so we need to kind of parse out and separate those different kinds of stories and talk very meaningfully then about, okay, so, you know, who's falling into what categories here and how do we deal with this situation? And the other thing I want to really separate out is use of force in the sense of So, if you're a friend of mine and you're trying to kill yourself in front of me, hey, I'm probably going to try to physically stop you. I might really, because I really care for you and I just don't want this happening. So, I have to understand we have a connection and you'd probably understand that motive as well, but that's a physical intervention. Now, it's very different if I then say,
Kel:
I'm going to do a little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
oh, now I'm going to intervene
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
in your brain and I'm going to
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
try to give you a drug that
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
you actually hate.
Kel:
little bit of a little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
to, you know, I'm going
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
to, I mean, we can even, there
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
are all sorts of other brain interventions that are
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
being experimented with now too. So,
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
I'm just saying let's separate out those two things,
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
because sometimes it's very easy to understand.
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, you know, some survivors
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
will say to me, I was running up and down the hallway
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
of my apartment building at three in the morning, screaming that aliens were coming to get us. And yeah, okay. Yeah, it's justified that somebody called the police and the police stopped me from doing that. That would bug me too, if someone was They said, but I do not get why I was then like stripped and forcibly injected and treated far worse than an average criminal and having far fewer rights than the average criminal. So that's another way I'd like to go at that, you know, is how do we separate out those two different pieces of it?
Kel:
You do talk a little bit in the book, well, actually quite extensively about the psychotropic drugs in question. But the thing I like what you did is you sat there and you had these questions. In fact, you start a lot with questions and you go, I'm going to go directly to the source. but you actually went and questioned the FDA, correct? And you really just brought the question of, you know, how are drugs being approved if there's no definitive way that they're proof that they're working? Could you talk a little bit about that? Because that was like, interesting to me.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, there were a number of things that I went to the FDA for. And one of them was, of course, because they themselves admit, the National Institute of Mental Health admits that diagnoses are very unscientific, really, and kind of loose. And well, they overlap in all these ways and can't really be relied upon. And so then I asked the FDA, how then do you prove that this diagnosis
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
responds well to that
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
particular drug if you know
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
full well that
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
these diagnoses are so really kind of ephemeral
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
and unscientific. They
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
just refused and refused to refuse to
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
answer and finally just gave me a very
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
trite kind of, they wouldn't
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
talk about it at all. They just issued
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
a little statement in writing that
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
said, we use a contemporary
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
accept the diagnostic criteria for
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
all of our work.
Kel:
I'm going to take a picture of you.
Rob Wipond:
No response to that at all. And then the other thing
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
I talk about in the book is how if you delve into
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
these,
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
The FDA can be credited for releasing a lot of this
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
information publicly that a lot of health regulators don't, Canada's terribly secretive, but you can actually get online a lot of the medical reviews that the FDA itself did of these drugs prior to approval. You can see how even they were questioning, is this drug really actually helping anybody? That's in a context where people are eagerly getting into a drug study, hoping it's going to help them. I asked them as well, shouldn't you be separately testing these things for when you're being forced on people? Because they're barely
Kel:
I'm going to be a little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
helping people scientifically, it
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
seems, when they want
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
them, let alone when they're not. And I
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
argued, it's kind of like a different delivery
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
method. If you test an injectable
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
versus an oral medication, surely
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
the notion of it being shoved down
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
someone's throat against their will versus
Kel:
little bit of a
Rob Wipond:
them voluntarily taken is something worth testing. And they were just like, oh, you're crazy. Why wouldn't? That's how I felt. Like, it's just like, this is way off the radar of even a sensible question to ask. And I just, again, I'm like, really, we got no science around this.
Kel:
Yeah, I call that the veil of scientific legitimacy. You know, they can throw that at you. And because they're in a position of medical authority, or they're in a government authority in that position, it's just like, okay, I just have to accept your word for it. is getting a lot of attention and me personally is because there's at least some legitimacy to the fact that I'm a clinical psychologist and I'm questioning these things and I'm providing some research and a lot of common sense. But one of the more fascinating portions of the book was chapter four, the catch-22 of insight. I found myself feeling very infuriated as I was reading that chapter because it's been my experience within the system when I would even challenge it as As a young man, I worked in a psychiatric hospital at age 22, it was my first job outside of undergrad. And I would question a lot of these things. And it was so dismissive. And then as I would go through the educational system and I would achieve more accolades and credentials, well, then I can get in a lot more critical debate with a doctor. But the patient, basically, if you refuse their diagnosis and treatment recommendations, of your mental illness. You lack insight into exactly what you're going through. Another example forced compliance into their overall narrative. Your experience with the Catch-22 of Insight.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, I mean, the reality is that basically this notion, and somebody's given it a pseudoscientific term, anosognosia. And really, when you look at it, what you find is that here in actual daily practice, what's happening is if you deny that you're mentally ill or you deny that you need treatment, which is actually very understandable, that even people who are really struggling will do it because they rapidly learn
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
The diagnosis and the need for treatment are the main criteria by which you're going to
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me. I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
be forced. Right?
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
So you realize, gee, no, I don't have a mental illness because it's the only defense you
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me. I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
have if you want to avoid losing all of your rights.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
So it actually becomes very understandable that lots of people would deny it.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me. I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
Plus the fact that we know scientifically, as we were just discussing, the diagnoses
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me. I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
are kind of ephemeral anyway.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
So it's easy to deny it.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
But if you do that, you've proven that you lack insight into your mental illness. Conversely, if you agree, and I have an amazing case of this where I got to look at the medical records that this woman shared with me.
Kel:
and the
Rob Wipond:
You can see
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
in the medical records where literally even
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
though she's actively been seeking
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
out help, she's actually already
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
on psychiatric medications before
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
she ends up in the hospital situation.
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
She's telling them
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
how well she understands
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
her own struggles
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
and that these are the things that help her and these
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
are the things that don't.
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
is used as yet more evidence that she needs to be there.
Kel:
the the
Rob Wipond:
This is her essentially confessing now to her mental illness.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
When she's explained to them, yeah, I did have this traumatic history as a child.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
This is how I'm struggling with it.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
I can see how it manifests in my daily life.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
This is how I deal with it.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
She was a student at the time,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
quite successful student in many ways,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
just struggling at that particular point
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
in her master's program.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
And so, basically everything she's saying
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
insight,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
as we call it,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
is used to prove
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
that she
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
lacks insight.
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
And it's literally
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
done in that way
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
to the point
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
where they're saying the fact that
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
she still doesn't
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
recognize she needs
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
to be here,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
i.e. she's just saying,
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
yeah, I don't
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
think I need to be here because
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
I think I'm managing
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
all this.
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
Well, that's
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
evidence that she needs
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
to be here.
Kel:
I think that's a good question.
Rob Wipond:
And so it's painful.
Kel:
I think that
Rob Wipond:
And then I kind of show how this is actually embodied now right in the legislation in some cases, what's really going on here. And what's really going on is simply psychiatrist, they regard that as lack of evidence, or I mean, as lack of insight into the situation. And some laws literally say that. They just say, if you're a voluntary patient and you disagree with the psychiatrist's treatment recommendation, you can be instantly made into an involuntary patient. And that's what I see in practice. And even if you look into the studies of, quote unquote, insight that exists, basically the questionnaires pretty much reveal that's what they're assessing too, whether or not you agree that you have this mental illness.
Kel:
Yeah, I really like to speak to the pseudoscientific nature of the DSM, because there's what we call diagnostic overlap. And this is what happens frequently. So imagine what would be the experience of somebody who is in either an abusive or neglectful, traumatic environment. Well, there's going to be a distrust of authority. And what would you imagine presenting yourself if you are really struggling? There's going to be a distrust of that authority in the way that you're answering questions. some strong resistance or anger towards that person, a natural kind of defense response to stress. And then that gets interpreted as mental illness, maybe like bipolar disorder. The person is just agitated. The person is out of control. The person is unwilling to accept medical recommendations and treatment, thus justifying some forced or coercive treatment. And then you give somebody a drug with. That's very, very clearly its adverse reactions in most of the population, in some those adverse reactions are quite severe. And then those symptoms are going to be interpreted as a greater sign of that person's mental illness. And I do think when it comes to people who are either traumatized or what I'll call emotionally vulnerable or sensitive, which is a portion of the population, they tend to be artists. They tend to be people who have strong compassion. empathy. They are the ones who are most victimized within the psychiatric system, because their presentations are not understood in context. They are misrepresented as a severe mental illness and their rights can be taken away from.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, and that's throughout my book. And I think many people would read my book and say, oh, well, a lot of these people should never have been forcibly treated to begin with. But the point you're making is really true, too, that the people that the system is so supposedly most supposed to be helping, it's the worst for them. People who've been through childhood trauma, who have these kinds of intense reactions to authority, to being forcibly stripped, they feel like they're being sexually assaulted all over again care for them. So it's often the worst for the people that actually do want and need the most help.
Kel:
So you said that just both the act of denying and confirming whether or not you, uh, have a mental illness will be, make you mentally ill. Aren't we creating an environment where more people are starting to seek out help? So what percentage or who is most at risk of being forced into treatment? Is it everybody?
Rob Wipond:
I would say it seems so, yes. And that's a risk. And that's why I think we as a culture need to be talking about this much more than we currently are, because even as we've seen over the last couple decades, the numbers of people voluntarily participating in different types of mental health treatments, and certainly medications use, psychotropic medication use is going up and up and up. So now we have 20% of the population at any given time apparently taking at least one or more Even as that's occurring, the rates of people being treated against their will is increasing as well. And so what the heck is going on there? And I think as a culture, we need to discuss that more. But the point you're highlighting is crucial. And I look at it in my book, too. Well, my dad is an example, right? He sought help voluntarily. And that was immediately used to justify as part of the justification his rights. And so I think everyone who's in this space who's seeking out mental health help should be aware and really should discuss it with their practitioner. Okay, what are your particular policies about this? Because licensing bodies often require some level of mandated reporting from professionals that if someone speaks about suicide in a certain way or speaks about potentially harming someone, it should be reported and there's some leeway there. But you should be discussing modulate or moderate what you might say.
Kel:
So there is definitely a social media trend where people are identifying and sharing their struggles with mental illness. And then migrating over towards some phone-based apps. What can you share with our listeners about the mental health monitoring that's occurring in the digital space?
Rob Wipond:
So we know that it's increasing dramatically. And one of the best places where we have data is the school system, because schools are kind of moving everything online right now. And they did that for, I think, other reasons. But this has allowed insurance companies and others to kind of say to them, OK, well, then since you're monitoring all of this activity that the students are doing, then you should be monitoring for threats of violence and all of these other things. And so we have these extensive monitoring systems that are in place that utilize roughly designed algorithms that basically anyone uses the word shoot for anything. Even if you're just talking about shooting pool that night, you get flagged, an alert goes to the principal. The principal has to intervene in some way, talk to you about it. OK, that's all. Review the documents. If you're writing a story, assignment, this kind of stuff. And so that's also happening. on Facebook, on different social media. There's all these algorithms that are kind of monitoring. A lot of them have already instituted policies where you hope and pray. We don't really know how these things work behind the scenes, but we're hoping that at least at some point in actual person reviews it before 911 is contacted. But people are getting roped into visits from police and taken to psychiatric hospitals against their will and having sometimes really traumatizing experiences of betrayal because it may have been somebody just could have been a person that reported them or it could have been an algorithm that Found them and often they won't even know they'll never learn the truth of that situation And as I cite the social school system, that's where we can see the numbers really really going up a lot In Florida they track it pretty well And you can see the numbers of children that are being taken out of public school in high school and taken to psychiatric hospitals Against their will has been skyrocketing quite dramatically over the last decade. And a lot of people link it directly to those kind of monitoring systems and also to people being trained. And that's the other piece of that that's going on. We're being trained to surveil each other in that way. I'm monitoring signs and symptoms of my friends and doing a caring thing by contacting 911 and getting them subjected to a wellness check.
Kel:
Rob, Tom Insull scares the shit out of me. Tom Insull is the former director. He was at the helm of the National Institute of Mental Health, which is the world's largest mental health resource institution. I mean, he oversaw billions into trying to identify mental illness as a brain-related condition. But it's, from reading your book, it seems like he has transitioned to this, this talk, or this mental illness app space, which seems to me to be a front to drive more people into psychiatric drugs. Should I be scared?
Rob Wipond:
Oh, yeah, I mean, those
Kel:
Thank you.
Rob Wipond:
apps, right? And you're right, like Thomas Insull has been working in that space. He moved from the National Institute of Mental Health to Google and then to a private company that's developing these kind of apps. And all of them have a policy of intervening. You won't find one that doesn't, as far as I've ever looked at. So people need to know that when they're kind of talking back how they're feeling that day or, and a lot of these apps will can do other things as well. They'll be monitoring your voice tone, other things you're doing, the searches you're using and giving you little alerts about that. But these things also have policies in place for when they're going to forcibly intervene against your will. And police will be contacted with or without your knowledge and often it's without your knowledge. So people need to be concerned about the use of these apps. like, oh, this is a great way for everybody to get mental health treatment in their pockets. But there's a real risk there. And again, it's not talked about a lot, because I think if people know, most people would be concerned and probably would not want to expose themselves to that risk. And so it's often hidden that this is going on. And it's really hard to find any kind of numbers. None of these people release them. You'll just occasionally get that anecdote from, oh, me. I was tweeting something and next thing I knew the police showed up. Or, yeah, I was using my mental health app and next thing I knew. And then that's all we really know because we're not getting any numbers on this.
Kel:
frightening. And think about your phone and location based sharing, and you can go into your your settings and see everything that's tracking you. And most of the time, I don't check that box. And then I'm like, Wait a minute, how is this happening? Like, there's so much in there. It is really, it's eye opening. You shared a lot of those stories in your book. And it is scary. Because people think they're communicating in a safe space. And it's not.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, that's it exactly. And unfortunately, there's such a lack of confidentiality in this entire space. As I talk about, privacy laws really don't apply in the same way. As soon as you've been labeled as someone who might potentially be, in some way, a risk to yourself or others, all bets are off in terms of how that information can be shared.
Kel:
I'm going to go ahead and start the presentation.
Rob Wipond:
Because ostensibly, they're helping
Kel:
So, I'm going to start with the presentation of the
Rob Wipond:
you, and they're helping the people
Kel:
presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
around you
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
this kind of information.
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
So really the
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
confidentiality of
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
health information just does not apply.
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
And as other people have shown, particularly
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
in the space of mental health apps that we're talking
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
about right now, a lot of them are not actually
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
like officially a health institution
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
per se, right? This is a private
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
company that's designed an app.
Kel:
presentation of the first presentation of the first
Rob Wipond:
So health laws don't even apply to them at all, period. And so we've
Kel:
I'm going to go ahead and start the presentation.
Rob Wipond:
seen some evidence coming out, some devastating
Kel:
I'm going to start with the presentation of the
Rob Wipond:
report just recently
Kel:
first item, the first item, the
Rob Wipond:
is being shared all over the place, right?
Kel:
first item, the
Rob Wipond:
And combined with all sorts of other information
Kel:
first item, the first item, the
Rob Wipond:
that Meta, the owner of Facebook,
Kel:
first item, the
Rob Wipond:
has been compiling in all these different ways.
Kel:
first item, the
Rob Wipond:
And the secret hidden digital images
Kel:
first item, the first item, the
Rob Wipond:
that are hidden within emails and within websites
Kel:
first item, the first item, the
Rob Wipond:
are relaying information about your activities
Kel:
first item, the
Rob Wipond:
across the internet to this centralized location and combined with any mental health knowledge they have. And it's all completely operating of health and privacy laws.
Kel:
Yeah, I believe that that study came from the Sanford Duke.edu. It was about the all of our data through these apps being put on sale through brokerage. So a lot of your names are removed, but you're basically you're identified within there. mostly through your IP address. Yeah, and what I'm concerned about is the continued diagnostic expansion into normal, which is the goal. And this is a pharmaceutical industry tactic that if you can expand the amount of people who can identify with the disease, then you can increase your base for drug sales. And so all these apps are bringing focus and attention to people to think about their own human experience in a way that's very much distorted. without emotional pain, you're not going to get through life without loss or fear or the challenges of being human and living. So if we can dehumanize and just like expect that, you know, going through life is to feel good all the time and send that false message that when anyone's struggling, they're now vulnerable to this idea that they're taking care of their mental health by turning to the intervention. And that intervention is not diet, it's not exercise, it's not community support, emotional skills in various ways or taking care of your sleep or taking some time away. Whatever is, you know, natural for a recovery process that existed throughout the course of human history, it's now you have a brain-based disease. They're going to take very complex human reactions and they're going to simplify it and they're going to simplify it as if we have a drug to be able to treat that. And you'll be back to yourself in no time, right? It's, it, it's mass marketing. pseudo-scientific nonsense that continues to get discussed throughout our culture. I mean, I think that for I think for the most part, the pharmaceutical industry has kind of stepped back from mass promoting this, because it's promoted already in popular culture. I think that it the damage has been done. When you have people talking about it, and school teachers talking about it, and lessons around it, and social media around it, and primary care physicians over and over again the damage has already been done they don't have to dump any more money into it.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, one of the things I talk about is how mental health has come to mean all things to all people. What the heck does it mean? It means mental illness, and it means everything in between mental health and mental illness. And I think that itself is already a problem. It was used as a metaphor originally, this notion that somehow the brain, the mind, in that sense, could have a healthy versus
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
unhealthy frame. It's
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
almost like a version of a moral
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
thing. Oh, you have a good mind or a bad
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
mind. Well, what does that mean?
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
details.
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
I think when I was a kid,
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
even then, it was rare.
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
Certainly, there was some awareness of mental
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
health as an issue, mental illness
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
as a concept. But by and
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
large, when people were struggling, kids were
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
struggling in high school, it was like, well, maybe
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
you should take up football.
Kel:
I think that's the way it is.
Rob Wipond:
Maybe you should join the chess. What are your interests? What are
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
your passions? How can we plug you
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
into more friendships
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
or whatever it might be?
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
There wasn't this immediate
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
that somehow your
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
issue is in your mind and
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
you need a health professional
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
of some kind to get
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
at that with you. And that's
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
a big change I've also seen in my professional career. Like 20 years ago, when I was researching this, I could easily call up virtually any non-drug practitioner, a psychologist, a therapist, psychotherapist, and they would readily critique this whole system. Nowadays,
Kel:
you
Rob Wipond:
professionals have recognized that overall the industry sort of grows if they're in compliance with the psychiatric industry and the pharmaceutical industry. And so now you really see this in the training
Kel:
I'm going
Rob Wipond:
programs
Kel:
to go
Rob Wipond:
for
Kel:
ahead
Rob Wipond:
children
Kel:
and
Rob Wipond:
and youth
Kel:
start
Rob Wipond:
and for
Kel:
with
Rob Wipond:
teachers and
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
schools.
Kel:
question of
Rob Wipond:
It's just
Kel:
the question
Rob Wipond:
a slippery
Kel:
of
Rob Wipond:
slope
Kel:
the question
Rob Wipond:
that happens over the course of several
Kel:
of
Rob Wipond:
pages
Kel:
the question
Rob Wipond:
of the
Kel:
of
Rob Wipond:
training
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
manual. It's
Kel:
question
Rob Wipond:
basically,
Kel:
of the question
Rob Wipond:
oh yeah, if you're struggling,
Kel:
of the question
Rob Wipond:
talk to your friends,
Kel:
of the question
Rob Wipond:
take up sports.
Kel:
of the
Rob Wipond:
That's
Kel:
question
Rob Wipond:
page one
Kel:
of
Rob Wipond:
and
Kel:
the
Rob Wipond:
two. Page three is, or two, you could have a brain disorder. You better see a professional. Here, serotonin needs balancing with it. Antidepressant, they start throwing in bogus science and really manipulative phrasing. Yeah, so you see this in the same continuum right now. I think that's one of the reasons it's gotten so out of hand. I think really non-drug practitioners need to, at this point in time, stake out which way they're going to go on this because right now, they're definitely fuel of this particular fire.
Kel:
It would be comical if it wasn't so serious. You know, you almost, it's laughable when we talk about it. Like if you feel a certain way for two weeks, then now you're disordered. Now you're mentally ill and now you require intervention, but we've bought into it. It's, it's worse since the pandemic. So, uh, what I'm concerned of and protective of is young people. They're the most vulnerable and we're seeing a dramatic rise in psychiatric over the course of the pandemic. Large percentage of them have been adolescent females. They're generally relational and engaging, but they're also susceptible to some of the harms created by social media. And we are seeing influencers who are talking about mental illness as if it's a badge of honor and also an opportunity to be able to join an oppressed group think about things in terms of social benefits and the disability culture that's being developed in the United States and you go and you discuss your struggles, even if you're not exposed to that and you say things to the wrong person, which tends to be a medical professional, you just even mention the fact that you thought about suicide. It doesn't even matter if it's about intent or desire, just the idea that it crossed your mind and you thought about is enough to push somebody into the system. And how are we going to now protect young people from going down this dangerous path where in your book you do a really good job of highlighting how easy you know you can enter into that system when you're in a vulnerable period in your life. We need to start talking about solutions and how to protect young people from going down this path. Thoughts?
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, well, one of them is we need to talk about involuntary commitment and forced treatment and psychiatric detentions more, because I think that's key to this. Because as soon as we get into the debate around, well, if somebody's saying, hey, I took this drug and it helped me, it's much more complex to sort of parse out then, OK, what's happening there? Are you fully aware of the actual possible side effects of these drugs? To what degree is the psychoactive
Kel:
you
Rob Wipond:
property of this drug affected your state of mind So there's a coercion going on there that I agree is absolutely really concerning and as a culture we need to get a better handle on but by I'm trying to simplify it at the beginning point because we're way beyond that. No, right. We got we got 20% as you said kids today embrace these notions and get upset if you try to take away the diagnosis from them and say it's not scientific or whatever because of all these other associations with it. So we're way past the point now can easily turn that tide back.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
So I'm trying to simplify the discussion,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
at least at the beginning, to go, well, at the very least,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
you should be making your own choices about that.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
You should have freedom to really be educated and hopefully
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me. I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
get good informed consent to these processes.
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me. I'm not sure if you can hear me. I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
And let's talk about the risks, though,
Kel:
I'm not sure if you can hear me.
Rob Wipond:
of going down this path. Because there are risks, even to simply having a diagnosis on your record. I think a lot of children today don't know, how could they know about what their possible repercussions could
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
be to having a mental health diagnosis on your record,
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
but we're already seeing. Well, guess what? You can't cross
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
the Canada-US border sometime if you've ever had
Kel:
I'm not sure if I'm going to be able to do this.
Rob Wipond:
this kind of diagnostic intervention that involved police in any way. Or there's other ways in which these kind
Kel:
I'm going to go ahead and start the recording.
Rob Wipond:
of records get permeating through social systems
Kel:
I'm going to start the recording.
Rob Wipond:
or passed from one school to the other. It follows
Kel:
I'm going to start the recording.
Rob Wipond:
you around. People have a prejudicial
Kel:
I'm going to start the recording.
Rob Wipond:
attitude towards you. So I think
Kel:
I'm going to start the recording.
Rob Wipond:
we need to talk about the negatives.
Kel:
I'm going to start the recording.
Rob Wipond:
And I guess that would be the beginning point. For me, part of the solution is to be much more honest, forthright, and let's get more data about how bad this can really be for some people some of the time, and then use that as a point of going, okay, how do we prevent that? And I think that opens up a lot of other dialogues. But I'm interested to hear your perspectives on this too, right? Because I don't really deal a lot with solutions in my book. As you know, have come from the World Health Organization as to how to reduce coercion in mental health systems, looking at innovative models around the world. And some of those are great. And some of them are happening in America at a small levels. And all that is great. I'm more concerned about this as almost like a policing issue that's happening in our communities and kind of turning that back.
Kel:
I totally agree with a lot of what you're saying. I do think first and foremost informed consent is a legal and ethical imperative. And so if people are not provided accurate information, they're unable to make informed decisions around their own healthcare. And if the physicians aren't accurately informed, and they are making medical decisions based off protocols. Like one of the things that I found out through my research and talking to physicians, 80% of psychiatric drugs are now being prescribed in primary care settings. The American Academy of Pediatrics, for example, is recommending for youth who are presenting with anxiety or depressed mood, an SSRI as like a frontline treatment or option. And so doctors they have to follow those protocols as if that's best available evidence. And these drugs have not been proven to be safe and effective, especially for developing brains. And then it increases the likelihood of self harm against yourself or others, both suicide and violence. And those are very clear statistics. They're they were, um, clear in the clinical trials and they're part of the drug companies, you know, even website and, and post clinical trial, uh, I mean, it's clearly stated these drugs can increase harm to yourself or somebody else. They're dangerous mind and mood altering substances. But those risks are just so diminished and minimized as if it's such a rare event. And the fact that you have a disease and this drug can help you, and we'll just monitor you because these adverse side effects are so rare, but they're not rare. They're actually quite frequent. you know, a loss of sleep or an agitation, they really can impair quality of life. So that information really matters. I think that in itself would lead to a real dramatic decrease in the use of harmful psychiatric drugs as treatment. And then we have to look at the outcomes of hospitalizations. Hospitalizations and partial hospitalizations are a negative health intervention. forcing somebody into such a sterile environment that can often be traumatic. We have to be able to increase our community support. I do think that is absolutely important. And we have to change the narrative. What is sound mental health has to be part of the conversation and part of education, but not in the way that it's being communicated by the special interest, not the way it's being driven down our throats by the medical authority and the pharmaceutical industry. based condition, kind of like require like insulin for diabetes are flat out lies and they're harmful. And then negative health effects of all these drugs are quite significant. We do have to get back to in our society, being able to talk about and normalizing the challenges that life brings and support coping, but also improve the health and well being of our culture. You know, you're going to be you're on a phone all day and you're stuck and you're not connected to nature and we're not interacting with each other socially and we're not developing purpose and meaning in our lives. Well, the result of that is going to be despair. And you know, you're on that television or you're either constant messages that are being bombarded to us provoke fear. You know, your life is going to be despair and depression and anxiety and sleep related problems. There are cultural issues that we're going to have to tackle. So deep so then the solutions have to be able to meet the complexity of the problem. I'm against the oversimplification of complex ideas and I think there's many different paths to solving this problem.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah.
Kel:
I think, go ahead, I'm sorry, go
Rob Wipond:
No,
Kel:
ahead Rob.
Rob Wipond:
go ahead, Kyle.
Kel:
I just, being in education, I agree with everything you just said. Here's my, but step number one has to be the ability to have these conversations without actually being fearful of any kind of, you know, fight back because there's system that believe in the opposite of what you just said. Do you know what happens when I have this conversation on private public forums? I mean, it's sometimes it's, it's presented out there as if I'm stigmatizing help for people who are mentally mentally ill, right? Like, we don't need more stigmatization. Like, this is you stigmatizing. I'll tell you what, there's, there's not enough stigmatizing that exists. Everybody is being turned towards mental health treatment. A lot of it is pseudoscientific crap. And we're not seeing any positive outcomes about it. What we need more is critical analysis and not just buying the narrative that's sold to us. Yeah, and that's what I really think needs to happen though is people just need to start talking. Just like you said, Rob, we need to just be able to talk about this and it's not threatening anyone. It's real, it's there, there's facts. We know all of this. Let's start there and then maybe we can, you know, get a positive change in the mental health It's like you don't see the end. It just keeps getting worse and worse and worse. That's why I loved your book because I was like there are solutions here. There's definitely things that we could be discussing and we should be discussing. And you know what,
Rob Wipond:
Yeah
Kel:
Kelly, the other response that I'll get is, well, Dr. McPhil, you don't work with the severe and chronically mentally ill. So you don't know how we're helping them. and chronically mentally ill. So even if that's the case, even if there are people who are really having a hard time connecting to reality, or in agitated psychotic or even manic states, the idea that these the current treatment is effective is a false narrative. It doesn't mean that there might not be some medical intervention to stabilize somebody. But to and respite and good care, right? And all the things that are leading to that person feeling that way need to be addressed. If we're going to use our tax dollars in some effective way, I would tend to think that it would be for the good of all of us in society if we can create some environments where people could actually heal and get treatment in an environment that's respectful and good care. Rob, go ahead.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, and I just want to reiterate, relevant to both of what you both said, was that we don't have any science that says forced treatment helps people, any demographic, any subgroup within that. The science is really poor in this. There's very few studies internationally, really. But they don't show any robust evidence that forced treatment helps. As even very pro-force psychiatrists and researchers would say is, gee, this seems to be tradition more than evidence and things like that. These aren't even critics that are finding this. So, we need to really highlight that particularly around force. There's nothing to support this scientifically. The other thing I want to talk about is that de-professionalization of this whole space I think would be great. Yeah, let's back up and say, hey, what are you really feeling? Let's not get into calling these diseases so quickly and all to just be helpful and supportive to each other. And what does that really mean in our daily lives and our daily interactions with each other? And there's a real model of that within community too, right? That goes back to the sixties and the people who did community development in really difficult inner city communities around America that sort of founded this movement. They were influenced by thinkers like Thomas Zahs and Ivan Illich who were already critiquing the over medicalization of human distress. They say, yeah, we need to de-professionalize, not excessively professionalize this environment, rather back up to go, how can we help each other? What does that really mean? It can be psychological, it can be practical, it can just be friendship and problem solve together. What's driving you to this crisis right now? Okay, gee, is there something we can do that would really help, that would make a change and at least get you over that that are a little more long-term, you know, just approaches like that. Because right now, like literally, a social worker in a school is often told, if the child mentions suicide, you check a box and you have to direct them to the psychiatric professional now. Whereas 20 years ago, social workers were allowed to do that, right? We're just over professionalizing more and more and more with a faux expertise, you know, driving it all. So yeah, I agree with both of you wholeheartedly.
Kel:
So Rob, you started off talking about your father and, uh, the takeaway I had from that was what he lost during that experience was that opportunity to build resilience and what you're talking about right now is just, you know, more of a, a general approach where you take that step back, you look at a stressful moment or an anxiety ridden moment as that opportunity to build resilience and there's really no environment that allows that to foster. Is that correct?
Rob Wipond:
that there's no environment that allows that to fault.
Kel:
There's no, yeah, there's no place for people to go where they can have that type of dialogue. They can talk about their stresses. They can talk about their anxieties and not get kind of migrated
Rob Wipond:
Right,
Kel:
into.
Rob Wipond:
those spaces are shrinking, yes. So one of the things I really encourage people is create that space because yes, they're rapidly diminishing in our culture and our society all over the place. So yeah, like you need to create it, you need to gather people around you that you really trust and give them the space to talk really honestly when they're in a deep crisis and say, hey, this is what I'm going through. And similarly, ask them for that space so that you calling 911 on each other and thinking that's a good approach to this. Yeah, that's going to solve it. No, be there for your friend, you know, to whatever degree you can and bring others to bear in that who share that and his family. Families should be doing this. We all need to be doing this and I understand it can get very difficult at times. Sometimes people really are struggling in a way that can, you know, create stress on a family that doesn't know how and they're to deal with it and they're afraid of it maybe and all that and I'd say that that's one of be afraid of this. It's true that as a culture, overall, we may lose some people on the way, but when we start adding up the numbers of how many people's lives are being destroyed by forced treatment or in lack of informed consent, in aggregate, we may end up doing better. And there's a lot of good arguments to suggest we will end up doing better overall, but you do have to be ready, I think, to live with a bit of risk in your own life and in the lives of those around talking about suicide and you know they might do it. I hope they don't and I'm gonna I'm gonna do what I can to make sure they feel cared for and supported and you know and all of that but at the same time yeah I think we have to also get back to accepting that life has risk to it.
Kel:
That is such a great point. And we've kept you a long time, but I want to follow up on that point. So we, we live in a litigious society and the mental health professionals in the way that they're being trained, they're being trained in fear. So when someone starts talking about ending their own life, they're automatically beginning to think about their risk, their liability. And so it changes the way that they interact with that person. No longer is that a human being in pain. can actually help motivate and support someone to want to live, they now become a risk to you. And there are checklists that are developed, and you have to go through your checklist in order to prove that you protect, that you took all the necessary steps as a professional. And it's often leading to this forced hospitalization as a protective measure, not because it's in the best interest of the patient, because it's in the best interest of your own fear.
Rob Wipond:
Yeah, and a great example of how ridiculous this gets, right? And I think I do, I blame both parties. I say, I blame professionals for not being more honest. That we, you know what, we don't know how to stop a suicide. There's no scientific evidence that we know how to stop one. Right? It's just, they should be more honest about that right up front. Sorry, we do not accept this responsibility because we can't. But similarly, I got to say to the people, families, patients, don't expect that from your mental health professional either, because an incredible ironic story that just came out. So we have this hospital in Arkansas that's clearly been holding people fraudulently. They've been exposed such that the local sheriffs are dragging patients out of the hospital there, because it's been exposed that they're fraudulently detaining patients. And yet, at the end of the article, they mentioned that, oh, and then one patient was let go early, and now the hospital's sued because that person committed, you know, killed themselves afterwards. And so you have this tension going on where we were expecting too much of mental health professionals, right, and cause what they do detain people. And then yeah, okay, we're upset when they detain people seemingly forever, because really, even if you're doing it fraudulently, hey, that's the safest
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
thing to do. It's like stopping crime. If
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
I jail everybody in the United States, there'll
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
never be another crime
Kel:
I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
And that's the logic
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
we're moving towards in this system
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
right now. And it's ridiculous,
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
right? So we really have to say, wait,
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
there's risk in this system.
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
These some people really are struggling.
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
Some professionals really are
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
trying to do their best and will still lose
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
patients in different ways or
Kel:
I'm sorry.
Rob Wipond:
just can't help because we don't have evidence that we can solve these problems. And I believe and I argue in the book, that's why forced treatment is expanding. It's expanding because we aren't solving these problems. logic out there. Well, maybe if we just do more of it and do it more aggressively and start earlier in children's lives and don't let anyone escape, we expand it into the community so no one can ever escape forced treatment. Maybe that'll work, but there's no evidence that will work and we have a lot of evidence that it's going to be backfiring and we're already seeing.
Kel:
Rob, where can people find you if they're interested in your work more about you?
Rob Wipond:
So the book, Your Consent Is Not Required, The Rise In Psychiatric Detentions, Forced Treatment and Abusive Guardianships. It's available anywhere books are sold. My website, robwypond.com, there's a page there that gives you more information about the book and testimonies about it and so forth. And I'm updating regularly with what else is happening around the book. And then I'm on Twitter and Facebook fairly actively as well. And just under my name, Rob Wypond. find me through any of those pathways.
Kel:
Rob, keep up the good work. Thank you for a radically genuine conversation.
Rob Wipond:
Thank you.
Creators and Guests
