SHRINKS' CYNICISM, ARROGANCE AND CONTEMPT FOR THEIR VICTIM-PATIENTS
by Justice Lover

Along with its atrocities and coercion under the prtext of "treatment" psychiatry and its practitioners showed only cynicism, arrogance and contempt for their victim-patients. This article provides two prominent examples, out of numerous cases of such attitudes.

The first example concerns a German citizen seeking justice in the European Court of Human Rights. The second example concerns the recent Dresden conference of psychiatrists for the declared purpose of dealing with psychiatric coercion, to which some leaders of survivors of psychiatry had been invited,but only to be incorporated into the psychiatric system.

Alexander Skugor of Berlin, Germany, had his claim for E500,000 compensation rejected by the European Court of Human Rights on April 10, 2007. On June 13,2007 he applied for
PRESENTATION AT THE GRAND CHAMBER to appeal against the court's judgement. The following is an excerpt from his letter :

http://home.tiscali.de/alex.sk/prozesse/EGH34.html#5

"Berlin, June 13, 2007

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

...My lawyer has informed me that certain points of my application were declared inadmissible. But I have so far received no explanation and no justification for this by either side. In my letter from April 5, 2005 I have declared:

"If the human rights court is to follow the FR Germany's legal practise by using psychiatric expertise as basis, with no regard to any logical plausibility check, then I see no use in taking my case further on."

The central point of my application is, that since September 12, 1994 I'm being alleged to suffer from a bio-genetic endogenous mental disease named "paranoid hallucinatory schizophrenia" and that under this pretence I was tortured, maltreated, and deprived of my liberty and further on of all my basic human rights. Thereby it was the deprivation of my parental rights which caused the most devastating personal loss and psychologic suffering for me.

So there is no use and logic in separating my application in admissible and inadmissible points, because the case is about the legitimacy of the justification used, and this is the same in all points, i. e. the pretence of the psychiatric "experts" that I'm suffering from some sort of endogenous mental disease. And so the central issue is, that until today I have no scientific evidence before me regarding these allegations and that no court has ever requested such evidence to be presented. Not even the question has been cleared up whether any such diseases even exist at all, i. e. by any means of biological detection.

Therefore I see a special importance in my case, because by the present practise anybody can arbitrarily be diagnosed of suffering from any kind of imaginary diseases, leaving doors wide open for vicious and very grave human rights violations. Since I cannot recognise any discernible evidence in your judgement, it just represents a continuation of all the previous judgements which lack any rational foundation and thereby have caused my application to the human rights court.

My personal opinion is, that the crimes committed by psychiatry, by no means are lagging behind the nazi holocaust and I have expressed this repeatedly towards the human rights court. And what is the use of a human rights court if such holocaust accusations are arbitrarily being declared inadmissible? Is the use of the court to cover and mask such crimes, whereas a normal citizen is deluded assuming that the court is seriously protecting human rights?

What is being done by psychiatry, is with no doubt some kind of psycho eugenics, where the criteria essentially are to be seen as irrational, i. e. they are subject to selfish profit interests of the psycho-pharmaceutical industries and the "medics" and pseudo-scientists that represent it.

One criteria might be the "lack" of strict and blind observance of citizens towards legalistic authoritarian legislative, but I'm refusing to comment further on this towards the human rights court, because it would appear schizophrenic to me. The nature of psychiatry can be described as split in itself, in one conservative-conformist obscuring fraction and another progressive-humanistic enlightening fraction. Obviously the first fraction, with it's abstruse thesis, has been corrupted by "success" in the context of a certain conceptual definition of rational behaviour dominated by the plutocratic establishment and has abandoned the scientific quest for establishment of truth. By that it has deprecated itself to a pseudo-scientific instrument serving the abuse of power.

But if people are being sanctioned for their perception of reality is approximating towards objectivity, then a fascist totalitarian condition is established as it is described by George Orwell in his famous book "1984".

Furthermore it is difficult for me to assess whether your judgement is the result of counter­productive, and for me, an unintelligible contribution of my former lawyer in the French language. Anyway I would kindly request, in case of presentation at the "Grand Chamber" which herewith I apply for, to refer exclusively to my own personal more than adequate statements, requests and exhibits. The constraint for representation by a lawyer is being abused in FR Germany to deny citizens the basic right of legal hearing. This is also an essential part of my application and I have brought in additional particulars in my letter from July 6, 2005.

It is a highly odd historic irony that this kind of legal constraint which was introduced by the Hitler nazi regime in order to discriminate "unwelcome" population groups has found its way into the rules of the human rights court. So I declare that I wish not to be represented by any lawyer at all, as your own judgement proves clearly that it is of no use for me, but in this case is now obviously more of a source of additional confusion and obscurity.

Yours faithfully, ( -)"

The second case involves the wining and dining of David Oaks and his cronies by the top shrinks (see photo at http://www.mindfreedom.org/campaign/media/mfradio/next . If you click on the picture - which shows Prof. Juan E. Mezzich, President of World Psychiatric Association; David Oaks, Director of MindFreedom; Judi Chamberlin, on board of MindFreedom; Prof. Dr. Thomas W. Kallert, Conference Chair; author & psychiatric survivor Peter Lehmann - you get a full screen picture of the smiling Mezzich and David Oaks ! ).

David Oaks is very good at serving the shrinks. Weeks before the conference began he prepared a statement, which he called "the Dresden declaration" on behalf of all survivors of psychiatry. However, rather than opposing the conference itself - an evil conference of torturers ! - and demanding the immediate banning of psychiatry, David Oaks stated that "Our organizations will have representatives from a number of countries participating in the WPA conference, with the intent of putting a human face on this practice."

By "practice" he meant the practice of psychiatric coercion and torture, as this is the meaning he gives it at the bottom of the statement.
(see the statement www.mindfreedom.org/kb/mental-health-global/wpa-dresden/declaration/ ).

The shrinks, who never intended to stop psychiatric coercion, invited David Oaks and his cronies to make speeches and wine and dine at the conference, as a public relations excercise,namely, "to show the world what nice liberal and democratic people they are"...
(Emphasis by Justice Lover).