Thank you for unpacking all this, it's way over my head, and appreciate the guidance. And bless the psychologists for sure, I find myself reading their columns at random these days and come out in better shape for it.

Take a look at what 40mg. of Zyprexa and 15mg. of Haldol did to liberate a non-schizophrenic. --[read my blog]Erikson.--"abundant evidence" =bunkum. The legal mental health system is as far removed from the mental health system in reality than NAMI and TAC combined.
I've not met one mental health prosecutor, judge or attorney that ever knew one thing about psychiatric medication, and what is was or was not doing for their clients.
Until I see the patients start leaving Western State Hospital in a mass exodus on this popular drug combination that place uses, then call me a pissed off realist.
I have an inside perspective that no one has, so far who has commented on this blog. The inside of state and county hospitals for 4-6 hours+ a day--for over a year-- [more hours than the average psych resident puts in]observing patients on antipsychotics, and the outcome is not only less than best==most don't ever leave--and the one's that do end up in a residential care facility are all disabled on SSI, and unable to work, or have a quality of life, read, comprehend who or what they are--this is classified as an anti-med rant for one reason: show me the "abundant evidence".

Being that psychiatrists namely medicate for a living, and psychologists listen and observe, could be a reason they are more in tune with what meds do to people.

My own psychiatrist always reminds me that he's "medication management only". I've been consise in my description of what the medications [such as Seroquel] cause(d)me to feel like.
Seriously--I would like to see any comment by TAC/NAMI, [as example]that has anything smart to say based on taking these medications and having first hand experience on them--then they can report in and I bet their stats would be different.
My last comment about TAC--they are one of the best self-promoting PR firms I've seen yet.

Go, Philip, for getting some big ass opinion leaders on your case. "Advocacy culture gone too far" -- that'll be the day. It's going to take a lot more than you, me, or the rest of the folks beating themselve up, to get biopsychiatry and psychopharmacology off their pedestals and get some balance back into the treatment of troubled folks.

Stephany, I hear you. I just shake my head when I read TAC's posts. You would think from their posts that their miracle treatments are making the lives of those with schizophrenia all sunshiney and filled with butterflies. I would like to introduce them to my relative with schizophrenia. These miracle drugs have made her obese and heavily sedated. Her eyes are glazed over and she stays in her apartment dependent upon government hand outs. She smacks her lips involuntarily as she will continue to do until the day she dies. She's not a productive member of society, but hey she's not getting arrested for disturbing the peace so life is grand, right? Is her life better on meds? Hell if I know.

The sad thing about the lives lost to medications/illness whatever the reason--is that people like myself--never knew the state hospital, county hospital, or residential care places existed, until it affected my life via my daughter.
I've never cried for people I never knew before---until I saw the inside of these places, that I drove past on various occasions.
It's all just heart-breaking. I'm sorry for your relative, and wish there was a better way.

Well Dawdy,

In fact, I am a psychologist and not an MD. I believe that Dr. Swanson has posted a comment over at Grohol's blog defending his study that seems pretty solid to me. The CATIE study was not perfect, but it wasn't garbage either. I also see that you have not responded to the substance of my post, but instead resort to flimsy rhetoric. I have enjoyed reading your blog and thought you have raised some good points. Posts like these, however, are a disservice to thoughtful readers and posters who want a debate on the merits and not one resorting invectives that swell the emotions and do little else.

Steve Erickson: I would love to hear more. Please don't leave such a vague reply.

Steve Erickson:

I would like personal consultation regarding my daughter's case; read my blog, and email me at the address there.

If in fact there are complex answers to this complex debate, then sign me up.

I am questioning CATIE, and everything else.
Up for the task?

Fair warning--I'm not emotional in board rooms.

Thanks.

Stephany, thank you. I know you get it. Honestly, I don't know what the answer is. I just wish the "experts" were a little more honest about how much the treatment options suck.

Marvin Swartz himself admitted in a lecture at UVA that the drugs that are most "effective" have the most side effects in terms of weight gain and metabolic syndrome. His only answer to the dilemma was to push the drugs more aggressively throught PACT etc., but I was cheered by the question from a psychiatric resident (I believe) that if these drugs are so dangerous, how can we force them on anyone? Even John Monahan said that obviously we need better drugs. I myself don't believe there is any perfect drug out there, but if even people who are pushing forced treatment realize and admit that the drugs are dangerous, what are we left to believe about their motivation to push forced drugging? I come away with the idea that people with schizophrenia are not really people to them, that they are sub-human and that the decreased life expectancy is seen as a reasonble trade off for not having someone annoy others.