Some people swear by speed for depression, does that mean everyone should have the opportunity to try it? I have heard the ECT saved my life speech from 2 people I know personally. One is no longer to practice his or her profession because of it and can barely write a coherent paragraph any more, the other attempted suicide multiple times, coming very close to completion the last time, after the ECT that saved his or her life.

I credit NOW consciousness raising in the 80's, along with the fact that while they were troubled, my parents always didn't just allow but in fact required me to be the primary caretaker of at least one dog and one cat as a child, with saving me from the horrific mental misery experienced by my mother and sister. I have worked in my life to make these experiences available to other people, and I yet I don't think they would work for everyone. While caring for a dog may save one person's life, it might not be helpful to another, so I don't think other people should be legally forced to go through these things. You're right on on this one Phillip. If someone wants to undergo ECT, it shouldn't be illegal, but it certainly should never be forced. I'll put my cards on the table and admit I don't think it works for anyone, I've seen it destroy people, and yet I don't know everyone. If only the proponents of ECT were open minded. Maybe we should try ECT on them.

I'm sure Liz Spikol has something to say about this subject.

I think this is a good example of how psychiatric treatments work differently for everyone. I read Tracy's blog with interest, and need to read more to understand how ECT saved her and why she continues it--but in reading what I read, it appears [and this is my opinion only]that it is a difficult thing to endure with [maybe? a little dread?].I think it's what a patient is willing to put up with to feel better, and the after effects of ECT or side effects of psych meds could practically be the same in some cases.
I think the main thing not to forget about this particular discussion is how Simone is receiving forced, court ordered ECT, that is just plain wrong.

ECT saved my life too. Of course there are people who've had bad experiences with it, and I agree it has to be a matter of personal consent. But how can someone make informed consent if they can't hear any positive stories over the clamor and clucking of people who've seen Cuckoo's Nest and consider themselves authorities?

I have had five courses. It did save my life when nothing else worked. I've also seen it have an amazing transformative effect on fellow patients in the hospitals I was in. However, it did cause some permanent, mild memory damage for me - see? I'm no pollyanna. I can still write, and write well enough to say I'm glad I made the choice to have ECT and to be alive now.

That same choice is for each individual to make. As a libertarian, you should understand that it's up to each person and not to a bunch of braying ill-informed alarmist asses carrying protest placards to decide for her.

you know i've read enough praise of ect over the years by ppl who still complain of occasional depression and psychosis to make me wonder how ect was a cure. but once again let me be clear: if someone wants it and consents go for it. as for the argument that pro ect stories are being drowned out that's silly. there is an entire industry of docs out there who drown out patients.

um as a libertarian i support free speech, unfettered, so if someone wants to say whatever about ect ignorantly or not, they can go right ahead.

I had ECT treatments about 6 years ago. They caused me to have permenant memory loss. Thankfully, my sister stepped in and threatened to sue the doctor if he gave me any more treatments. I say "thankfully" now, but at the time, I was furious about it. I thought the ECT was working..I *needed* it to work. It was my last hope, and I was afraid I would die without it. ECT did seem to "work" right off the bat. But what I realized later on, when I was able to think more clearly, was that the ECT just made me not care about anything anymore. It was only through therapy that I was able to save myself, and get off all meds. If I had gotten that therapy in the beginning, I very well might not have gotten to the point of even needing to consider ECT. Another thing that makes me so angry is that I should not have even been a candidate for ECT, because I'd had a stroke 5 years prior, which lowered my seizure threshold. After the ECTs, I had a few grand mal seizures, one of them was while I was driving, and I totaled my car. I'm assuming I had given consent to the ECT, but I don't remember it at all. My husband said we watched a movie about it. Forced ECT is appalling. Giving ECT without giving all the available info and side effects is appalling.

I've had at least 3 courses of electroshock (funny, I can't remember exactly how many), most recently in January 2006. I was severely depressed and being drugged into oblivion at the time. It did "work" if you mean I "responded" but the improvement didn't last and the side effects were horrendous (for example, I used to get lost on my way home). I think you could pretty much get the same perk-up effect without the side effects by spraying someone down with a garden hose. I think electroshock and psychosurgery belong together in a museum where tourists can marvel at how we used to abuse the mentally ill.

Ah, the debate. ECT saved my life, but it took me about ten minutes to remember what my friggin' URL was to write it here. I am never one to say I need ECT, but in the end, I need ECT. This seems to be a very individual thing. And speaking of the dangers of domain name, um, shit....the word for when you take over a domain name so you appear to be the authority of a subject....monopoly? (see what ECT has done to my brain and I'm *still* a proponent?). ECT.org presents an extremely lopsided view of ECT. With a name like that, one might, *should* expect a more level presentation of ECT. Again, it is very individual and should be taken as such. Thanks FS for presenting one of the more balanced viewpoints.

I guess we (pro and con ECT) are all agreed that ECT causes brain damage right?

the psychiatrist told me my depression was so deep that ect could very well be the only thing strong enough to help. and that he had gotten amazing results from other patients who presented like me. i had been sitting in the same position in the same chair in the back of the day room for three weeks. i was eighteen, alone, naieve, scared of feeling the pain i was feeling for the rest of my life. and i trusted my doctor knew what was right for me. he said it would protect my brain and get everything firing correctly. at first i remebered nothing, then i remembered existance, where am i
?why am i here? who am i?) after my 12th schock, twelve times waking up with a mind that didn't remember what is is. i was such a zombie i got shipped to an IMD for long term care. a place where you gotta watch your back. i could'nt.

so ECT made my memory swiss cheese , my reaction time very slow, and i got PTSD as a new edition to my file.

my hair was long and curly and it swayed back and forth when i danced.
and i cut it off.
because that's not who i was anymore

I don't know what to think, my brain is fried. I think it should be abolished, and replaced with something better. Meanwhile do what you want, I'm in your corner. I shot my blogwad, and would vote to abolish if it had a snowballs chance of appearing on the ballot. But protesting and promulgating is off the table because I'm all about the unity. I am so tired of these debates. Do psych patients have any common goals at all?

do psych patients even have a forum to discuss common goals? it would be a targeted and easily discredited group. but it would be great to start an orginization of psych patints to provide the forums to talk, and hear other peoples opinions. and evntually present some unity of idea. or acceptance of experince. a voice that is respected