Sliwinski's lawyers waived her right to a jury trial, so there's no need to wonder "what a jury makes of this case." It seems incredibly insensitive to the families and friends of Michael, John and Doug to imply that the wrong person is on trial. In our legal system a person who kills anyone must be tried in court of law. Whether or not her psychiatrists made mistakes does not excuse Sliwinski from standing trial. It is up to the judge to decide whether Sliwinski was "legally" insane when this crime occurred. It seems like the media has forgotten about these men. I'm tired of seeing Sliwinski's "modeling" pictures in the press and on the internet. How about featuring pictures of Michael, John, Doug and the families that will never see them again.

I don't think anyone is forgetting about the three that were tragically killed. But this story is very similar to the case of the little girl in Boston who died from polypharmacy. Her PARENTS are on trial for her death, not the psychiatrist who cooked up the evil stew.

No doubt in my mind who should be imprisoned in both these cases.

http://chicagoist.com/2005/07/18/suicidal_driver_kills_three_musicians.php

In the process, she killed a member of Silkworm and a member of The Dials, two criminally underappreciated bands. Unfortunately, right now, people are forgetting about them. I saw her name and knew who she had killed in her decision - however she made it and under whatever influence - to end her own life.

In some way, she must be held accountable for her actions. Unfortunately, the justice system only provides criminal penalties for those who committed an act, not those who prescribed medications that may have contributed to / caused it. The civil courts will have to deal with them.

Among my wildly unpopular beliefs is this one, people on ssri's and antipsychotics shouldn't drive because of the impairment caused by antipsychotics and the false sense of well being caused by ssri's. Antipsychotics may also cause a false sense of well being and ssri's physical impairment, some of you will know more about that than me, but my theory is that what happens when you take ssri's is that you have unreleastic confidence in your judgment and are having racing thoughts and thus take exactly the same kind of risks someone driving drunk on alcohol takes. As for antipsychotics, well, they are tranquilizers, your physical reaction time is impaired.

But the patients are often not responsible because if they complain of any of the above symptoms the doctors tell them they can't trust their judgment because of their defective brains. So I invision the driver here possibly claiming involuntary intoxication and the prosecution going after the prescribing doctor in the same way bars are sometimes held liable for drunk driving deaths. I can't imagine a situation in which a bar should be held responsible for the acts of a drunk driver, but with these drugs the doctors are in fact responsible as they are prescibing the drugs and giving the users a false sense of safety.

Just wanted to put in a reminder here that on ssristories.com we are approaching 2000 stories in which, in our opinions, psychiatry and the pharmaceutical companies should be held responsible at least as much, if not more, than the perpetrators. This is an epidemic and a serious one. It is a very sticky wicket from a legal and criminal justice point of view and I don't claim to have the answers once murder and mayhem have taken place. But I'd sure like to stop a lot of this violence before it happens by changing some of the paradigms we're using to "treat" unhappy people. This iatragenic (medicine-induced) epidemic of murder, suicide and bizarre behavior is another "inconvenient truth" of our times that needs to be acknowledged urgently.

She admits to using her vehicle as a weapon in an attempt to kill herself; and ended up killing innocent people instead.

What's the difference if it's murder by vehicle or gun?[or other] She made a choice. Whether it was med-induced behavior/thinking or not, she made a choice.

There is no way to stop this over-medication train unless the FDA rises up to the occasion and starts paying attention to Columbine, Chris Pittman....

Of course psychiatrists and doctors should be paying close attention to behaviors/actions of their patients on medications, but unfortunately, that just doesn't seem to be happening. If it was, there would be a noticable drop in psych med sales. Instead there is an increase. We are in for some bad times ahead, as a result of a flooding of psych meds into the market place, and if anyone should be on trial, it's our own Government for not having a real watchdog in place to prevent such tragic stories.

At any given moment we could all have free psych med samples given to us via Pharma reps, so this is a wild horse out there, and innocent people are and will continue to suffer as a result.

Tragic for the people who lost their lives and I also find it tragic that a person's mental health history is on trial for all to read. This should make anyone with any dx ever given to them, or psych med--shutter at the thought of your life being used against you. Especially when being given prescription drugs by a doctor.

Dear Philip,

“No kidding.

Apparently the woman was on as many as five meds at the time. Further proof, sadly, that polypharmacy is very dangerous. Why do doctors continue to send people home with multiple Rxs when they know how unpredictable the results can be? And giving stimulants to a bipolar? That's malpractice.

It'll be interesting to see what a jury makes of this case. A doctor testifying for the prosecution claims that the woman was not psychotic. Personally, I think the prosecutors may have the wrong person on trial.” --- Philip Dawdy

It seems you too buy into and seem to promote what I refer to as sensationalism and headline news reporting without all the facts. Sorry, I’ll have to take an opposing position from you.

“Apparently,” is that fact or fiction or just conjecture? I know of many patients suffering mood disorders that are on a polypharmacy treatment regimen and I have also know of Bipolars taking stimulants when appropriate and they have killed no one nor is it proof in their case histories “that polypharmacy is very dangerous.” My own spouse was on polypharmacy for many years and although therapy did not benefit her she drove her car and never had an accident or killed anyone. For that matter there are far more vehicle fatalities in this country that I read of making no mention of medications or recreational drugs as a possible cause.

While sad but true Andrew Goldstein pushed a young woman to her death from a subway platform. He was on no medications. Should one then also infer, “Why do doctors continue to send people home…” without medications “…when they know how unpredictable the results can be?”

As a former DBSA support group facilitator amongst the many hats I’ve worn we stressed at our meetings that regardless of the fact that one was taking prescription medications the individual still remains responsible according to our state law for one’s own actions and in the case of vehicle accidents it is possible to be accused of “DUI.” So we informed and forewarned the support group members.

I also ask where are the relatives, loved one’s and/or caring friends to have offered guidance or caution or to have removed the keys for the vehicle. Certainly doctors make errors; I shall not dispute that possibility but randomly laying blame on every psychiatric medical professional whose patient commits a crime is irresponsible in my view.

Does anyone in this country take any responsibility for their actions anymore? Or is it easier to lay blame and responsibility upon others to sue and potentially make some money while one’s at it?

What about the rights of the individual, which I so often read on these various forums, not being violated through forced hospitalization? Why hospitalize someone who is suffering serious mood disorders so as not to violate the patient’s rights? I guess we’ll just have to live with the very rare instances of a car accident or subway incident while attempts are made to lay blame elsewhere.

I think too many folks buy into these headlines and point fingers without having all the facts.

I do think in this case from what I’ve read so far is that the judge’s decision is correct as was the appeal and corrected decision in the case of Andrea Yates and the decision in the case of Goldstein. All are guilty of their crimes with extenuating circumstances.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

After living this nightmare for the last 2 and a half years and attending every hearing, motion and subsequent trial I have some information that may allow you to have a better prospective of the circumstances in this case. It was always a mystery as to what information and observations the reporters would choose to relay and at what time during the proceedings they would arrive & leave, subsequently missing out on testimony that never made it in the news.

One reason that the families or their friends may feel that the men were forgotten is that, especially in the Chicago Sun-Times, although the pictures of this woman are huge, often in color, and "tasteful" modeling photos (as opposed to other photos of her available on the internet) the photos of these men were small b&w square photos. In comparison alone they appeared as mugshot photos. If you did not read the paper, but instead passed by it at work, it appeared that these three men had done something terrible to the defendant. If the defendant had been a man and the victims had been 3 young women, I think we can all agree the cover of the Sun-Times would have looked very different.

This woman was prescribed many medications, by many doctors, whom she lied to in regards to her current prescribed medications and whether or not she was seeing another doctor. This is accepted, factual evidence- not a partisan comment. There is no proof she was taking any legally prescribed medication apart from Adderall. I have no reason to assume that she took these other medications that were not some version of speed which she not only asked for specifically by relaying the symptoms of ADHD but by telling these doctors that the drug Adderall had worked for her in the past. I also believe it is important to note the fact that her tox screen showed she was not taking any other medications the day of the "crash." Although she did admit that she had done several lines of coke 2 days before, drank 21-28 Martinis a week and had used ecstasy not more than 50 times.

She also admitted that was she not taking the other legally prescribed medication given to her. She was warned about her long-term, substantial alcohol & illegal drug use in regards to being subsribed any prescription medication.

I do believe there was a cultural and generational difference that figuratively hung over that court room throughout the trial. She was prescribed Adderall. Then according to her words, 5 days later "had a bad reaction to coke" while taking Adderall and her mother took her to the hospital and for the first and only time in her life was diagnosed with having acute psychosis. After sleeping for the first time in 3 days (according to her statement) she felt better, appeared calmer to her acting psychiatrist who told her not to take Adderall again and scheduled another tox screen. This is accepted, noted, factual evidence. She never took a another tox screen after May 30th after she had been hospitalized by her mother. She continued to use alcohol, Adderall, cocaine and ecstasy and then she got into a fight with her mother got into her car and killed 3 men trapped at a stop light. You should know that her mother followed her and before checking on her daughter's status attempted to remove her daughter's purse from the scene that was sitting near the open bottle of gin in the street. Once at the hospital the parents were never seen in her actual hospital room, but instead left, hired a defense attorney and did not see their daughter again for 7 days.

It is my opinion that the evidence is clear that the defendant was doctor shopping so that her insurance could cover her addicion to speed... Adderall. I do not blame the doctors- how could they know how many other doctors she was seeing? The Defense psychologist said that although she had admitted to "doing" 5 lines of cocaine and admitting that she used cocaine every 5 days did not effect his opinion, as it "would depend on how big the lines were." This psychologist also said that he was unfamiliar with ecstasy so he didn't know what symptoms it would cause or mimic, like pychosis. And although she admitted to going out 4 nights a week with friends, staying out until 5am and taking whatever "club-drugs" her friends gave her that information did not affect his opinion as to her being (in his opinion) bi-polar and eventually psychotic. The Defense attorney found it illogical that she could use "herbal" medications purchased by her over the internet to also receive some sort of high. He yelled this out at the state's psychiatrist who said he could not be sure that the Defense's statement was true because he did not know what was contained in these "herbal" medications. The Defense also said it was illogical to think she could have received drugs in jail.

Most importantly you should know now that she is only prescribed an anti-depressant. She is no longer considered bi-polar or psychotic.

I believe that she starred into the back of the heads of three men and killed them. It did not matter to her what the outcome for herself of this act would be did (whether she lived or died) as she blew her horn over and over again and yelled "Help me! Get me out of here!" It is simply a histrionic narcissist who was use to and wanted to cause a big scene. This time her mother would have to deal with it. Suicide is a private matter and by no stretch of the imagination did we, the prosecution or the judge believe she was psychotic.

Interestingly enough not one friend or co-worker testified for her or report seeing any mania or psychosis.

Dear Sally,

I also wanted to take a moment to address some of your beliefs, opinions and alleged statements of fact and in doing so I’ll also take an opposing viewpoint to your commentary.

“Among my wildly unpopular beliefs is this one, people on ssri's and antipsychotics shouldn't drive because of the impairment caused by antipsychotics and the false sense of well being caused by ssri's.” --- Sally

Contrary to your beliefs my wife drove safely for many years while on psychotropic treatment regimens. As I’m sure your aware by now that as a support group facilitator I sat across the table from many participants and learned of first hand accounts of their driving safely too.

Do your beliefs also apply to individual’s not holding responsible job positions “because of the impairment caused by antipsychotics and the false sense of well being caused by ssri's?”

My spouse as well as many of the participants including nurses I’ve come to held responsible positions while utilizing medications until their illnesses escalated and became unmanageable at the time.

“Antipsychotics may also cause a false sense of well being and ssri's physical impairment, some of you will know more about that than me, but my theory is that what happens when you take ssri's is that you have unreleastic confidence in your judgment and are having racing thoughts and thus take exactly the same kind of risks someone driving drunk on alcohol takes.” --- Sally

An important word to be reemphasized in your statement is the word “may” and it seems to me also in the above statement you could have summed it up in one or two words; bipolar disorder or mania. One needn’t take drugs or alcohol to experience what you’ve stated. One only needs to suffer the illness left untreated.

“But the patients are often not responsible because if they complain of any of the above symptoms the doctors tell them they can't trust their judgment because of their defective brains.” --- Sally

I don’t know what patients you’re referring to or if that is your personal experiences but I do know my spouse’s doctors have never replied to her in the manner you’ve stated.

“I can't imagine a situation in which a bar should be held responsible for the acts of a drunk driver, but with these drugs the doctors are in fact responsible as they are prescibing the drugs and giving the users a false sense of safety.” --- Sally

Whether you imagine it or not it is a fact in a number of states and unlike you I can see a bar owner being held responsible for serving a customer, already seemingly intoxicated, additional alcoholic drinks. Doctors are in fact responsible for prescribing medications, at least in my state, but no where in my experiences has any doctor written or voiced an opinion that the prescribed “drugs and giving the users a false sense of safety”.

Once again, whether a patient or support person I believe there is an inherent responsibility to be reasonably educated and to obtain information before taking any medications to also know of potential side-effects and contraindications. I know as a support person to my spouse that I make every effort to be reasonably educated before my spouse’s undertaking of any treatment regimen as well as making any changes to her treatment regimen.

Once again in exhibited in your writings, in my opinion, is that same seemingly apparent laying of blame on everyone else and not taking any responsibility for one’s actions. Psychiatrists are not god and hence are fallible and as I often state, “There are doctors, good doctors and better doctors.” Maybe your experiences have been to only have associated with “doctors” whereas we too have experienced “doctors” but have been fortunate to utilize “better doctors” for my spouse’s care.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

I think this is a prime example of violence on and off of psych medications and I've seen it in someone both on and off medications. [the same person].

The worst was while loaded up on 5 medications upon discharge from a psych ward. Unfortunately, there just ARE people who have adverse reactions to medications. Unless one has witnessed it, or had a reaction due to taking the med,one wouldn't understand it.

But the truth is, drugs of any kind can affect a person's rational behavior and thoughts.

Ive also been in mental health court and was jaw dropped at erroneous information read from a hospital psychologist's mouth to the Judge. Charts are full of errors, and there are many people who eval situations such as the one discussed here.

The bottom line is psych medications and ALL medications have the potential to induce psychosis, even when the person does not have the diagnoses.

Re: leaving a Defense attorney with the daughter in the hospital, she is a legal adult most people DO get attorneys in any situation such as what happened, and not seeing the daughter in 7 days could be as a result of lack of paperwork giving consent for visitation.

Clearly, her lifestyle is/was on trial, and if she wasn't a blonde model, the story might not be as sensationalized. Just a thought.

Bottom line in my opinion, is she killed people, and she's going to have to do time in prison as a result.

Dr. Stephany,

“There is no way to stop this over-medication train unless the FDA rises up to the occasion and starts paying attention to Columbine, Chris Pittman....” --- Stephany

It is not in the mandate of the FDA to do any such thing that you’ve suggested. It is within their mandate to insure reasonable safety and efficacy.

I personally am against the public marketing and promotion of drugs and various medical devices via public media to the general population. I believe the use of media for these products should properly be addressed to the medical professionals.

Simply from reading various message forums I’ve learned of considerable patient lack of education and knowledge as well as numerous inaccuracies and the dissemination of misinformation from forum to forum. I do not believe the government need be involved as we have a number of watchdogs already not watching and the government is “f’uped” enough. Again, I’ll redirect the readers back to patient, family, loved ones and friends taking on some responsibilities. This also not to say that instead of spending 12 billion dollars a month in warring those moneys cannot be more properly directed to improving mental health care for the citizens of this country who are truly in need.

I don’t spend my time blaming and finger pointing. I’ve been results oriented through my business career as well as my support and caring efforts for my spouse and my proactive mental health advocacy and activism. Blaming or having a negative attitude never accomplished or helped us succeed in our goals.

“Of course psychiatrists and doctors should be paying close attention to behaviors/actions of their patients on medications, but unfortunately, that just doesn't seem to be happening.” --- Stephany

From my personal experiences I would have to disagree with your statement. The first point being I personally feel that “doctors” should not be dispensing psychotropic drugs and that should properly be in the hands of a qualified specialist, the psychiatrist. Secondly, under the circumstances, I know my spouse’s psychiatrist pays close attention to her behaviors/actions in the 15 or so minutes, once a month that he sees my spouse. On the other hand he is very aware in my involvement and he relies upon my diary and empirical observations over 4 decades to give him a much better understanding of her mood state, effects of treatment regimens and/or any changes in mood state as a result of changes to her treatment regimen. I also coordinate all information between all of her attending physicians so that we’re all on the same page contrary to what we learned this young woman was perpetrating.

“Tragic for the people who lost their lives and I also find it tragic that a person's mental health history is on trial for all to read.” --- Stephany

I am in agreement with that it was “Tragic for the people who lost their lives…” It ends there. It is not tragic for that young woman that I learned from “Family’s” post of the young woman’s history which rightfully was presented. I believe in the facts and all the facts not just the biased facts. Based upon what “family” shared I see no reason to hold any of the physicians negligent. I also learned contrary to Philip Dawdy’s statement, “Apparently the woman was on as many as five meds at the time”, that once again one should have all the facts and not to make judgments from sensationalistic and headline news media that most often lack any in depth research as I’ve come to learn. Then again, maybe Philip was correct in that she was on “five meds at the time” but the question is they prescribed medications, were they prescribed by the same psychiatrist or as we learned from “family” that this young woman appears to have been an abuser of chemicals.

I have not read the actual transcripts of the testimony but this discussion once again illustrates in my mind the differences between facts and hearsay and I shall presume “Family” is reporting reasonably accurate information for which I thank him/her for presenting an interesting and different perspective.

I would like to share with “family” and those intimately affected by this tragedy my sincere heartfelt condolences as I shall also presume “family” didn’t attend each day’s trial without having a close relationship to one of the deceased.

I would also like to share with “family” my understanding and knowledge of those individuals who I know closely and who truly suffer serious mood disorders that they do not necessarily act irresponsibly as you have indicated in your writings. Please know that the population of patients suffering severe mood disorders commits far less crimes and violent crimes as does the general population and this one individual’s actions should not be construed or a generalized reflection of those patients who are law abiding.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

Stephany, I am not sure where you receive your information from but this woman was not loaded up on drugs. This is exactly what I tried to explain. Although prescribed different drugs by many different physicians that SHE sought out at the same time, she was NOT using them (by her own admission & tox screens.) I am not sure why you have dismissed her alcohol and illegal drug abuse through omission. During her one overnight hospitalization she tested positive for amphetamines & opiates which she attributed to some pills her friends gave her. Do you understand?

And although I think there is a great place & time for this conversation to happen between you and Herb, she was NOT taking these drugs. You two might have this debate in a different forum.

"Re:" I wonder what paperwork might have instructed her mother to try to remove evidence at the scene of the crime without even first having regard for her daughter's condition. She was concerned about her daughter's drug use (this was unrefuted testimony) and it is logical to believe she was nervous about what might be in her daughter's purse especially since it was sitting next to an open bottle of gin as she tried to remove it by sneeking up behind a paramedic. The paramedic who was trying to save her daughter's life had to instruct her to hand back her adult daughter's purse.
And honestly, I don't understand how your daughter could be in the ER and your instinct is to leave her there alone (before the Defense Attorney showed up) especially without knowing what her condition is whether she was 23 or 43. Would you leave ANY injured loved one in the ER alone even if they had been with an attorney? This was during a period of time that her mother (who claimed on the stand) she slept in the same bed as her "legal adult" DAUGHTER because she was so fearful for her mental and physical condition.

Of course she should be held responsible for speeding UP into Michael Dahlquist's car when she saw it by slamming her foot on the gas and killing three people- especially because her tox screens ran CLEAR of medications. I don't understand why the two of you continue to ignore this while you debate psychotropic drugs.

Miraculously she is now fine and not bi-polar or psychotic. This may be from not using Adderall, Ecstasy, Cocaine & Alcohol.

"Clearly" her lifestyle was not on trial in that court room, unless you include the tremendous amount of alcohol & illegal drugs she was using 4 nights a week. They never brought up her occupation. This is not sensational to me and literally thousands of others. This is a histrionic narcissistic murder that destroyed our lives, in different ways for different people, forever.

Family,

I did not miss the information that you stated. What you are missing is the fact there are individuals who look to attribute or blame Psychiatry, Psychiatrists, psychotropic medications, the mental health system and the like for their “damaged” lives or the lives of others as a result of the named items above and often refer to themselves as “Psychiatric Survivors” or in other circles “ECT Survivors”. I know of breast cancer survivors, brain cancer survivors, epilepsy survivors, diabetic survivors and mood disorder survivors etc. What I don’t read of is Neurologist Survivors, Oncologist Survivors, Orthopedic Survivors and the like if you can understand where I am coming from.

Family, what you may be missing in this tragedy and the dialog here is the original sensationalist media hype and headlines which Philip Dawdy posted and jumped upon in his commentary and which the other anti-psychiatry, anti-psychiatrist, anti-psychiatric medications and anti-mental health system folks immediately jumps upon to try to justify their positions without having the facts or stating hearsay and generalizations. Unless you missed it on the home page this blog deals with issues of Psychiatry and Psychology and related issues dealing with these two main themes. While Philip’s blog and personal writings are well done and informative, in my opinion, it does not mean I have to agree with all his thoughts or positions as is obviated by my commenting relating to this specific issue.

I feel strongly the young woman found guilty has serious issues but Psychiatry, Psychiatrists, psychotropic medications and/or the mental health system or lack there of are not at issue nor to blamed as your commentary has revealed.

As I stated, the young woman is rightfully guilty of her actions as the judge ruled “but mentally ill of three counts of reckless homicide” may lessen the severity of her criminal act.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

I'd like to say that my experience with polypharmacy (my own) is that I should not have been driving and still now on only a fraction of what I was on for many years there are many days that I choose not to drive now that I have the option. I can tell you when I was working and responsible for my income I felt like I had to drive and that I had no choice. Most people I think would be loathe to give up driving---it is in fact a symbol as well as literally a form of freedom. This fact alone is an extremely compelling one to make people not be honest with themselves. Also, most drunks think they are fine to drive too when they cause accidents. I think it also safe to assume that most drunks do not cause accidents--they remain lucky as many of us do, driving under the influence while not causing serious harm.

It would be quite interesting to do studies as they have done with people who have had one, two, three drinks who claim to have no felt sense of being dangerous and it turns out their reaction time is totally f@#$ed. Do this with psych meds and I think you'd find the same. It's tragic and would effectively put millions more on the disability roles because they could not get to work. I drove for years praying I would not hurt anyone.

Herb, the word survivor (no snot quotes needed) is perfectly appropriate. On the basis of my arbitrary (and incorrect) psychiatric label, I have been incarcerated, tied down, force drugged and force electroshocked. If you prefer the term "psychiatry" survivor to psychiatric survivor, for the sake of grammatical consistency, that's fine. We prefer the term psychiatric survivor.

Please read further into the case of Andrew Goldstein before concluding simply that he was a murderer not on medication. Prior to this awful crime, Goldstein had just been turned away from mental health services. Kendra's Law should have addressed mandatory mental health services for anyone who WANTS it.

I haven't been to your blog so I don't know if your wife ever gets a chance to be heard. How does she feel about your keeping notes on her for 40 years, for instance? And, if psychiatry, as a valid medical science, has been treating her all this time, why has she not stabilized?

As we saw on the kid-psychiatry comments, family members get awfully defensive when their care is questioned. But these issues should be looked at as it's often the family as a whole that need to be healed, not the designated crazy person's brain.

There's lots of crap out there from TAC and NAMI for the "rah, rah, psychiatry" crowd. Yes, Philip's blog is more skeptical. That's what we love about it.

I spoke of my own daughter being on 5 medications, and didn't realize I was in a debate with Herb. I appreciate Herb's comments here and elsewhere. I am an advocate for my daughter, proactive in her care, well-versed on psychiatric medications, asked by NAMI to teach an advocacy group.I also just single-handedly prevented her from being discharged to a state mental institution.

I also believe that Herb and I do not need to discuss this woman killing 3 people anywhere but here, under the story. Maybe the "family" can start a family blog and link the court transcripts there for all of us passionate commenters to read and learn.
Everyone has a story in general who posts here, and most are/have been psych patients, consumers and care givers. That's where most of our opinions us come from, and Herb might be surprised how much he and I have in common watching out for our loved ones safety.

"Family",

I also wanted to address leaving my daughter in an ER.[which I never have done] I was trying to not get wordy, but the reason I say paperwork and visitation is due to what Ive lived with re: my daughter at psych wards.

I slept in chairs in an ER for 3 solid days and nights in June waiting for my 19 year old to be assessed by a mental health professional when she ran down a road and stopped traffic, with police and paramedics there, I was able to talk to her and get her to walk to the sidewalk.

I've actually never left her side in the last 8 years. Now you may say this is not the place for me to write this--but I am addressing what you broadcast toward me in your post addressed to me.

Herb and "family",

Due to having to explain my opinion and comments here, I will leave you with this post, A Mother's Love:the advocacy journey, and Clozaril-soulful selpucher from my blog, that will possibly clarify my life for both of you. Best wishes, Stephany.

Dear Francesca,

Before I address you’re posting I first would like to express my appreciation to Philip for what I consider a wonderful service in terms of his writing, skepticism and his willingness to allow different points of view.

I have been excommunicated from several forums as the site administrators are unappreciative of my experiences, research and knowledge and sometimes challenging statements and/or differences of opinions based upon facts and/or documentation.

I am a believer of respectful freedom of speech and again I thank Philip for the opportunity to share my views in this forum.

Francesca, I just wasn’t aware that “psychiatry” or “psychiatric” were mood disorders or an illness or a disease. So I was wondering how one becomes a survivor of either. Surviving despite poor, improper or negligent care or the lack of support of family and friends I could understand. Whether you prefer psychiatric survivor or psychiatry survivor I simply see those as negative connotations and I see things differently from my perspective.

My spouse has never been incarcerated in any form. She enters hospitalization under her free will with the exception of two attempted suicides which in our state requires a mandatory evaluation and observation of up to 72 hours. She has never been tied down. She has never been forced drugged. She has never been forced to have ECT.

I need not read further the case of Andrew Goldstein. I cited that issue for a couple of reasons. Mr. Goldstein had no psychotropic drugs and therefore the anti-psychiatry folks cannot allude to the fact, “Aha, the drugs did it.” So if you can’t find the drugs as cause you’ll play the blame game and find something else to fault and so you cited the mental health services, and in doing so you have also justified several of my positions. If read into Goldstein’s case he was still lucid enough to know he needed help and needed help by way of his medications and had he obtained the medications it would be possible the event would not have occurred. Yes, the NY mental health system did fail Andrew Goldstein and worse yet failed to save the life of Kendra but I quote from Kendra’s mother something which you obviously oppose:

“Mrs. Webdale said she was proud of what has become known as Kendra’s Law, which gives families and others the right to go to court to force patients to comply with outpatient treatment or be committed. Mr. Goldstein had stopped taking his anti-psychotic medication when he pushed Ms. Webdale.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/nyregion/03kendra.html?_r=1&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/G/Goldstein,%20Andrew&oref=slogin

So Francesca, which way do you want it or better yet, propose an improvement?

I know in our county mental health services are available but the problem as I see it is that they are severely under funded and short staff. So what else is new when mental health initiatives have almost always been at the bottom of the budgetary barrel? Have you written to your Senator and Congress people advocating for the recent mental health funding?

“I haven't been to your blog so I don't know if your wife ever gets a chance to be heard. How does she feel about your keeping notes on her for 40 years, for instance?” --- Francesca Allan

Maybe if you perused the site you could easily have answered a number of your questions and possible picked up some other information. The website is my repository of information I’ve garnered over this past 8 or 9 years and is an opportunity to share my commentary without having my postings edited, censured, deleted or my private messages through the system messages censured by some paranoid or derisive site administrator uncomfortable with any opposing thoughts.

Why not send me a private E-mail with your telephone number. I’m sure my wife, Joyce, would be delighted to chat with you and you can ask her directly whatever questions you might have. You can also address my diary and in the interim read some of those entries I share with the readership on the site?

“And, if psychiatry, as a valid medical science, has been treating her all this time, why has she not stabilized?” --- Francesca Allan

Who said she was “not stabilized.”

“As we saw on the kid-psychiatry comments, family members get awfully defensive when their care is questioned.” --- Francesca Allan

I know not of what family members “we” or actually you speak of but I’ll share with you as my wife’s spouse. I am positive of my effective health care efforts on behalf of Joyce. I am so positive that if not for me my spouse would be dead. How’s that for being positive?

“But these issues should be looked at as it's often the family as a whole that need to be healed, not the designated crazy person's brain.” --- Francesca Allan

Well I can agree with you from the standpoint of my spouse’s illness having major effects upon the lives of our daughter and me. Certainly a divorce would have been the easy way out. My spouse’s mood disorder and/or malfunctioning of her brain just added to our challenges. I’ll take a guess that Psychiatric Survivors use terms such as “designated crazy person’s brain. Our daughter, family, friends and I recognize a mood disorder in my spouse. She’s anything but a crazy person and quite frankly being a long-time proactive mental health advocate and activist I find your remark not only abhorrent but stigmatizing. If that is what you may think of yourself, so be it.

I support NARSAD. I’ve worked for a local chapter of DBSA as a President, Board Member and facilitator and the organization did a wonderful and outstanding service for its participants. Many support persons I have also known have also complimented the services and work offered by NAMI to their participants. I am not familiar with TAC.

Rah, rah for education, hope and persistence and several rah, rah, rah for achieving wellness no matter how achieved.

Stephany, I had in the past quickly reconnoitered your blog and yes most definitely there is much we share in our efforts, advocacy, our own agonies and that important hope and persistence to never give up seeking wellness for our charge.

We do bring a different perspective from that of the Psychiatric Survivor folks but that is what respectful dialog and sharing is all about. I also agree with you that “family” should not misinterpret our concerns or these discussions. The death of those three individuals is truly tragic but I believe the original intent of Philip’s posting was to address the mental health issues or lack thereof that many of us whether as support persons and care givers or that of patients in their own rights suffer and the many issues relating to mental health and the law.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

Herb & Stephany,
You are right. I found this link and did not see it's home page. I am definitely responsible for having the "wrong" discussion in the "wrong" forum.

That being said, the way I ended up here is that the woman you have used to debate your arguments is the wrong poster woman for either position.

You should know that after someone you love is killed you stumble upon their name hoping to read kind words, but most of all the truth.

The information posted here has been incorrect. Her lifestyle was not on trial and she was not on the medications that you are here to debate.

Hopefully you are not in a personal position to know that we will not have access to the court transcripts & all evidence until after she has exhausted all of her appeals. You also need to purchase these transcripts, which as you can imagine after a two week trial, these transcripts will be quite expensive.

I was naive when I expected to read postings that would not speak of evidence that did not exist. I can not possibly stop people from discussing the woman who murdered my loved one from reiterating untrue statements in order to bolster their own personal arguments. I am sure I have done it many times in the past, but I have learned a tragic lesson and will not speak "out-of-turn" anymore.

Stephany, I am genuinely grateful to hear that you have not left your daughter's side. I wish that had been the same for the Sliwinski family. I hope you understand-- that was my point. What mother would ignore their daughter's kicking feet in a roll-over collision to remove evidence of a crime?

Narcissism and Histrionic behavior without any overlapping of a manic or bi-polar disorder is a testament to a personality disorder cultivated in the home. At one point Jeanette Sliwinski was a child who craved her mother's attention & love. She is now a grown adult who refuses to pay her own rent or give up her luxuries so that she could purchase Adderall, Cocaine, Ecstasy & tremendous amounts of alcohol. She craves attention and I do not doubt that using that much alcohol & Ecstasy in particular would make a person depressed. Unfortunately she was not a woman who wanted help, she wanted to garner attention.

I will leave this forum and hopefully you all will continue to discuss these issues and not use this woman to bolster any argument- it only diminishes your position.

Herb: Francesca, I just wasn’t aware that “psychiatry” or “psychiatric” were mood disorders or an illness or a disease. So I was wondering how one becomes a survivor of either.

* You misunderstand yet again, Herb. We survived the treatment, not the alleged disorder.

Herb: “Mrs. Webdale said she was proud of what has become known as Kendra’s Law, which gives families and others the right to go to court to force patients to comply with outpatient treatment or be committed.”

* Mrs. Webdale is an idiot, Herb. Andrew Goldstein had just tried to access mental health treatment BUT HAD BEEN TURNED away from the hospital. To suggest, as Mrs. Webdale (egged on by Fuller Torrey) does, that had Goldstein been on meds this wouldn't have happened, is an unprovable assertion. As we have seen, many disasters happen while patients are ON their meds.

Herb: So Francesca, which way do you want it or better yet, propose an improvement? I know in our county mental health services are available but the problem as I see it is that they are severely under funded and short staff. So what else is new when mental health initiatives have almost always been at the bottom of the budgetary barrel? Have you written to your Senator and Congress people advocating for the recent mental health funding?

* I have always proposed patients’ advocacy. The last thing the mental health system needs is MORE money. Yes, indeed, I have written to various governmental agencies promoting mental health alternatives. I also appeared, by invitation, to speak before Senator Kirby’s Mental Health Commission in 2005 and have presented papers/talks to the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology and MindFreedom International. I’ve met and corresponded with Robert Whitaker (Mad in America), Grace Jackson (Rethinking Psychiatric Drugs), Louis Wynne (Healing the Hurting Soul) and many, many others in the psychiatric rights movement. I devote a substantial amount of my time and resources to helping those trapped in our mental health system. Thanks for your suggestions, Herb, but I think I’m good to go.

Herb: Maybe if you perused the site you could easily have answered a number of your questions and possible picked up some other information.

* Really not interested in your blog nor in talking to your wife, thanks.

Herb: Who said she was “not stabilized.”

* I just assumed (wrongly, evidently) that she wasn’t. If she’s stabilized, why are you so wrapped up in it still?

Herb: I know not of what family members “we” or actually you speak of but I’ll share with you as my wife’s spouse. I am positive of my effective health care efforts on behalf of Joyce. I am so positive that if not for me my spouse would be dead. How’s that for being positive?

* Yes, my father says much the same thing. He's delusional.

Herb: She’s anything but a crazy person and quite frankly being a long-time proactive mental health advocate and activist I find your remark not only abhorrent but stigmatizing. If that is what you may think of yourself, so be it.

* If you find the phrase “mentally ill” kinder than crazy, by all means, use it. But I'll thank you not to infringe upon my own freedom of speech.

Herb: We do bring a different perspective from that of the Psychiatric Survivor folks but that is what respectful dialog and sharing is all about.

* Herb, since we’re on the topic of respectful dialog, psychiatric survivor “folks” sounds rather condescending.

Just reread my last post and now it's disappeared.

Francesca: But these issues should be looked at as it's often the family as a whole that need to be healed, not the designated crazy person's brain.

Herb: Well I can agree with you from the standpoint of my spouse’s illness having major effects upon the lives of our daughter and me. Certainly a divorce would have been the easy way out. My spouse’s mood disorder and/or malfunctioning of her brain just added to our challenges.

* Yikes, Herb, do you deliberately misunderstand what you read? I meant that the family dynamic (giving rise to the black sheep’s psych label) as a whole needs to be healed. I didn’t mean that the family members have to be healed from dealing with their designated crazy person. Christ! This has been a frustrating conversation. Signing off in disgust.

Dear Francesca,

As someone previously had mentioned to me about Mr. David Oaks and that which I too experienced while participating in his radio program is his straw man arguments which I read a similar demonstration in your arguments.

“This has been a frustrating conversation.” --- Francesca Allan

I’ll have to agree with you on the above point especially when I read your statements where you refer to individuals as “idiot” or delusional and in the same breath make an inference I might be the same. Hmmm…where were you when my spouse was code blue from an attempted suicide. Yup, it must have been you or the hypothetical you at her beside that called 911 to save her life in that one instance. I wonder…delusional…huh.

I also wonder why you ask questions and have no interest in the answers? Is that part of the straw man argument?

“As we have seen, many disasters happen while patients are ON their meds.” --- Francesca Allan

No, I haven’t “seen many disasters happen while patients are ON their meds.” I’ve seen patients stabilized and in better control of their illness and lives.

I wonder why you have to later preface your statements with “I mean” or “I didn’t mean.” Are you still speaking hypothetically or are you talking about yourself. If you’re the “black sheep” so state it. We don’t have “black sheep” or “black sheep issues in our family. We do sometimes have issues so I don’t relate to your personal or hypothetical statements simply because there has been no abuse, no incarcerations and no forced treatments and I or my spouse do not look at Psychiatry or its practitioners or medications as the enemy nor have my spouse and I had any issues of patients rights violations as apparently is your experiences or perceptions.

My efforts are spent in trying to achieve and maintain my wife’s wellness. I’ll leave rights issues to the likes of you and David Oaks who incidentally proposes the banning of ECT. I find it interesting that he and his organization see nothing wrong with abrogating the rights of a patient to make an informed choice for his/her treatment option just as you pull another straw man argument out of the hat, “But I'll thank you not to infringe upon my own freedom of speech.” Obviously you’ve stated whatever you wanted so what the heck are you talking about? Who, what, where or when in this discussion has anyone infringed on your freedom of speech? Again, I wonder…delusional…huh.

Once again I’ll just let you know that I personally find some of the words you use abhorrent and stigmatizing and contrary to my mental health advocacy to educate, obtain parity in health insurance coverage and to remove discrimination and stigma toward those who suffer mood disorders. So what in the hill of beans does all this have to do with your freedom of speech?

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

Some of the worst times of my daughter's life happened while fully loaded on doctor prescribed medications. In fact, she was the most "dangerous to herself and others" while taking the medications. This is a moot point. People all have different body chemistry and reaction to chemicals whether rx by a doc or not. Once a person understands this, and most importantly the health care provider--then a person can move forward with recovery.

This is about a quality of life, on meds or not, ECT or not, it's about what works best for the person to have the life they want to live.

Herb's wife, Francesca, Rob, my daughter, all of us-- hey if it's mac and cheese and vitamin B12 shot-- let's celebrate that we have a life.

What else matters?

Thanks Stephany…it is about life. And when there is life, there’s hope and hope for a better quality of life.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

Herb, I thought you just posted in another thread here about driving your wife to work. I feel sorry for your wife. Why do feel that she is responsible for your moods? This is the creepy dichotomy you see among many people who label a relative as mentally ill. All through your posts on all of these blogs is this common thread, when your wife has a feeling or acts a certain way you are certain it is because her brain is defective. When you have a feeling or act a certain way, you are certain it is not because your brain is defective but because of the trauma you experience because your wife is being difficult because her brain is defective. What if it's not her? What if it's you that has the defective brain? Oh, and your daughter too, she could have inherited brain defectiveness from you? Why don't you try your vns depression treatment on yourself, that way your wife's behavior won't bother you and everyone will be happy.

Gianna stated my position on driving perfectly. And yes, Herb, I know people who take these drugs and live and work productively, as I know people who are alcoholics and illegal drug addicts who live and work productively, but generally it takes its toll.

Family, I'm sorry for your loss. I haven't followed the case at all but hope that justice is served for you and the people who died.

Herb: My efforts are spent in trying to achieve and maintain my wife’s wellness. I’ll leave rights issues to the likes of you and David Oaks who incidentally proposes the banning of ECT. I find it interesting that he and his organization see nothing wrong with abrogating the rights of a patient to make an informed choice for his/her treatment option ...

* You clearly do not understand the principles of MindFreedom International. David Oaks is a friend and colleague of mine and BOTH of us believe in INFORMED consent. MFI is all about empowerment, helping the mentally ill select the treatment option of THEIR choosing. David Oaks has done a huge amount of work for the psychiatric rights movement and I am quite tickled that you group us together: the “likes of [me] and David Oaks.” You just made my day, thanks!

Herb: Who, what, where or when in this discussion has anyone infringed on your freedom of speech? Again, I wonder…delusional…huh.

* You do, Herb, when you attempt to “correct” my speech. Crazy is a bad word, according to you.

Herb: Once again I’ll just let you know that I personally find some of the words you use abhorrent and stigmatizing ...

* Case in point. Plain English is abhorrent and stigmatizing but, for instance, "assisted treatment" is warm and fuzzy.

* Lastly, since you misunderstood the metaphor, I’ll explain here that the crazy person in the family is the black sheep.

Dear Sally,

“Herb, I thought you just posted in another thread here about driving your wife to work. I feel sorry for your wife. Why do feel that she is responsible for your moods...” --- Sally

“What if it's not her? What if it's you that has the defective brain? Oh, and your daughter too, she could have inherited brain defectiveness from you? Why don't you try your vns depression treatment on yourself, that way your wife's behavior won't bother you and everyone will be happy.” --- Sally

I’ll respectfully reply to you by stating I think you may be having a bad hair or over medicated or under medicated or not medicated or should be medicated or you drank too much or your underwear is pinching you in the wrong place or its too tight or your angry at your boyfriend or husband or dog cause one or possibly all peed on your very best shoes or one of three all three stepped on your peanut butter and jelly sandwich but you do make it obvious to me that you can’t be degreed or qualified to diagnosis me or anyone else for that matter, thank goodness.

Quite simply, I don’t know what you’re rambling about but you do a good job of rambling. You feel sorry because I drove my wife to work. I guess I’ll additionally add to your lack of qualifications and knowledge is that of commuting into the big apple. You feel sorry for my wife because I drove her to work…please do not interrupt my laughter and forgive me if I use one of Francesca’s metaphors which I’m sure you can understand. My wife certainly would think you’re crazy but I’ll be politically correct and just assume something isn’t quite right with you, at least at the moment of your writing. I know I’m crazy, I drove in the traffic everyday. Laughter, laughter, laughter, laughter please forgive me for interrupting you.

Are you truly a comedienne?

Francesca,

Again with the straw man arguments, I have to believe you, Oaks and probably the rest of you guys must take a prerequisite course in straw man discussions and debating. I stated Oaks and his organization, which I shall presume includes you, has as a platform calling for the banning of ECT which I oppose.

No where in my writings did I say anything against informed consent. I wrote about him and his organization wanting to ban ECT and abrogating the rights of the patient to choose. Actually, if you ever read my commentaries, many times I speak of “informed and un-coerced medical consent. You guys do enjoy playing games, don’t you?

While you may enjoy playing hypothetical games I’ve left those practices behind in my teens as I’ve had to deal with realities. Now being in my senior years I’ve been around the block a few times and ran a successful business and I’ve also employed and had to work with folks that seem to enjoy playing games.

“Herb, when you attempt to “correct” my speech. Crazy is a bad word, according to you.” --- Francesca

I didn’t attempt to “correct” your speech nor did I say “Crazy is a bad word.” Those are words out your mouth or should I say writing. If you choose to play with your feces that’s okay with me too except I would find that abhorrent too, not necessarily stigmatizing because maybe that’s what you enjoy nor discriminating but certainly awfully smelly.

Although there are certain platforms of MFI I can agree with I find that your thinking which in turn is translated into your writing reminds me of the folks standing on their soap boxes (not necessarily a soap box) on 42nd and Broadway, NYC and preaching their daily sermons. Well you know what, they were wrong…I’ve never repented and I’m still here to tell you so and so are you. But then again, I don’t know if you’ve repented.

So please go practice your straw man arguments or routine on or with Sally. I’ll take a guess that, she understands your metaphors, hypothetical situations and “I meant” or “I didn’t mean.”

It’s not a game for me or a soap box.

For me, thank you, this will conclude my comments to this topic as the responses are eroding into non-sense or possibly delusions.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

Herb, I'm afraid I'm going to have to agree with Sally on this one. You do seem a little unbalanced on this subject.

Furthermore, you don't appear to know the definition of straw man so here it is (courtesy of wikipedia): an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. I have not misrepresented your position; thus, I am not guilty of the straw man fallacy.

And I am not a member of MindFreedom International. This is yet another mistaken assumption on your part. For what's it worth, I do not support a ban on electroshock but I very much support the abolition of INVOLUNTARY electroshock, including quasi-voluntary electroshock where patients trade an early release (or fewer drugs) for a few zaps. Lest you fear we are agreeing on a subject, I'd like to add that I also support the right to informed suicide.

I’m sorry for coming across as unduly harsh. I’m glad for your wife that she has your support. Let’s end this discussion here. Good luck with everything.

Francesca, I wish I could give Herb as much benefit of the doubt as you do.

Herb, I wish your wife the best, and since she seems to be in your control, and maybe even your legal custody, I pray that you are it.

Just wanted to add that I often had to clarify what I was saying in this discussion because Herb usually didn't get it the first time. Anyway, I suspect we scared him off.

Sally, I agree with your reservations. Kind of reminds me of those mothers that stand up and say "God bless Thorazine [or whatever] because without it little Timmy couldn't function." Why do we never hear from little Timmy himself? Could it be that little Timmy's a cabbage [sorry, Herb, that's my politically incorrect word for a drug-addled mental patient] and that antipsychotics ain't that great? Creepy, indeed.

Dear Francesca,

Please excuse my returning to post to this topic but I simply cannot stop my laughter.

You allude to me being delusional and yet I find myself right on target and quite lucid.

I didn’t realize that Sally had a blog site and by accident in doing some researching I happened upon her site. If you look back a few posts I responded to Sally that maybe she was upset because her writing didn’t make sense to me and somewhere I mentioned something about maybe her dog or husband or boyfriend or all three peed on her best shoes.

Well, lo and behold she posted a picture to her site of what appears to be her dog having peed on her shoes.

http://concerned2-asylum.blogspot.com/2007/10/aint-that-america.html

Call me “delusional,” will ya huh! You’ve guys got a good case. A picture is worth two thousand of yours and Sally’s words.

Oh my, I can’t stop laughing.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

Herb - Why resort to personal attacks? That is just rude and totally unnecessary.

Herb, stop making an ass out of yourself. "There's a picture of dog pee on Sally's blog therefore Francesca's wrong when she says I'm delusional" isn't much of an argument. Don't you have something better to do with your time?

Though it would be cruel to respond to Herb's flawed logic, I must mention that those are not my feet nor is that dog pee.

Dear Sally,

Thanks for the logic and finally stating some facts. Then again, I shouldn’t have expected you or Francesca to have any kind of sense of humor. It was coincidental to my off the cuff thoughts of Sally’s bad hair day etc and funny to me and I thought of sharing the humor in the situation with you. I apologize and so too for interrupting your further discussions.

I extend my very best wishes to you guys. I would also suggest trying to laugh once in awhile or at least break a smile. Personally, although the two of you never mentioned it, laughter is in my opinion the best medicine.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

Herb, Sally's got a fantastic sense of humour. Maybe you should take your platitudes back to vns world.

Why thank you Francesca.

I will keep reading Furious Seasons because I appreciate the investigative information, critical thinking and healthy skepticism that Philip puts forth in his blog. Philip writes: "What's more, there isn't much of a free market of ideas in the mental health world--it's pretty much the mental health establishment versus the anti-psychiatry movement. Let me stress that I am not a member of the latter movement. What I am is a long-time psych patient who has become quite skeptical about where we are with mental health in this country. I believe in accountability and an honest exchange of ideas." Amen!

I am deeply saddened, however, by the vicious, vitrolic and extremely jugdmental exchanges that have been posted recently. Can we please be more civil, respectful and tolerant of other people's experiences and perspectives?! I would hope that as mature adults we could agree to disagree without namecalling and hurling insults. The commentary of late reminds me of the cruel sniping of junior high school days. Dealing with the realities of brain disorders, medication safety issues, finding health care that promotes mental wellness, as Stephany coined it recently, are hard enough. Until you walk in another person's shoes or personally know all the details of their reality, please don't presume, assume or judge anything. Reading these negative exchanges doesn't seem helpful to anyone and personally, only escalates my stress/frustration levels, which are high enough already. Peace~~

Amen, Nancy. I won't rise to the bait next time. "Civil, respectful and tolerant" will be what I strive for. So I won't say Herb started it, or anything immature like that. Oops.