Comments: Fort Hood Shooting: Psychiatrist Calls Psychiatrist-Shooter "Terrorist"
Explosive allegations!
I admire Breggin, believe his critical analysis of psychiatry and drug therapy to be dead on the nail, but given that he manages to weave Samuel Adams into his speculation about Hasan, then reminds readers in the post-script that he has a new book out on the founding fathers - well, the cynic in me sees a bit of grandstanding and PR trickery at play.
On the other hand, all the pieces do seem to add up to Breggin's conclusion, and thankfully the answers did not die, as they usually do, with the killer; Hasan's recovery is the key to this story.
You're right Philip, this is going to get uglier, especially once Breggin hits the prime-time TV circuit with his theory.
Posted by The Skeptic at November 8, 2009 10:47 PM
Coming from a psychiatrist, Peter Breggin's remarks puzzle me. He is so quick to claim that the shooter is a terrorist and "un-American." He wants to "confirm that Major Nidal Malik Hasan was driven by religious ideology." That the religious ideology happens to be Islam seems to confirm in Breggin's mind that the guy is a terrorist. Well, hopefully this isn't news to Breggin, but religion is topic numero uno on the minds of the severely mentally ill. They tend to read their Bible a lot and think God is speaking directly to them. The death of a parent can be a triggering event. If Hasan had been, say, Methodist or Episcopalian, would Breggin use the word "terrorist?" Probably not. Shouldn't Breggin, as a pyschiatrist, have more compassion for what appears to be a man severely under stress? Hasan is an Islamic man under stress, and that seems to lead Breggin to conclusions that are incompatible with his role as a psychiatrist.
Posted by Rossa Forbes at November 9, 2009 04:04 AM
I respect Breggin and agree with all of his critique of psychiatry in this piece but I don't think enough is known to call this guy a terrorist. All Muslims are not terrorists and there has been a lot of horrible persecution of innocent Muslims and non Muslim folk of Arabic descent since 9/11 and before.
I think the fact that the guy wanted out so bad that he hired a lawyer and offered to pay the army back and yet he was forced to stay in means the the blame to a huge extent is born by the folks that wouldn't let him out. Of course this doesn't excuse his actions but his actions don't excuse the actions of his superiors.
Force almost always results in an escalation of danger and harm. War is tragedy resulting in tragedy.
Posted by Sally at November 9, 2009 04:42 AM
I love Dr. Breggin. It's funny you mention the PR stuff Skeptic. I find it a tad annoying too how he mentions his other books continuously in his writings. It works though... I've bought three, so far! I have to overlook it, he saved my sanity (him & Philip D.).
Posted by Damaged at November 9, 2009 06:19 AM
http://www.medsvstherapy.com/2009/11/tragic-fort-hood-shooting-this-fits.html
I also strongly suspect increased homicidal / suicidal impulsiveness from serotonin-involved psych meds (SSRI or SNRI). I blogged abt this possibility on Friday. Hopefully, we will get honest info as this story progresses.
Posted by medsvstherapy at November 9, 2009 07:00 AM
I won't get into what I think of Breggin blowing up the "terrorist" side of this story but I do think there is corroboration for the fact that Walter Reed and the military are pushing psychopharmacology in a big way as the most "efficient" way of treating mental disorders. Let's face it -- all of psychiatry is operating with this standard of treatment and if a doctor doesn't follow it he's accused of malpractice. So I don't fault him on that accusation about the way psychiatry is practiced in the army. In the press this weekend it said a million vets (and/or soldiers) were on waiting lists to get psychiatric counseling. They don't know how lucky they are if they're avoiding the medical maelstrom that way but maybe they're just getting the pills from others so they'll be really sick when they're finally seen.
Also I wish I was completely confident we will learn the full story of what Hasan may have been taking but I'm not counting my chickens before they hatch on that one. The powers that be have a way of whisking in and destroying, dismissing and ignoring evidence. If he was treating himself there may be no records. I wish I was kidding about this but it's the one piece of this whole thing about which I really believe there is a conspiracy. Big pharma really doesn't want us to know if rampage shooters are on meds. Virginia Tech is an example of how records were stolen and destroyed -- so is Columbine.
Posted by Sara at November 9, 2009 08:26 AM
Presumably, shrinks are required to be objective - that is, they must not have any prejudices that would prevent them from giving the best possible advice to patients. Indeed, so fine is the balance of these intellectual wonders that they are required to undertake counselling with a peer once a month (or so I understand it), in order to work out any issues that may have been offloaded on them unwittingly by their clients.
Soooooooooooo... Unless we perceive that Hassan's version of reality was entirely objective, shouldn't we ask how his profession, including his peers (certainly including his regular counsellor), failed to notice that he was a murderous (possibly religious), psychopath, whose views might interfere with the execution (forgive the word), of his professional duties? If they didn't notice these things in such an apparently obvious scenario, then how are we to trust them in more subtlety nuanced cases? And how is it that a child with some behavioural stuff going on is subject to physical restraint and lockdown? There's a disconnect going on, here, that I don't quite comprehend (laughs to self).
Hmmm... The profession is only big on scrutiny only when its interests are threatened, I suspect.
Matt
Posted by Matthew Holford at November 9, 2009 10:08 AM
I hope they took blood samples immediately after arresting Nadal Malik Hasan. Of course, he could have been in withdrawal.
In some cases they do take blood tests of the perps. Here is an example from SSRI Stories of a 17 year old who killed his mother and two younger sisters while his father was at work.
http://www.ssristories.com/show.php?item=475
The fourth paragraph from the end reads: "Tests of Siesling's blood taken immediately after his arrest at the house that day show he hadn't been drinking alcohol, but he had a chemical called fluoxetine in his system. Fluoxetine is a major ingredient of the antidepressant Prozac".
http://www.mlive.com/news/grpress/index.ssf?/base/news-12/1073922625233040.xml
Admitted killer will blame split personality
Monday, January 12, 2004
By Doug Guthrie
The Grand Rapids Press
Jon Siesling has admitted to police that he killed his mother and two sisters, but court records indicate his trial will open this week with an explanation from his lawyer that the real killer was "Johnny," Siesling's alter ego.
Posted by Rosie at November 9, 2009 10:33 AM
For the most part, I liked Breggan's point of view. He's sort of forgetting, though, that a lot of reason drugs are so big right now is past failures of talk-only therapy, including fake recovered memories, fake multiple personality disorder, blaming mothers for schizophrenia, etc. Due to these past scandals, psychiatry turned toward drugs, probably because it makes psychiatry seem more medical and scientific. They forget, though that drugs aren't a cure all for everything, and that improper medication destroys lives.
I think the real issue with psychiatry is that it can't regulate or moderate itself. Bad talk therapists begat bad lobotomists begat bad talk therapists begat bad pill pushers, and so forth into infinity. The problem isn't the treatments as much as the fact that every treatment is overused and given to the wrong patients.
I totally agree with Breggan that listening to others' trauma is not a likely cause of shootings. Many people listen to horrible stories, without the benefit of being paid $300 an hour for it, and yet they don't kill anyone. What about social workers, rape crisis hotline volunteers, police, etc? What about the shooting victims and their family members, who are surely severely traumatized? Are they going to all go on murder sprees, too? I doubt it.
Posted by A at November 9, 2009 11:39 AM
"Terrorist" is surely the "scare you to death and wreck your peace of mind" trigger for the masses.
Accountability is apparently not going to be on the agenda in terms of finding out how the military dropped the ball on this one.
Sigh....everyone panic when you see someone with brown skin or heaven forbid an "Islamic" last name.
For giggles and if you're attentive ADD check the cultures and religions of the serial killers listed under the "America" category.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_country
It's wiki so wiki haters pick your own lists and sort through them.
There is far more to the Fort Hood story than meets the eye.
The posts now have the shooter linked to everyone but the Great Pumpkin and Easter Bunny(and of course-9/11)
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/report_cia_aware_ft_hood_shooter_LjsDA0q4t3i0Yfyi4svk9M
Posted by Lili at November 9, 2009 02:16 PM
A wrote:
"...I totally agree with Breggan that listening to others' trauma is not a likely cause of shootings. Many people listen to horrible stories, without the benefit of being paid $300 an hour for it, and yet they don't kill anyone..."
I disagree - I think it rather depends upon how detailed one is in one's analysis, and upon how skilled one is at anchoring one's own reality, before plumbing the (unknown), depth's of somebody else's.
It's not for nothing that shrinks deliberately break rapport with clients - it's to avoid getting dragged in. Have you ever read that psychopaths are charming, and that paedophiles are plausible? It's because their logic is as real (and therefore detailed), to them as yours is to you. Hasan believed his reality was Real, too - everybody does, and everybody can justify their behaviour, on some level, as a consequence.
I tell you what: try and solve a problem for somebody, sometime, when you have absolutely no motivation to do it. If you are able to find an incentive, it'll drive you nuts, because they'll withhold vital information, particularly about their own role in the situation they find themselves in. It took me a long time to work out that people only ever tell half a story, if that!
Matt
Posted by Matthew Holford at November 9, 2009 02:41 PM
I agree this whole story has the potential to get truly ugly and probably all the wrong things are going to be emphasized. I just heard Hasan regained consciousness -- oh my! Let's hope this means we will hear more of the story if only people are asking the right questions.
Posted by Sara at November 9, 2009 02:54 PM
If Hasan weren't a psychiatrist would there be significant doubt he were anything but yet another islamic radical? Is this situation any different than the other islamic soldier that threw grenades into the tent of his fellow American soldiers? Remember that guy?
Why does his being a psychiatrist somehow give this guy a pass from the most obvious, least complicated answer? I'll just have to wait until more information is made public before I have any reason to think otherwise.
Posted by Paul at November 9, 2009 06:26 PM
Paul, I agree.
Posted by Lisa at November 9, 2009 08:20 PM
I think Hasan became a "terrorist" after he started on the antidepressants. They can change a person's personality and cause paranoia.
John Russell who killed five of his fellow soldiers in Baghdad was on a med for depression. Almost all of these shooters were on them. Sure, they all had grudges but they only acted on the grudges because of the drugs. That's why they call the SSRIs, "The Shooting Drugs". There is even a book out about the SSRIs with that title.
Michael McDermott at Edgewater Technology computer firm had a grudge - they were going to garnish his wages, but this is what the expert witness had to say about his Prozac usage:
http://ssristories.com/show.php?item=383
Paragraphs 11 through 13 read: "Dr. Joseph said McDermott told him that he had increased his dosage of Prozac by Dec. 1, first from 70 milligrams per day to 140 milligrams, and then to 210 milligrams. Joseph said McDermott increased the dosage without his doctor's permission or advice.
Although Prozac is an antidepressant, potential side effects include restlessness, agitation, psychosis, rage, anger and violence, Joseph said.
"I would offer the opinion that it's very possible that Prozac is the final piece of the puzzle that explains the level of rage and anger that allowed the killings to occur," said Joseph, an attending psychiatrist at McLean Hospital and an associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School.
http://www.boston.com/news/daily/18/office_shootings.htm
Prosecutors try to shake psychiatrist's testimony about office gunman
By Denise Lavoie, Associated Press, 04/18/02
Michael McDermott
(Globe Staff / John Blanding)
TODAY'S GLOBE
CAMBRIDGE -- Prosecutors on Thursday tried to shake the testimony of a psychiatrist who said a man who killed seven co-workers was mentally ill and unable to understand right from wrong when he went on a shooting rampage.
Posted by Rosie at November 9, 2009 09:04 PM
"This was the worst terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11. It was committed by a Muslim fanatic, who shouted 'Allah is great' and gunned down 44 unarmed innocent soldiers and civilians.. . ."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573326,00.html
Posted by Blackeneth at November 9, 2009 10:57 PM
This is great!
Terrorism + Psychiatry + Mental Illness + Psych-drugs + Army + Islam!
I wonder who will write the novel or the screenplay.
Sad when all of these are at the same headlines.
Posted by Ana at November 10, 2009 09:30 AM