Behaviorism and Mental Health

Alternative perspective on psychiatry's so-called mental disorders | PHILIP HICKEY, PH.D.

  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Tell Your Story
  • Submit Your Story
  • Moderation Policy

The Bitterest Pills, by Joanna Moncrieff: Another Book Worth Reading

November 19, 2013 By Phil Hickey |

Dr. Joanna Moncrieff is a UK psychiatrist and a founding member of the Critical Psychiatry Network.  In 2009 she wrote The Myth of the Chemical Cure: A Critique of Psychiatric Drug Treatment.

The Bitterest Pills-joanna-moncrieff

Her latest book, The Bitterest Pills, was published earlier this year, and is about neuroleptic drugs (the so-called anti-psychotics).  You can get an idea of the tenor and scope of the work from the table of contents:

  1. Curse or Cure:  What Are Antipsychotics?
  2. Chlorpromazine:  The First Wonder Drug
  3. Magic Bullets:  The Development of Ideas on Drug Action
  4. Building a House of Cards:  The Dopamine Theory of Schizophrenia and Drug Action
  5. The Phoenix Rises:  From Tardive Dyskinesia to the Introduction of ‘Atypicals’
  6. Looking Where the Light Is:  Randomised Controlled Trials of Antipsychotics
  7. The Patient’s Dilemma:  Other Evidence on the Effects of Antipsychotics
  8. Chemical Cosh:  Antipsychotics and Chemical Restraint
  9. Old and New Drug-induced Problems
  10. The First Tentacles:  The ‘Early Intervention in Psychosis’ Movement
  11. The Antipsychotic Epidemic:  Prescribing in the Twenty-first Century
  12. All is not as it Seems

There are 39 pages of references at the back.

Here are some quotes:

 “It is necessary to point out, however, that despite the claims of much official information, current evidence does not allow us to conclude that schizophrenia is a brain disease in the simple sense in which we usually understand the term ‘disease’.  No biological factor, whether it be a genetic, biochemical or anatomical deviation, has been found that is consistently and specifically related to schizophrenia, despite more than half a century of recognizably modern research efforts.  Moreover, what was thought to be one of the most reliable indications that schizophrenia arises from a defective brain, namely the finding that people with the diagnosis have smaller brains and larger brain cavities than people without, turns out, as we shall see in Chapter 10, to be at least partially a consequence of antipsychotic drug treatment.” (p 16)

“Descriptions of the neurological and physiological effects induced by antipsychotics and other psychiatric drugs such as antidepressants, disappeared from the literature …Henceforth they were referred to, if at all, only as ‘side effects’, which were regarded as an incidental nuisance, rather than an intrinsic part of the a drug’s action.” (p 51)

“In view of the considerable evidence that the only dopamine abnormalities in people with schizophrenia are caused by antipsychotic treatment, it is hard to think what evidence could convince the promoters of the dopamine theory of schizophrenia or psychosis that the theory is mistaken.” (p 74)

“Prominent psychiatrists, including David Cunningham Owens (whose research had been used to argue that tardive dyskinesia was part of schizophrenia, but who, in later years, has become more critical of drug treatments), have started to suggest that the story of atypical antipsychotics as a group of  compounds with unique therapeutic properties is a myth, largely constructed by the pharmaceutical industry, and swallowed hook, line and sinker by the psychiatric profession…” (p 90)

“People commenting on olanzapine described an altered state consisting of profound sedation accompanied by emotional flattening and indifference, in association with a markedly increased appetite for food.” (p 121)

“The use of drugs to control behaviour started to be discussed more frequently in psychiatric journals from the 1970s onwards, but articles adopted various strategies in order to emphasis the therapeutic aspects of emergency drug treatment and play down its coercive function.” (p 139)

“It seems extraordinary in the twenty-first century that people should be forced to take drugs which profoundly alter their bodily functions, their emotional life, their behaviours and personality, and that the institutions that instigate and enforce this ‘treatment’ have no interest in the range of effects the drugs produce and how they make people feel.” (p 151)

“An almost religious commitment to the disease-centred view of psychiatric drug action has created a blind spot to the serious physical consequences that long-term ingestion of toxic substances is likely to produce, and drug companies are still able to present antipsychotic drugs as innocuous and restorative agents that work by balancing the brain’s ‘natural chemicals’… (p 213)

This excellent book is for anyone who has a serious interest in the topic:  survivors, caregivers, writers, students, etc… It’s a book to read and to keep close for reference and research.

Disclosure:  I have no financial interest in this work or in any book that I promote on this website.

Filed Under: A Behavioral Approach to Mental Disorders Tagged With: books worth reading

About Phil Hickey

I am a licensed psychologist, presently retired. I have worked in clinical and managerial positions in the mental health, corrections, and addictions fields in the United States and England. My wife Nancy and I have been married since 1970 and have four grown children.

 

Recent Articles

  • AND FINALLY
  • RESPONDING TO DR. MOREHEAD’S SECOND ATTACK ON ANTI-PSYCHIATRY
  • DR. PIES STILL TRYING TO EXCULPATE PSYCHIATRY FOR THE CHEMICAL IMBALANCE THEORY OF DEPRESSION
  • RESPONDING TO DANIEL MOREHEAD, MD,  PSYCHIATRY’S LATEST CHAMPION
  • PROBLEMS AT A COLORADO MENTAL HEALTH CENTER
  • THE ENIGMA-MDD PROJECT: SEARCHING FOR THE NEUROPATHOLOGY OF “MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER”
  • ILLNESSES OR LOOSE COLLECTIONS OF VAGUELY DESCRIBED PROBLEMS?
  • WHY IS PSYCHIATRY SO DEFENSIVE ABOUT CRITICISM OF PSYCHIATRY? Part 2
  • WHY IS PSYCHIATRY SO DEFENSIVE ABOUT CRITICISM OF PSYCHIATRY? Part 1
  • ADDRESSING THE SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF MENTAL HEALTH – OR PERHAPS NOT

The phrase "mental health" as used in the name of this website is simply a term of convenience. It specifically does not imply that the human problems embraced by this term are illnesses, or that their absence constitutes health. Indeed, the fundamental tenet of this site is that there are no mental illnesses, and that conceptualizing human problems in this way is spurious, destructive, disempowering, and stigmatizing.

Disclaimer

The purpose of this website is to provide a forum where current practices and ideas in the mental health field can be critically examined and discussed. It is not possible in this kind of context to provide psychological help or advice to individuals who may read this site, and nothing written here should be construed in this manner. Readers seeking psychological help should consult a qualified practitioner in their own local area. They should explain their concerns to this person and develop a trusting working relationship. It is only in a one-to-one relationship of this kind that specific advice should be given or taken.

Privacy Policy

Popular Topics…

ADHD akathisia alcohol alcohol/drugs antidepressants antipsychotics anxiety benzodiazepines bipolar books worth reading case study chemical imbalance theory conflict of interest dealing with problems of daily living dementia dependence depression drug DSM DSM-5 ECT expansion of psychiatric turf IF THEY'RE NOT ILLNESSES WHAT ARE THEY? involuntary commitment Mad in America major tranquilizers myth of chemical imbalance myth of mental illness neuroleptics over-medicalization of everyday life parenting pharmaceutical industry placebo posttraumatic stress disorder Psychiatric "spin" research corruption schizophrenia shock "treatment" side effects somatic symptom disorder SSRI's suicide survivors of psychiatry tardive dyskinesia violence

© 2009–2023