Thursday, March 24, 2016

Freedom From Religion: Campaign to Support CRPD

Campaign to Support CRPD Absolute Prohibition of Commitment and Forced Treatment

Freedom of Religion, Freedom from Religion: A Psychotherapy Survivor’s Account of Unravelling the Colossal Irony

By Eveline Zenith

Our freedom to believe and practice as we choose is correlated with the core values of liberty and autonomy. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects our rights by stating that everyone has freedom of conscience and religion; also, religious belief cannot be preferred to non-belief. In the United States, freedom of religion is constitutionally protected in the First Amendment, and is associated with the separation between church and state.

Freudian psychoanalysis is a religious ideology that has absolutely no relevance in my life. I can only say that now I have researched it in depth, and this has been no simple task. Finding information about this clandestine methodology required: hours of detective work; a small fortune of books; under-cover attendance at a psychoanalytic seminar; six months of email correspondence with a psychoanalyst; intensive abuse recovery; jumping through every possible hoop in the system… and it remains today irredeemable. I did all this in order to regain sanity after therapy; my mind became so scrambled I had to abruptly discharge myself from the transaction. I am staggeringly aware of how lucky I am.

I had a nervous breakdown and began constantly re-living the bizarre statements my analyst had said to me. They were all vague and stated in a slow hypnotic tone, by a man who had been presenting as a “blank slate”. I had absolutely no familiarity or understanding of him: his intentions, beliefs, or personality. With sheer terror I would wake at 3am… trembling, eyes watering, remembering his intense staring, cutting words, sadistic glee, and condescending manner. There were other times when I felt bonded with him, that he cared, that he was a spiritual guide. The cognitive dissonance alone was torture enough to drive me insane!

Once I went “no contact” all my illusions disintegrated; I became appallingly aware of the prospect that he had deliberately abused me. He has the power, the education, and the techniques at his disposal to really screw me just for kicks. The research I have done on emotional abuse is a succinct match to the so-called techniques; I was vulnerable and had no idea what I was consenting to. He would simply shift the goalposts whenever I grew wise; he’d divert to blaming my hyper-vigilance and trust issues.

I never imagined I would have to defend my human dignity to an institution that is supposed to protect me, or that they would dismiss my testimony and actually try to silence me. The greatest, deepest betrayal was that it was an endeavour to heal from childhood abuse. That therapist held the keys to my most defenseless wounds and senselessly battered them. There is still no accountability on behalf of the profession: either this is considered permissible, or this practitioner needs to be corrected.

I have learned that Freudian psychoanalysis - perhaps psychotherapy on the whole - holds the absolute belief that the pathological relationship will inevitably re-enact. What this means is that if you were abused before, you will re-experience it in therapy and be re-traumatized. I have not yet found anyone in the field who will explain in plain language how this works; it makes no rational sense. This is an accessibility issue. Not only is it illogical, it is downright heinous without mandatory informed consent. Currently, the authorities assume on good faith that the practitioner will inform the client. If you have any knowledge of the world of predators, abuse, and exploitation, you will know this is a loophole for corruption. Also, if you don’t understand this is the process, you will only experience your therapist as your abuser and hopefully get out of it like I did!

There is no therapeutic value in having your spiritual guide manifest as your worst nightmare unless there is a therapeutic alliance; this can only be forged through informed consent every step of the way. Sex, boxing, and psychotherapy are similar: if one person isn’t participating it’s a crime. Psychoanalysis believes practitioners can subject us to treatment because they feel we need it; they have a plan for us, but they don’t reveal it. There are plenty of ethics seminars where theories are discussed about what’s good or bad for clients, but no actual observance of human rights is mandated. The entire “treatment” goes on in complete privacy, with biased accounts of clients’ “transferences” scratched on notepads for billing purposes. I never consented to any transference; I assumed everything was in the here and now. All of this religious interpretation was done behind my back so there was no way I could refute it, question it, challenge it, or even benefit from it. I have searched far and wide in a vast wilderness of possibilities, finally concluding that my practitioner is delusional, sadistic-aggressive, lacks empathy, and has no substantive reasoning for any of it besides money and control. This conclusion is the reason I am alive and well today.

The imperative reason I advocate for the absolute prohibition of coercive treatments is because this harm is done to the previously harmed, vulnerable, and voiceless members of our society. These are people who have had cruel, devastating, and heinous things done to us; large parts of our bodies and souls have been murdered. Even with all the agency I possess, I can’t get through to anyone on the other side of the door. The lack of education and total absence of conversation about abuse in the mental health profession is criminal negligence, considering that is the number one reason people use these services. Although the Code of Ethics for Psychiatry explicitly states informed consent, I am told by the authorities I consented simply by being there.

In terms of CRPD principles, although many sections address aspects of this problem I focus on sections 14 through 16:

Article 14: Liberty and security of the person
1. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others:
(a) Enjoy the right to liberty and security of person;
(b) Are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that any deprivation of liberty is in conformity with the law, and that the existence of a disability shall in no case justify a deprivation of liberty.
2. States Parties shall ensure that if persons with disabilities are deprived of their liberty through any process, they are, on an equal basis with others, entitled to guarantees in accordance with international human rights law and shall be treated in compliance with the objectives and principles of this Convention, including by provision of reasonable accommodation.
Article 15: Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
1. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his or her free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.
2. States Parties shall take all effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, from being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 16: Freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse
1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social, educational and other measures to protect persons with disabilities, both within and outside the home, from all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse, including their gender-based aspects.
2. States Parties shall also take all appropriate measures to prevent all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse by ensuring, inter alia, appropriate forms of gender- and age-sensitive assistance and support for persons with disabilities and their families and caregivers, including through the provision of information and education on how to avoid, recognize and report instances of exploitation, violence and abuse. States Parties shall ensure that protection services are age-, gender- and disability-sensitive.
3. In order to prevent the occurrence of all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse, States Parties shall ensure that all facilities and programmes designed to serve persons with disabilities are effectively monitored by independent authorities.
4. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to promote the physical, cognitive and psychological recovery, rehabilitation and social reintegration of persons with disabilities who become victims of any form of exploitation, violence or abuse, including through the provision of protection services. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment that fosters the health, welfare, self-respect, dignity and autonomy of the person and takes into account gender- and age-specific needs.
5. States Parties shall put in place effective legislation and policies, including women- and child-focused legislation and policies, to ensure that instances of exploitation, violence and abuse against persons with disabilities are identified, investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted.

© 2016 Eveline Zenith

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Neutrality Is Gaslighting

I identified that the neutral position that is professionally taught and ethically enforced for mental health professions, is gaslighting. The notions of transference and projection may have some validity, but without clear, honest communication in any relationship (including the therapeutic one) become moot, because each person involved is transferring and projecting (as it were). I feel that neutrality is unethical and abusive.

There is no way a person comes to understand the nature of the pathological abuse trauma they have endured by re-enactment in therapy. This is an insidious fallacy. This teaches clients it is their fault they attracted or created pathological emotional abuse in another human being. Real education about pathological abuse describes in explicit detail the sadism of the abuser, and the brainwashing it does to the victim. A therapist who assumes to be a "blank slate" that magically manifests in psychopathology, then tells the client it's all a projection (or elicited via the counter-transference) tries to say that he or she is not responsible for their actions... that the client is merely dreaming, and experiencing some kind of flashback. This is ultimately gaslighting, which is a severe form of invalidating psychological abuse.

In order for this therapeutic technique to have any validity whatsoever, the therapist must at least be forthcoming about this theory; to do so would make them accountable and therefore liable. Basically they would admit: I treated you badly because you irritated me. You didn't cooperate with my agenda - by being in denial about your pathology as I see it - so I needed to control you by deflecting your questions, destabilizing you with riddles (meaningless, indirect comments), depriving you of empathetic connection, and minimizing your feelings and concerns. Basically, I become your abuser. My therapeutic technique is set up so you believe you encounter your abuser by projecting it onto a "blank slate". But I can never be held accountable for the abuse you experience, even though that is my religion and the entire reason I'm getting paid.

You're not allowed to know this about your contract with your mental health provider, because that again would make them an equal party in the so-called relationship. Also, you would realize it's dangerously illogical and therefore prevent any successful gaslighting. They would not be able to abuse you and pretend it's your fault. Besides, the only way to get free of ALL abuse in one's life is to realize it's not your fault. Perpetuating a sick "dynamic" (also a fallacy) is not therapeutic; it is deadly. There is no reasoning with an abuser, and you can't prevent a therapist from abusing you. The only way to supposedly not attract abuse in this situation is to not go into therapy... which you can't choose because you are denied informed consent. 

A client can't discover their inner wounds caused by a pathological abuser by having another experience of being bludgeoned at those wounds. This simply compounds the trauma, adding to it another layer of betrayal trauma and a stark reminder that no one can be trusted. The worst of this all is the lie: They get paid to do this to us, but the profession has no answer for themselves as to how this double bind gets resolved. I believe this is because if you are intelligent enough to think this through, you will realize it's a huge scam. That is why all the communication involved in this profession is doublespeak and propaganda: it plays on our need for healing, pretends to provide a service, and puts clients in a position to become traumatically bonded through one-sided intimacy. As long as your therapist is denying you bodily autonomy to critically question what you're being subjected to and where you stand with them, they are abusing you with the power of a fiduciary relationship. They believe they are entitled to withhold information about your treatment, instead leading you to the "insight" they manufacture (while claiming they are neutral), and this is brainwashing. The only way to be a fully autonomous mature adult is to call this bullshit and get out of it as soon as possible.

I think if you can find someone who will say: "I don't like you sleeping with that guy; I think you probably have an ingrown habit of choosing seedy partners," or "I think you're getting testy with me right now because something I said (or how I said it) is activating an old wound." 
"I'm not perfect, and although I do care about you very much, I get angry with you because I think you sometimes talk nonsense, are defensive, and behave passive-aggressively. I would like to communicate openly with you as much as possible and encourage you to do the same." 
"I wonder why you seem to have the need to act as though you don't need help, and try to convince me that you are tough as nails; maybe you don't feel safe talking to me because I don't know where your boundaries are." Maybe you can heal with someone who respects your boundaries and is clear about theirs.

Wouldn't it be something if you found one who would say: "I'm an old-school Freudian, and I believe the unconscious is a delusion one must overcome. I believe women should defer to men, and that they are all inherently masochistic and incomplete because they lack the almighty male organ. If you've been attacked or oppressed, it's your fault; you focus on outward conditions to avoid looking at your overly tolerant attitude, and perpetuate your victimhood by being oppressed. Magical thinking (intuition) is hysteria and pathology except where it pertains to my dogma, when I say so, because I wield the analytic superiority to judge what's real and what isn't. I don't need to question myself or my religion, because it is "the truth" and I therefore don't succumb to projection; you are the one who is delusional and unable to accurately perceive the world around you. If you fail at therapy, it's because you weren't ready to understand or heal; you were in denial about your pathology and took it out on me. But you should know... there are hundreds of other schools of thought and methods of therapy... but nevermind. This is the one true way, because it's my way. I have a right to subject you to it - including post-hypnotic suggestion - because I decided you needed it. It is my duty to make you see the world as I do, because that will be your salvation."