O.D.D. - conclusion

Defiance of Authority

 

If you have read any of my O.D.D. [oppositional defiance disorder] write-ups, then you can see how the manipulation of mental illness can be used as an evidence-based system by corporate or government sources to provide a wide continuum of intentional or unintentional abuses that may lead to suicides if pushed to the limits of capabilities and intentions

This scope of a very difficult and extensive work by various professionals in the medical and psychiatric fields should not overshadow the legitimate use of genuine psychological services and psychotropic medication to treat real mental illness.

The fact is this type of psychiatry is very useful in legitimate diagnosis or given a real and effective treatment for those who suffer of such severe mental conditions. This is written clearly to show no intent of creating misunderstandings that assert the scope of mental illness treatment is either false or bogus.

It is and can be helpful in alleviating symptoms of seriously mentally ill persons and allow people afflicted by such an illness to lead fairly normal lives that would otherwise be out of reach for them. What is important to remember and realize is how such services and treatment can be abused and misused for the wrong reasons.

Dealing with the human mind is an intricate process that can be easily tampered with or without drugs. Brainwashing is a good example as cults are formed easily by those who have the influence over others. Using medication or false mental illness diagnoses is a dangerous revelation and development to accept and understand.

Changing personality traits to reduce authority defiance is not normal but yet, under most scientific terms, not abnormal as well. One such examples cited is the instance of cased where mass murderers were prescribed psychotropic drugs before they acted out and killed many innocents.

Doctors should be held accountable for such mistreatment however, under the current law, that is not happening. On the matter of changing the mindset of those diagnosed with O.D.D. and getting them to become less resistant to authority and follow at will, the use of such malpractice is a slippery slope with very little legal consequences.

This is because most enter into the treatment voluntarily unaware of the motive behind their treatment. Since there were assessed legitimately, their treatment appears to be legitimate as well.  Whether or not this is harmful to the Freedom of Speech has not been determined yet as there are no such cases filed in the federal appeal courts or the Supreme Court to make such a ruling.

Secondly, because these individuals, scientists, professors, or others who have demonstrated an anti-authoritarian behavior towards corporate or government business, labeling them to be mentally discredits much of their words, actions and criticism as they appear to be assessed legitimately for intentional purposes – to label them with psychiatric diagnosis to slander or erase their credibility and or reduce their rejection of all authorities they have to deal with in their scope of work.

Certainly, this subject or theory is a legitimate cause to investigate or explore the process used to address anti-authoritarians in our society and question whether they are healthy or being treated illegitimately by existing authorities e.g. corporate or government related who see fit to use such a process to undermine liberty and other freedoms.

Using mental illness and chemical restraints and controls for the sake of providing a complete need for national security or other tasks that are predictably illegal or immoral to the persons diagnosed and treated to reduce their objection to such effort is a basic violation of our human and civil rights even in the name of the advance of science or national security