Replies

You don't understand how "anti-psychotics" work. Much if not most of their "therapeutic effect" lies in their ability to clobber the brain. Patients do not as much become rational, as zombies. In the old Soviet Union, publically advocating democracy and or free market reforms was not infrequently diagnosed as "schizophrenia." Haldol and the like were equally effective in putting and end to these "delusions." Critics of the regime describe how, just as their economic delusions disappeared, even their ability to remember their kids' names went too.

The truely scary thing is that if one's belief that one is innocent is dxed as "psychotic," it's quite likely that haldol and the like would be able to get innocent people railroaded.

You don't understand how "anti-psychotics" work. Much if not most of their "therapeutic effect" lies in their ability to clobber the brain. Patients do not as much become rational, as zombies.

Do you personaly know anyone who is schizophrenic? Did YOUR sister marry somebody who wouldn't take his anti-psychotics? Don't presume to letcure me on this. The ones I know are not mindless zombies, they are fully capable of holding a job, writing songs, debating and everything else as long as they take their meds. Without them they are abusive, irrational, unemployable and dangerous.

Yes, there are side effect to taking them, and it would be wrong to force them on someone who doesn't need them, but those who are phycotic are not rational without them and can be a danger to both themselves and to the public. They are not capable of rational thought or of telling reality apart from delision that come from the chaotic storm in their synapes that NEEDS to be dampened for them to function as an intelligent adult. To put them on trial without the proper treatment of their condition would be a travesty of justice. Of course there should be safeguards to ensure that it's only done when absolutly required, but that is another issue.