I am waiting to hear from the GP who is prescribing Metformine for Elizabeth. He has had to contact the hospital for their records. . Metformine is prescribed for Type II Diabetes however the team say it is being given for weight loss. Drugs are recommended short term – but where is the evidence that given long term they are any good? As a mother I’ve seen such substantial decline in my daughter and wish this to be addressed. A GP should take great interest regarding the physical health of my daughter, whereas the psychiatrist tend to dish out drugs after drug in such a way that they do not take into consideration physical health. It is of no consolation that they claim to carry out tests on the physical well being – the fact is I have more than proven what they are doing is totally wrong. When I produced the private reports from Bio Lab I’d had done years ago these reports showed substantial deficiencies/decline yet were ignored by the team. I have since had more of these tests done for Dr Walsh when he comes over here. It is not a good situation that a GP has to revert to the hospital asking for files/records which they should have been given in the first place in my opinion. The last time I questioned prescriptions from GP v psychiatrist was when the local GP gave Lymececlyn for skin problems. The drugs had caused my daughter to have terrible skin irritation and led to her scratching and this in turn led to infection. This drug was supposed to relieve the symptoms of the other drugs being prescribed and I looked up this drug and was horrified – I questioned with the previous GP why they were still prescribing it after so long when it clearly said on the leaflet that it should only be used short term. The drug was then immediately stopped. I am now doing the same with the Metformine – if there is any problems with my daughter’s physical health then we as a family need to know because she may have to be put on a different diet – this could be life threatening if say she is diabetic. I am sure that no one – neither psychiatrist or GP really looks at adverse drug reactions, especially in instances where more than one drug is being prescribed. This is totally wrong and could be life threatening to the patient and new measures need to be put in place. The GP will not interfere with the treatment from a psychiatrist – why not if the drugs are harmful!( I do not think psychiatrists are that knowledgeable about the full workings of the psychiatric drugs and how they interact with other drugs. I do not think they have ever done a reduction properly as I know that this needs to be done very carefully and very slowly.). I have been amazed at some of the psychaitrists comments regarding these drugs and have questioned whether in fact they do have enough knowledge on the workings of these drugs, having read up so much myself and sought specialist advice from leading experts. As I said to Mr Burstow I doubted whether all of these psychiatrists really know the full workings of the drugs let alone the correct way to withdraw someone which leads to failure and do they monitor properly the taking of these drugs or withdrawals from them in the community – well I VERY MUCH DOUBT IT. I have seen nothing done properly as far as reductions are concerned re Elizabeth and this has led me to doubt the competence of some of these professionals. Someone like Dr Ann Blake Tracy would know exactly how to do things properly for instance and should be invited to the UK along with Dr Walsh and Dr Shaw and every expert in this country should be brought together to determine what should be done about the current crisis situation in the UK where wards are overflowing and patients returning time and time again. At the Bethlem Royal Hospital for instance the Psychiatrist there said I should sit back and relax and let the experts to their jobs – so the Professor and Pharmacist were the experts in terms of knowledge of prescribing and the psychiatrist just came with out with the reduction would be done over 2 weeks when it should have been over several years so this was doomed to failure. The Pharmacist could not stop smugly smiling throughout the meeting and this so called specialist hospital was meant to give “best treatment” ie drug free period as recommended by Professor Murray who even defended them by saying that I should give them a chance. The pharmacist stopped smiling when I questioned what was so amusing but I find this kind of arrogant behaviour as unacceptable by professionals who truly think they are above the law but they are certainly not above God and it is awful to experience this and be threatened but I am not the kind of person to be intimidated. It was at the Bethlem she was given contra indicated drugs of Metformine and Clozapine and my daughter was so ill she experienced strain to her heart and could barely walk. In the first instance my daughter gave authority for the family to be able to freely discuss the care with the professionals and be included and she signed an Advanced Declaration with the instructions of no more experimentation but the Advanced Declaration and consent to the team were both ignored and then on the drugs what they did was turn around and say she had changed her mind and did not wish for family to be included or have any real information. All you got was a weekly phone call from the lead nurse who talked about nothing really – the minute you asked a question – the question was unanswered They meddled with the drugs leading to adverse behaviour mixing one with another leading to Section 2 and then I was subject to bullying by legal representatives in order that I agreed to a Section 3 or else be replaced as Nearest Relative. Where are the regulations in place? – it is no wonder some psychiatrists and other MH professionals can sit there laughing/smugly smiling.
Who Really Cares?
The easiest option is to ignore whether a patient has a physical problem such as Diabetes which is CAUSED BY THE DRUGS and I would not be surprised if things are covered up should they find anything serious. Some psychiatrists receive funding from the pharmaceutical industry and they do not care about the wellbeing of patients – the patients are there to be used a human guinea pigs whilst they get the funding.
I have been critical about the Government’s spending of £25,000,000 on MH professionals working alongside police. I have commented that some patients could have a valid role. However some think it a good idea but I know for a fact that if a patient has psychosis they can snap out of it when the right approach is given and if for instance 6 police officers approach someone in terrible distress this is bound to cause more distress to the patient. The right approach is far too often not given and if someone is dealt with humanely then they will respond likewise. It is the same for MH professionals who descend upon a patient in a crowd just to give a drug injection and this goes on in the shocking acute wards where I have heard patients begging to be released to go to prison instead of. An acute ward has not worked for my daughter and whilst there may be some patients who do not mind being treated this way I as a mother am not happy at this treatment of my daughter. At least in prison you are told when you are being released. In the MH you have to fight for release under a system/law that can be easily usurped. I can quite understand a patient’s reluctance to go on these wards having visited so many times where drugs are given as a means of control and every time I visited I saw the same faces back on the ward. The drugs do not erase someone’s painful memories as in some cases they do not work at all yet no alternatives are given. The side effects of the drugs can be hallucinations and akathisia amongst other terrible things yet experts link this with the illness rather than with the drug. When a patient seems to be progressing OK temporarily the drugs are praised but when things do not go well the illness is blamed rather than the drugs. It is when someone stops taking the drugs that there are complications. The Psychiatrist said to Elizabeth and the family that she had a diagnosis of Schizophrenia and would have to take the drugs for the rest of her life. Totally untrue! He not only got the diagnosis wrong but what he said is wrong too – however a reduction needs to be done correctly and if not done correctly due to lack of knowledge of the drugs then this is bound to fail and it should be done in a safe environment. I was against the drugs back then but other members of the family felt here was a professional doctor who should be listened to – however it is only now that the rest of the family are questioning and are concerned of the decline in appearance and physical health in Elizabeth. She now needs 24 hour care.
There can be recovery if given the right treatment and someone who has withdrawn from the drugs can experience “never having felt better” – my daughter withdrew from a small dosage of Aripraprazol (her idea, not mine as she was suffering terrible side effect on this drug) but this was done wrongly and if you do a reduction too steeply then it will fail and can lead to psychosis which would also apply to any changes in drugs – also I knew nothing about the drugs at the time. If my daughter had been able to go into a facility back then and have the expert assistance needed, she could have got off the drugs much easier but now is a very different matter and I would not attempt to do this yet still the team use this as an excuse against me to try and get rid of me as Nearest Relative.
By the way the new diagnosis which is being kept from my daughter by the team is PTSD. The treatment should be INTENSIVE TRAUMA THERAPY. The drugs given are CONTRA INDICATED. I must speak to Sir Simon Wessely about this who wishes to improve the image of psychiatry. With his military background he would be well aware of the condition of PTSD and of the research by Professor David Healy. Well this condition does not just apply to military and in that case I as a mother want to make sure that my daughter has the correct treatment which is certainly not a lifetime of drugging. Article 33 of Good Practice says “you must be considerate and listen to the views of family members” – this is something he and other professionals can also note and especially the success of Finland (Tornio) where I would like to go with Elizabeth one day.
Tomorrow I will write more shocking revelations as there are just too much to put on one blog and also I have not finished featuring my guest blogger with his brilliant piece THE NEW PSYCHIATRY.
My Daughter who was once physically well and fit, is in bed at 7.00 pm, feels tired, dizzy and confused and needs 24 hr care. I am ashamed of the fact that the UK has such a cruel system in place.
In the words of some of my readers – here are some very true comments “we have never felt listened to”. “we were controlled and put on the drugs” when someone is vulnerable the patient can be easily manipulated. How about this “Incurable but treatable” – this is laughable because the treatment they dish out leads to physical health problems and that goes against the professionals role of “DO NOT HARM ” – I do understand that if anyone in the profession dares to speak out, the system is rife with bullying and I understand someone can be ridiculed, lose their jobs, be bullied and harassed however there was talk at the IOP last time I went on resilience – I think I come into that category. Having been a carer for everyone in my family and seeing certain family members go downhill with say cancer and Alzheimers, a child drugged, other people – well I am certainly resilient and what is more I do not care if I am ridiculed and I do not care if nasty comments are said because it would be cowardly not to come out and say this to my face. Also I wish to point out that if anyone tries to give a diagnosis to me I would never accept it having read so many books, watched dvds etc.