Trust is confidence in the honesty or integrity of someone or something. It involves a complex mixture of cognitive and emotional beliefs and expectations that create an attitude of optimism about the motives and competence of the person being trusted.
Trust requires the calculation that someone has the knowledge and expertise to do what they are being trusted to do, but it also necessitates believing that whatever they are being trusted to do is done in good faith with honesty, sincerity, and integrity.
Trust presupposes adherence to moral principles, codes of conduct, and ethical standards and requires an implicit conviction that the other person aspires to help and not to harm.
Political abuse of psychiatry is the “misuse of psychiatric diagnosis, detention and treatment for the purposes of obstructing the fundamental human rights of certain groups and individuals in a society.”
It is more often seen under totalitarian rule (the Soviet Union, China) where dissent was disapproved, often punished, and those perceived as threats to the existing political system could be effectively “neutralized with trumped up psychiatric illness. By this stigmatization reputations were ruined, power was diminished, and voices were hushed.
It involves the deliberate action of diagnosing someone with a mental condition that they do not have for political purposes as a means of repression or control.
It is important to recognize that the unique role of discrediting opinion and dehumanizing those with one whom disagrees is not limited to totalitarian regimes. The coercive use of psychiatry represents a violation of basic human rights in all cultures.
Whistleblowers and psychiatrists
“Whistleblowers are often referred to a psychiatrist by the employer. The aim then is to make a finding sufficient to discredit the whistleblower, as having a personality disorder, a pre-existing psychiatric illness, or a neurotic reaction. All too often, the psychiatrist selected by the employer will cooperate in this, relying perhaps on uncorroborated information/allegations supplied by the employer without the whistleblower’s knowledge or consent. If, as not uncommonly happens, the psychiatrist reports that there is no pre-existing problem, and the person’s complaints of malpractice within the organisation should be taken at face value and properly investigated, the employer will usually insist on referral to another psychiatrist; and if that one’s report is no more helpful, to another … until the desired report is achieved. One…
View original post 485 more words