Robert Whitaker a medical journalist suggests that medication prescribed for most mental illnesses cause more harm than good in the long term. Whitaker suggests that individuals who make millions from these drugs have commercialized psychiatric practice. Additionally Whitaker suggests that illnesses such as depression were ideas sold to populations by pharmaceuticals. Instead, he proposes the use of love, food and understanding rather than drugs (Whitaker 2016 p. 2). According to Whitaker, the number of psychiatric patients has increased with the use of drugs as he refers to the 18 th century era of moral treatment where psychiatric patients were treated humanely. He indicates that Dr. William Awl reported impressive cure rates in 1843 when he reported one hundred percent cure rates among his patients with the use of moral treatment (Whitaker 2016 p. 2). In his book, Whitaker discusses the World Health Organization multi-center schizophrenia study, which reported that individuals from developing countries where medications were rarely used had better outcomes than patients in developed countries.
Robert Whitaker believes that studies on mental illnesses are boxed by the peer review process that reify existing believes on mental illnesses rather than criticize. Whitaker argues that authors of most medical journals on mental illnesses prescribe to the idea that medication is the only solution for psychiatric patients. These authors prescribe to the thought that mental illnesses are caused by chemical imbalances in the brain. Whitaker believes that the theory was devised shortly after the invention of psychoactive drugs in the 1950s (Whitaker 2016 p.2). The first was Thorazine launched as a major tranquilizer for psychotic patients with schizophrenia, Miltown to treat anxiety and Marsilid to treat depression. The three medication were launched to treat the three major forms of mental illness; its invention revolutionized psychiatry (Whitaker 2016 p. 2). In recent times, most authors of medical journals actually propose the use of certain medications for mental illnesses rather than let the doctors prescribe treatment on patient need basis. The peer review process eliminates the chances for scientists to publish journals that might be considered controversial. If a journal criticizes the use of medication in psychiatry then it is considered to be of poor quality.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Robert Whitaker’s view on the peer review process being restrictive is valid. The peer review process has always been criticized for lacking transparency. The peer review process is mostly done behind closed doors, the public has little insight into who does the review, and the issues discussed in the review process. Another issue with the peer review process of medical journals is bias. are the reviewers free of bias? Can they be influenced by outside sources? Whitaker’s observations can be considered valid considering the issue addressed on the peer review process. Most journals have been disqualified from publication due to corrupted peer review processes.
The study of pharmaceutical treatment of medical illnesses was necessitated by the poor outcomes of patients under medication. Most studies indicate that patients who stopped taking medication or those that never took any medication have more positive outcomes than individuals who took medication. A study by Martin Harrow on Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders conducted on 200 subjects over 15 years indicated that a group of patients that had stopped taking medications improved between the second and fifth year of follow up (Whitaker 2017 p. 163). The traditional belief is that these patients would deteriorate and relapse severally with dire consequences.
Harrow discovered the opposite since the patients’ psychotic and anxiety symptoms subsided more than 30 percent were on the road to recovery by the end of the fifth year. Whitaker highlights the World Health Organization statistics on the positive outcomes of patients that do not use psychiatric medications in developing countries as compared to those in developing countries (Whitaker, 2017 p. 163). The studies and observations highlighted above are some of the reasons that necessitated the studies on pharmaceutical treatments for mental illnesses. Although I believe that Whitaker presents some valid points I will proceed to review the argument of individuals advocating for the use of pharmaceuticals to treat mental illnesses then I will make an informed decision on the matter.
References
Whitaker, R. (2017). Psychiatry under the Influence: In the Sedated Society (pp. 163-188). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Whitaker, R. (2016). The case against psychiatric drugs: Cadernos Brasileiros de Saúde Mental/Brazilian Journal of Mental Health , 8 (17), 1-16.
