Judi Kessler wrote:

>       Second, electrotherapy is
> selectively utilized for the most intractable cases of unipolar and
> bipolar illness. The way in which it is administered today in no resembles
> the inhumane use of electrotherapy in the past. It is not pleasant, but it
> does provide relief for some extremely ill individuals.

Judi:

As I understand current medical managerialism, the emphasis is upon outcomes-based, 
best practice
[ie. neoliberal (cost-cutting) management practice, from the corporate sector, 
including
benchmarks].  With that thought in mind, I offer the following from Roy Porter's book 
A SOCIAL
HISTORY OF MADNESS, in relation to the "relief" coming from more humane applications 
of ECT:

After undergoing ECT, in 1944, Antoine Artaud "regarded himself as nothing but a 
wreck.  His memory
was gone, his feelings were numb.  He was dead."  [p. 144].  Porter characterizes the 
final phase of
Artaud's life as "the madness of rage... Now he felt more possessed than ever.  The 
ECT was merely
the most physical manifestation of his persecutor's oppression."  Today, I suspect 
that the military
metaphors that are part of medical ideology would demand even more severe 
interventions to Arnaud -
more "humane", apparently - but more intense dosages [same as upping meds, imho, if 20 
mg isn't doing
the trick, then lets try 40 mg. or 60 mg., and on and on...] and more frequent 
applications of ECT.

 Memory loss, in particular, [ie. of raising one's children, as I have heard some 
female patients
report] is not an uncommon outcome reported by those subjected to ECT, even in its 
more "humane"
guises.  The medical ideology, surrounding ECT, may have changed, but I doubt if the 
outcome has.

Regards,
Bob Bowd



Reply via email to