Guardian: "'France is 50 years behind': the 'state scandal' of French autism treatment"

Andy

Retired committee member
Good old psychs, making the world worse for whoever they can get their hands on. :mad:

(OK, there must be some good ones, I'll admit that, I just struggle to believe that the good they achieve outweighs the bad of all the rest.)

Like thousands of French children whose parents believe they have autism, Rachel’s six-year-old son had been placed by the state in a psychiatric hospital day unit. The team there, of the school of post-Freudian psychoanalysis, did not give a clear-cut diagnosis.

Rachel, who lived in a small village outside the alpine city of Grenoble, said she would go elsewhere to assess all three of her children. But the hospital called social services, who threatened to take the children away from her.

A consultant psychiatrist said Rachel was fabricating her children’s symptoms for attention, that they were not autistic, and that she wanted them to have autism spectrum disorder in order to make herself look more interesting.

Rachel’s children were taken and placed in care homes.

The children were subsequently diagnosed with autism and other issues, proving Rachel right. But despite a high-profile court battle in which parents’ groups denounced the “prehistoric vision of autism in France”, Rachel, who herself has Asperger syndrome, has still not won back custody of her children two years later. They remain in care with limited visiting rights. Local authorities insist the decision was correct.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-the-state-scandal-of-french-autism-treatment

Edit: Spelling, cos spelling iz hard.
 
Last edited:
I have a theory on why they often get things so wrong:

A central belief in their system is that patients are inflicting the illness on themselves via thoughts and behaviour. They also believe that they know better than patients. After all, they learned all this in their training, and the fact that patients are sick proves they must be doing something wrong.

Doctors hand them "the patients without medical illness". According to the central belief, the road to getting better is to get the patients to stop harming themselves, and that means patients must think, feel, believe, and act in exactly the opposite manner than they are currently doing.

If the patients however are adopting thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and behaviour that serves to mitigate the effects of an unrecognized underlying illness, then this kind of intervention will likely destabilize the patient further, with a good chance of increased psychological distress.

Since none of this stuff is really based on science, in the ensuing conflict patients are at a serious disadvantage because they usually don't have the credentials and also an impairing illness.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom