Australia is a psychiatric secret police state and its people don't even know it

Jun 27, 2006 at 12:50 PM
Recent news in Australia?

Now Aussies can be forcibly examined by a psychiatrist in their own homes or anywhere at all (even their place of worship) without warning or legal representation. If found based on that one forced encounter with a psychiatrist to be insane, they are then forced into treatment - all on the basis of a secret complaint. That's right, the cowardly complainant is protected by law but not the individual in question.

What if the person is pissed off that he's being forced to answer personal questions with a complete stranger and the police present? Might that not make a person understandably angry? What if the psychiatrist feels this represents evidence of insanity?

Here's a piece of the article in the Courier-Mail (QLD Newspaper) about Psychiatry in Australia:
Under the Mental Health Act, JEOs can be obtained by anyone provided they are able to convince a JP or magistrate to authorise the document and claim to believe the subject has a mental illness requiring examination.

Doctors or authorised mental health practitioners are then empowered to enter any place to conduct the examination, accompanied by police if they deem it necessary.

What's even worse - and not mentioned in this article - is that the psychiatrist, being state funded, gets more money if he finds you insane than healthy. I wonder how many people are being abused by the system there?

Let's presume that the above is okay with you. You're thinking: " OK. So why is that bad? If a person is insane, shouldn't it be discovered and shouldn't that person get help?"

Maybe, but you're predicating your statement upon the belief that a. government belongs in the field of mental health for the public good, and b. psychiatry belongs in the field of mental health and actually provides real help.

Point A is too obvious to even debate. Look how well government has done at helping people be more moral and socially aware by subsidizing Social Programs and Moral Awareness programs (tongue firmly in cheek).

Here is the basic flaw in all government mandated mental health programs:

They are predicated upon the supposition that psychiatry is an effective science.

For some reason, point B above remains in debate. So let's take a look at this. Is psychiatry a science? Does it help people?

However not one single moment in history can be proven to be the moment that psychiatry moved from an alchemic voodoo of pain and unconsciousness over to being a fact-based science.

So much of psychiatry's definition of crazy is dependent upon the currently chic version of sane. What do people currently think is just eccentricity and what is actually offensive? (Recently, having a disorder became an eccentricity that was somewhat fashionable - look at all the likeable characters with disorders on TV shows if you don't believe me - and the DSM doubled in size.)

So much of the "science" behind psychiatry is really no more than:

taboo versus accepted
rebellion versus conformity

When did we start leaving no room in our society for those who are different than our accepted norms? When did we start applying labels to every one we thought was different than us - before truly confronting what they are.

Most of the time it comes down to simple concepts:

intelligence and artisticness versus stupidity and solidity
Moral convictions versus the lack of them or a clash of morals
Following goals versus failing to know your goals

Rarely does sanity really play a major part in the feel-good-drug pandemic.

Psychiatry has never shown it can erase evil. It has never done anything to help those who are too intelligent or artistic for their peers to appreciate, except muzzle them.


A great example of this is the idea that being more active than the others around you as a child is bad. Throughout history, this was a common trait in the childhood anecdotes of effective leaders and those who caused great change in societies. Today this gets you labeled.

And it is nothing more than a label. HYPER-active doesn't even factually exist. For instance, the amount of work it takes to start up a successful home based business automatically makes you hyper-active.

So, in such a commonly bandied term "hyperactive", even, we find the crux of the flaw in psychiatry. What is the degree of activity that is normal? Where is normal defined?

How can something be "hyper" anything when the standard against which "hyper" and "hypo" are compared has not been uniformally set. Is it comparison against some preconceived notion in the psychiatrist's mind? If so, who checks him for beign the standard against which to measure? No one.

Also, even behind this, why is being more active or less active necessarily a negative? If one were alone inn the world, it would not make a huge difference would it? It would not cause you personal harm.

Does being more active than most cause your family harm? Not if they don't mind.


An abnormal activity level is a societal, group-think set idea. As such, it will always be measured against the lowest common denominator. Against a basest consistence of what the current fashionable idea of "unflawed" or "sane" is.


Psychiatry is definitely not a legitimate science. Where are the laws that dictate sure action and certain result? Where are the observable constants? Where are the proven facts? Where are the consistent results in the same experiment? They don't exist.

Psychiatry cannot promise to cure you. Any medical science should have at least one ailment it can show that it can effect positive change upon. Psychiatry cannot show that it can universally cause improvement in all cases of any particular ailment (see the JAMA for more on that). That's right, I said ANY. Not one.

However, they do show that they can abuse, torture, deny rights, circumvent due process, and imprison for life without recourse for the majority in countries around the world. In America, I don't like what I see - but I see a very watered down version of what other countries around the world have as their psychiatric system. The more power you give these people, the more evil they become. What does that say of their motives?

Science is a word that has affected society greatly by retaining it's true definition. Science is observable law, effective constants, truths that cannot deviate or fail because they are true. Science is impermeable by belief, by opinion, by fashion or whether the truth is popular. It is Science. Science is THE MEANS by which society has furthered itself for millenia.

Psychiatry tries to destroy the very definition of science when it calls itself a science and demands scientific funding and scientific status.

If Science loses its meaning, society loses the ability to continue to further its goals.

And that would be insane to allow to happen.