>>939071713
>Has been compared to Drapetomania
Yes, by a random journal article written by someone who, in their own article, cited Wikipedia (A good sign that they shouldn't have written an article on the subject.) Generally that type of citation would be removed by Wikipedia editors. I may even do so myself.
>Anti-Psychiatrists
I'm surprised they aren't labeled pseudoscientists in this day; they USED TO be a group that critiqued the science of psychiatry, pointing out faults with it and generally criticizing it in practice, not concept.
Anti-psychs now are people who believe psychiatry will always cause more harm than it can possibly hope to help with. There's no differentiation between those who think psychiatry is ineffective, and could be better, and those who think psychiatry is an outright Mind-Control model. All of these positions (besides moderate skepticism) are just wrong. A claim like "it can't help, it never helps" isn't statistically insignificant, we can just verify that claim isn't true through reviewing the positive outcomes of people who've utilized psychiatry, and checking them against the total number of outcomes, good, bad, neuter.
Anti-Psych people also use, verbatim, not even a joke, the exact same arguments for every other attention and behavior disorder, CD, ADHD, ODD, OCD, BPD.
They are all "medicalization of rational resistance." According to the anti-psychs. Not much of an argument, since every one of those conditions features that symptom to varying degrees. I guess if you just over simplify everything, you could just say that and close the book on it.
The most reasonable critique I've heard of ODD comes from it's statistical over diagnosis in African Americans, when an equal diagnosis of ADHD would have more likely been given to a white patient; this obviously implies a negative social stigma with the disorder's NAME, rather than a poorly defined disorder. This happened to ADD(now ADHD)
