Talk:Anti-psychiatry

	This Psychology related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Relevant stuff

https://www.madinamerica.com/2021/01/madness-network-news/? 'The History of Madness Network News and the Early Anti-Psychiatry Movement'

Do we really need this article?

Looks like a woo/conspiracy to me. Also it doesn't even actually points out the problems about psychiatry, just follows the history of Anti-psychiatry. GeeJayK (talk) 00:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

We most certainly need this article, which is strongly related to Mental illness denial, but not interchangeable. Sure, the article can use expansion nor does it discuss any problems with psychiatry fairly. Doesn't mean we should delete it. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 00:22, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, maybe we do, but I don't like neither form nor the substance of this article. The author admittedly said that psychiatry is quackery, and that sounds ridiculous to me. GeeJayK (talk) 01:00, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

May I disagree. These guys are skeptics. We can accept them, right? Saying things as they are is why this wiki exists, but, sadly, there is nothing strait forward about this situation. Cheers. New world (talk) 02:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

On another note, this article should make a difference between psychoanalytic psychiatry and post-psychoanalytic psychiatry. The Freud wars part is generally missing on rationalwiki. New world (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Caution is needed for this article IMHO, the bulk of this was written by a user (Neiltyson1fan) banned on this Wiki and others for (among other reasons) whitewashing incel articles and exhibiting unbalanced bias on certain others (eg MMT and antidepressants). Neiltyson1fan also polluted the psychiatry article and at the moment I feel that there are some significant problems with his additions compared to that entry before he came along. ("People who sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into pseudoscience in an academy in their late teens tend to look down on this sort of thing, however." -- what the fuck is this shit?) Having said that, I don't see anything obviously wrong in this article at first glance... just be on the lookout for this sort of thing. BobJohnson (talk) 16:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with it either (after a quick gander). If the article describes woo, then isn't that by definition one of the objects of this wiki? Here's the thing. Psychiatry is a branch of medicine and not a pseudo science as long as therapeutic methods are determined by their effectiveness. To what effect? That of resolving an individuals medical problem. When it comes to psychology, everyone thinks they are on the right track. No. Most people are not, but they are not running people off the road. That's why there is psychiatry; for when a crash happens. UncleKrampus (talk) 20:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I disagree that this article really describes woo. It more goes over criticism of the institution of psychiatry. It does sort of throw in a bunch of different things in together and treats them all as implicitly equal in their merits. For instance, conflating incel problems with psychiatry as being the same as neurodivergent or patient's rights activism. The latter two are motivated by real grievances and have valid critiques of psychiatry as an institution. I wouldn't really consider social justice-based criticisms of a field which engenders an inherent power imbalance from the get-go (psychiatrist/patient, and a patient can be forcibly confined without their consent) to be "woo". It's not mental illness denial. It's social criticism. Carthage (talk) 02:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)