There’s been a lot of news lately involving child psychiatry. As noted by others, the Supreme Court may grant cert in the case of Pittman v. South Carolina which has the interesting twist that the defendant, age 12 at the time of the crime, was taking antidepressants when he killed his grandparents. Yet, as I mentioned the link between antidepressants and violence is tenuous at best.
On the heels of the Pittman case, comes this weeks Frontline program which explored the explosive growth of children being diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Unlike ADHD, bipolar disorder is generally treated with antipsychotic medications which can have profound and lasting side-effects. Yet, the desire to place the blame at the foot of the pharmaceutical industry is misplaced; the psychiatric community has a long tradition of capturing behaviors within their diagnostic net and transforming them into pathologies. All of the pharmaceuticals in the world do nothing to our children without a mental health culture which favors medicine as the first line of treatment for troubled children. And that mental health culture is not just a product of myopic physicians or Big Pharma, but very much one of our own creation.
5 Comments
The Pittman case is interesting not only b/c of the fact the 12 year old was being treated with psychotropic drugs, but also that he was prosecuted as an adult. A bad combination really.
Don’t forget too, that, do-gooder DCFS types will put pressure on families to medicate their children by threatening coercive measures.
Pittman could have taken a plea deal that would have gotten him out of prison at age 25. That fact has to be in the equation.
thanks for the link. if i may nitpick,antipsychotics were almost never used in treating bipolar disorder in any age group (except for some very short term use) until about 2000. until then it was mood stabilizer plus an anti-depressant for the most part.
Steve: You question the validity of child psychiatry developments.
What is your label for this person?
He believes 1) people can predict future accidents; 2) minds can be read; 3)a fictional character, and only a fictional character can set an example of conduct for all citizens; dude is an implausible weirdo; 4) the gut feelings of random strangers can serve as a lie detector. What about this person’s using a gun to enforce a doctrine that the New Testament must set the standards of the above fictional weirdo character? Not the Torah, not the Koran, not the Code of Hammurabi, not any other religious text, only the New Testament.
Do you believe this person is normal? Or is this psycho certifiable?
“until then it was mood stabilizer plus an anti-depressant for the most part.”
Yeah. THAT sure works. Medicine changes with the times dude. Antipsychotics are now considered to be mood stabilizers themselves. [says the bipolar on TWO mood stabilizers (anticonvulsants) AND an antipsychotic]