MindFreedom Ireland's submission on legal capacity   "We are all human beings responsible for our own lives and should have the right to decide what is best for ourselves. Some of us are not more human than others!!

It is hard to believe that they brain damage us and then they say we are less that human! It is because they believe we are subhuman that they have the right to lock us up and drug/electroshock us against our will for our own good.


Even though I am drug free for over ten years now and prescribed drugs tortured me for nearly 20 years yet I could still be forced treated with these same drugs if two psychiatrists thought this was necessary.  If I wrote an advanced directive this could also be over ruled by two psychiatrists.

Psychiatric diagnoses are not valid.  They are not based on objective scientific proof.  There is no blood test, scan or objective medical test to establish any psychiatric diagnoses yet psychiatrists have the power to deprive innocent people of their freedom and force treat them with powerful psychotropic drugs.


Why have we not got the right to decide how to live our own lives?   We should have the same rights as every other human being full stop.”  

Mary Maddock

 www.mindfreedomireland.com  www.mindfreedom.org





    Vejle, Denmark, 20th July 2004 The following was used as the reference for the Resolution of the workshop on the United Nations convention on human rights and disability, which was passed by the WNUSP general assembly in Vejle, Denmark, in July, 2004: ( MindFreedom Ireland was represented at this general assembly )   We work with WNUSP and ENUSP. World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry generally supports the Working Group text for articles 9 through 12, and in particular urges that the following language be retained. In Article 9: States parties shall … (b) accept that persons with disabilities have full legal capacity on an equal basis as others, including in financial matters; (c) ensure that where assistance is necessary to exercise that legal capacity: (i) the assistance is proportional to the degree of assistance required by the person concerned and tailored to their circumstances, and does not interfere with the legal capacity, rights and freedoms of the person; … (d) ensure that persons with disabilities who experience difficulty in asserting their rights, in understanding information, and in communicating, have access to assistance to understand information presented to them and to express their decisions, choices and preferences, as well as to enter into binding agreements or contracts, to sign documents, and act as witnesses; In Article 10: 1. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities: … b) are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that any deprivation of liberty … in no case shall be based on disability. In article 11: 1. States Parties shall take all effective legislative, administrative, judicial, educational or other measures to prevent persons with disabilities from being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 2. In particular, States Parties shall prohibit, and protect persons with disabilities from, medical or scientific experimentation without the free and informed consent of the person concerned, and shall protect persons with disabilities from forced interventions or forced institutionalisation aimed at correcting, improving, or alleviating any actual or perceived impairment. In article 12: 2. Such measures should prohibit, and protect persons with disabilities from, forced interventions or forced institutionalisation aimed at correcting, improving, or alleviating any actual or perceived impairment…. Draft Article 15 LIVING INDEPENDENTLY AND BEING INCLUDED IN THE COMMUNITY 1. States Parties to this Convention shall take effective and appropriate measures to enable persons with disabilities to live independently and be fully included in the community, including by ensuring that: (a) persons with disabilities have the equal opportunity to choose their place of residence and living arrangements; (b) persons with disabilities are not obliged to live in an institution or in a particular living arrangement; (c) that persons with disabilities have access to a range of in-home, residential and other community support services, including personal assistance, necessary to support living and inclusion in the community, and to prevent isolation or segregation from the community; (d) community services for the general population are available on an equal basis to persons with disabilities and are responsive to their needs; (e) persons with disabilities have access to information about available support services.   In the case of Article 12, it must be recognized that legal capacity on an equal basis with others means the same legal capacity as others – not an inferior or partial legal capacity or a presumption of legal capacity that can be rebutted by evidence of lack of sufficient decision-making ability. One person’s judgment that another lacks decision-making ability is tantamount to negating the human subjectivity of that person; such judgments if probed are based on an attribution of psychosocial, intellectual or other mental (such as dementia) disability. Support must be provided to the full extent of a person’s need, but must never become compulsion; support for the exercise of legal capacity can never subvert legal capacity itself, which is the right to make one’s own decisions. WNUSP and our related networks have developed robust alternative models for a social response to persons experiencing madness, mental health problems and trauma. These models emphasize the primacy of first-person experience, honoring thoughts and feelings, meeting practical needs, taking enough time for resolution or healing, and believing in every person’s ability to transform his/her life. Professional psychotherapy, nutrition and other holistic therapies, and psychiatric treatment with drugs, can be a valid part of an individual’s healing journey when used with free and informed consent. Free and informed consent practices should be geared to giving individuals the tools to make decisions they are comfortable with now and are not likely to regret later; their primary purpose is not to protect medical personnel from liability. The serious adverse effects associated with psychiatric drugs in particular, including increased potential for metabolic problems and early mortality, indicate that safer alternatives should be researched and developed, and that existing drugs should be carefully scrutinized for safety and efficacy with accountability to users. A consensus is developing in our community that electroshock, in its modified or unmodified forms, as well as any kind of psychosurgery, is too risky and should not be used at all. Spiritual and traditional healing/therapies may have great value for individuals and communities, affirming their connections to one another and the transformative potential of madness, so long as it is not forced or coerced. Forced or coerced participation in spiritual and traditional practices, like forced medical interventions, can amount to torture or ill-treatment. The success of alternative models indicates that resistance to the full implications of the CRPD is primarily the result of discrimination that persists despite the advances made in human rights law and in the development of practical knowledge. WNUSP calls on states to develop inclusive processes for implementation of the CRPD in the manner of the drafting and negotiations, with a central role for users and survivors of psychiatry and other persons with disabilities, coming together in good faith to transform society and its laws and practices for our full inclusion and equality. Users and survivors of psychiatry are the primary agents and primary beneficiaries of this transformation but it is one that ultimately involves and benefits everyone. Moosa Salie, Editor WNUSP newsletter Chair WNUSP Secretary PANUSP www.wnusp.com