The Myth of the Chemical Cure and the Serotonin/Dopamine Imbalance.


As the Mental Taskforce reported earlier this year;

There has been a transformation in mental health over the last 50 years. Advances in care, the development of anti-psychotic and mood stabilising drugs’


There has been no ‘transformation.’.

How could there have been, in light of ours, and America’s epidemic ?

The East and Third world, do not have widespread mental illness and their patients recover.

50 years ago ,the few ‘mad’ were diagnosed psychotic  and institutionalised , given ECT ,a lobotomy, and/or anti psychotic drugs ,which served as major tranquilisers and chemical lobotomy.

Now, by contrast, 1 in 15 USA citizens at 18, are diagnosed with one of  now 375, mainly ‘conduct’ disorders, created largely by the pharmaceutical industry.

1 in 10 children, and 1 in 3 teens are now according to our government ‘mentally disordered’.

And mere developmental disorders, like intellectual impairment, and autism, are categorised, as mental disorders and medicated.

All this has made the pharmaceutical industry, the UK’s third largest industry, eating into a quarter of our NHS budget.

But these drugs and diagnoses, have not improved the outcomes for mental health suffers.

Instead, they are sought out, institutionalised, and medicated for life under the MHA and MCA by section, or court order for life.

And 3 a day die needlessly, without independent investigation ,if any.

In 1955 in the USA , there were 267,000 schizophrenics, today there are 2.4 million suffering a psychotic disorder.

And the Mental Taskforce Report this year, was in sharp contrast, to ten years ago, when the then Health Minister Lord Warner warned;

“…I have some concerns that sometimes we do, as a society, wish to put labels on things which are just part and parcel of the human condition”.

Advances in care, the development of anti-psychotic and mood stabilising drugs’

On the face of it, the government’s intention, to give mental health parity with physical health, appears to want to improve the physical health of the mentally disabled.

Today their physical problems are not being picked up, as medical examinations and tests, are costly and difficult, requiring ketamine, deprivation of liberty restraint, extra hospital facilities and staff, and not profitable.

But the government, does not intend to change this appalling neglect, as there is no profit in it.

This sound bite parity, instead, eludes to treating our brains, as if they were just another part of our body.

With 100 billion neurons, 150 trillion synapses and neurotransmitter pathways, the brain is almost infinitely complex.

And modern neuroscience admits, poorly understood

Yet, our government intends to medicalise our minds, emotions, our very humanity, as if it were any other part of our body.

We know insulin cures diabetes, antibiotics infection, but mental ‘disorders’ are largely man made, and unless due to some physical assault/decease, have no pathology, or even detection, and therefore, cannot be, if at all, medicated.

But amazingly, the  psychiatric drugs used to cure, a deemed malfunctioning, infinitely complex brain, appear to be based on an imbalance of just two chemicals- dopamine and serotonin .

And,  more astonishing, even if there were proof, that chemical imbalances, do cause mental ‘diseases’, no one knows, how much of any particular chemical, a  brain needs to function normally, so adjustments are blind.

This imbalance, was first propondered by Schildkraut and Jacques Van Rossum, in respect to sufferers of depression in 1965..

Yet even they stated in their paper;
“[this hypothesis is] at best a reductionistic oversimplification of a very complex biological state.’

Yet, it went on to form the basis of psychiatry, and the treatment of all mental disorders.

Depression was caused by seronergic neurons releasing too little serotonin into the synaptic gap making the serotonegic pathways underactive.

Antidepressants, brought these serotonin levels up to normal, curing the depression.

Schizophrenia was caused by overactive dopaminergic pathways.

Anti psychotics put a brake on these, appearing to alleviate hallucinations and voices.

But in 1969, Yale researcher Malcom Bowers, was the first person to report on whether depressed patients, actually did have low levels of serotonin metabolites (5-HIAA) in their cerebrospinal fluid.

In a study of eight people, his results showed that 5-HIAA levels were slightly lower, but not “significantly” so.

In 1974, he tried again – this time finding that depressed patients who had not been exposed to antidepressants had perfectly normal 5-HIAA levels.

Suggesting that anti depressants per se, actually overtime might  cause a drop in levels.

In 1974, Joseph Mendels and Alan Frazer revisited the evidence, that  led Schildkraut to suggest his theory, and found, that the drug he had tested didn’t reliably reduce depression.

In fact, it actually lifted the spirits of some people.

And, when researchers, gave patients other serotonin-depleting drugs, they didn’t cause depression.

Then in 1975, Marie Asberg, reported that 20 of the 68 depressed patients they tested, suffered from low levels of 5-HIAA.

This, at last,  appeared to be the confirmation of Schildkraut’s theory,  the pharmaceutical industry was desperate for.

However, researchers noticed a flaw, as Asberg had failed to note,  that even though 29% of her depressed patients, had low 5-HIAA levels, 25% of her normal group did too.

There was a bell curve for each group (normal and depressed), and both showed about the same variability.

And,  worse still 24% of the depressed group, actually had high levels of serotonin.

Numerous follow-up studies continued to disprove the theory.

Causing the Essential Psychopharmacology textbook to state;

“There is no clear and convincing evidence that deficiency accounts for depression; that is, there is no ‘real’ monoamine deficit”.

But Ely Lille, was determined to make billions out of the chemical imbalance myth, and marketed it voraciously, and in 1988, Prozac//fluoxetine hit the shelves.

A pharmaceutical manager at Ely Lille, Dr John Virapen, has written a book exposing this corruption.
‘ Side effect death: corruption in the pharmaceutical industry”

And despite all this, antidepressant use has doubled in the last decade
Last year the NHS spent 285 millions on 61 million prescriptions in the UK.

So this must warrant the most lucrative quackery ever marketed.

And graphically illustrates, the awesome power, PR, and state and professional influence  of the pharmaceutical industry.

Ronald Pies, Editor in Chief Emeritus of Psychiatric Times – one of the most widely read psychiatric publications. Summed it up;

‘I am not one who easily loses his temper, but I confess to experiencing markedly increased limbic activity whenever I hear someone proclaim, “Psychiatrists think all mental disorders are due to a chemical imbalance!”

In the past 30 years, I don’t believe I have ever heard a knowledgeable, well-trained psychiatrist make such a preposterous claim, except perhaps to mock it.

On the other hand, the “chemical imbalance” trope has been tossed around a great deal by opponents of psychiatry, who mendaciously attribute the phrase to psychiatrists themselves. And, yes — the “chemical imbalance” image has been vigorously promoted by some pharmaceutical companies, often to the detriment of our patients’ understanding. The legend of the “chemical imbalance” should be consigned to the dust-bin of ill-informed and malicious caricatures’

This dangerous myth, has now made trillions for the pharmaceutical industry and largely justifies the psychiatric profession.

For the latest experts dispelling the myth read here.

But in the Western world, it is still accepted and promoted, that such imbalances exist and cause a pathology in the brain, that can be fixed..

If depression, and schizophrenia cannot be detected, as a pathology, how can ADHD, ASD, Bipolar, Anxiety or PTSD ?






Mental Services 9 billion a year bonanza. ‘Those whom government wish to profit from, they first make mad’



It is strange indeed, that in our times of unprecedented personal and national debt, austerity and NHS crisis our government’s main priority was our mental health.

So much so, it is now a ‘cross-party, cross-society consensus’.

But it appears this continued concern for our ‘wellbeing’ and happiness may be anything but, altruistic.

Earlier this year The Mental Health Taskforce made recommendations;

Public attitudes towards mental health are improving, and there is a growing commitment among communities, workplaces, schools and within government to change the way we think about it. There is now a cross-party, cross-society consensus on what needs to change and a real desire to shift towards prevention and transform NHS care’.

Apparently, a quarter of us, suffer from a mental disorder in silence.

And, even more are ‘at risk’, if the state does not intervene.

Local communities will be supported to develop effective Mental Health Prevention plans for those at risk’

‘Those at risk’ are the old, poor, pregnant, minority groups and children, 1 in 10 of whom, suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder. How reliable this information is, or how it was ascertained, is unclear.

Teenagers, particularly girls, are suffering, and at risk.

All national media covers this new mental health epidemic.

Scientists Link Selfies To Narcissism, Addiction & Mental Illness

Natasha Bevan, co founder of Body Gossip, set up in 2014, provides esteem and mental health courses in schools.

She was appointed Mental Health Campion,  and produced a report that 1 in 3 school teens have mental health disorders.

She purports to act for them, and their families, and wants similar courses to those she provides in all schools.

Who approves such courses and on what basis ?

Body Gossip, is a registered charity, but Charity Commission does not reveal details of their accounts.

The two trustees appear to be a research academic sociologist and a psychologist

Ms Bevan was sacked as Campion/Tsar,  just before she released her report,  appeared on Channel 4 news this week, and was featured  in  national press, complaining governmente not taking this issue seriously.

All good PR .

So social need, being a teenager, and even childhood, are made potential signs of  a mental disorder

Even the homeless are hounded, on the national news, not to be housed, there is no profit in that, but to be assessed for mental ‘disorders’.

Since release of The Taskforce Report, there has been a veritable explosion of mental health issues  in all media, mental disorders are everywhere- students over top up fees, academics,  Brexit  anxiety.

A terrifying, judgmental denormalisation of natural concerns, research dubious totalitarian push,  to create a sinister, insidious, mental epidemic, resulting in a dangerous, unprecedented, unchecked revolution, in health and social care, and the state’s control of the individual’s behaviour, medication, social interactions, and health for profit.

A market is being created. And is more likely, to be based on self interest, rather than concern and paternalism, and who will protect the  vulnerable ?

Citizens, teenagers and children can be mentally labelled, for often normal emotions or reactions to our dire, isolating, ruthless society, and poor education system.

And, the state, and its many agents, and even on message citizens, are  tasked to survey and judge, our mental health and decide what ‘normal’ behaviour is.

To enable this, we are told the stigma of mental health has been removed, allowing us like Alistair Campbell, Stephen Fry, Ruby Wax and soap characters, to discuss our ‘mental’ problems.

And provide a privatised NHS, with potentially 16 million customers, not including those ‘at risk’, who may never suffer this subjective mental issue.

So what might be the real reason for our government and now a cross party, cross society concern ?

Already 22.8% of the NHS spend is on mental services, compared to 15.9% for cancer and 16.2% for cardiovascular disease.

NHS England spent £8.5bn in 2013-14 and an estimated £8.62bn in 2014-15.

And the government is investing a further £1bn a year to deliver the mental health taskforce’s recommendations.

So private/charitable mental services, can get their hands on over a quarter of the total NHS budget.

It will make them happy, but what about us What do we get for this 9 billion a year spend ?

The recommendations do nothing to change our 30 year +, deplorable service, except to provide more counsellors, liason officers and suicide prevention teams to harvest customers.

And alarmingly, but is not surprising, in view of the governments connections to the pharmaceutical industry

This expensive transformation relies on the increased use of anti-psychotics and mood stabilising drugs.

As The Taskforce states;

There has been a transformation in mental health over the last 50 years. Advances in care, the development of anti-psychotic and mood stabilising drugs’

‘Prevention and Transform NHS care ‘ would appear a barely veiled push, to spend money  seeking out,  as many as possible- old, children, teenagers to drug, even though some of these people are only at risk.

Social medicalisation .

As excepting for vigilance in every part of society,  unethically treating  those ‘at risk’, who might never develop a mental disorder, and, the use of more anti-psychotics and anti depressants, nothing has changed..

Mental health, as an asset light service with few measurable, let alone measured outcomes, is already the most lucrative part of the NHS.

And as our present deplorable services show, throwing money, now already 22.8% of NHS budget at mental health, without accountability and measured outcomes has already proved disastrous, but very lucrative.

See the recycled profits of St Andrews Healthcare allowing its chief a £375,000 salary in 2010.

One autistic boy’s ‘care’ is worth £12,500 a week

Yet this ‘treatment’ has not improved the patients, quite the reverse, they, particularly the autistic are being made much much worse, institutionalised for life and dying in swarms.

A corporate state monopoly service’s duty, is to sustainability and profit, recycled or not, and successful treatment can be counter productive, if there is no competition and effectively no regulation.

No one knows how our minds work and  without measured control based outcomes, psychiatry and psychology are largely Emperors Clothes and conjecture.

See the Myth of Mental Illness written by a psychiatrist of 50 years standing.

And  deterioration can be blamed on the ‘disorder’ per se and ironically used to validate the ‘disorder’

There is also evidence that anti-psychotics can cause psychosis and seizures..

And how can the consumer complain, or sue, as unlike USA we do not have an insurance based/contractual causes of action.

As many disorders, currently at 375, as wanted can be created.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) is the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals

Each  disorder can be treated with a ‘magic bullet’ drug that is why the pharmaceutical industry largely created them and promotes the manual.

The Manual opens with a four-page colour spread of different drugs listed under trade names.

And these ‘disorders’ can usefully, be attributed to different facets of a pathological, or development disorder ie Autism can lead to diagnoses of ADHD,OD,OCD,..

Research by charities and Universities paid for by government give flesh to the latest created ‘disorder’.

Self harm, as a separate disorder, was unheard of,  and bi polar/manic depression was a severe mental condition of  psychotic highs and lows, but is now extended by  government funded research to mood swings.

Autism and learning disability have been similarly widen by adeptive  and ever vaguer assessment criteria, and then recently  made mental disorders.

There have even been recent suggestions for the creation of a radicalism disorder Mentalising not just social but political dissidence.

ADHD, Autism, Behaviour Disorders are diagnosed in children.

The very serious side effects of medication are ignored.

And often treated with a different magic bullet.

GPs, and psychiatrists are paid by prescription and intervention and are employees under strict codes of conduct, in now a commercially aware industry, and often forced to ignore or subvert ‘ First do no harm’.

The eventual monopoly privatisation of mental health services will boost our economic growth but at a huge cost to the deficit.

And to truth, individual autonomy and the nation’s sanity.


Deprivation of Liberty Authorisations- Mental Capacity Act enforces Bedlam for life ?



Hundreds of thousands and millions more, have and will, lose their liberty for ever in England and Wales, on the basis of a simple authorisation by Local Authorities.

A standard Deprivation of Liberty authorisation can be issued by any Local Authority.

Nearly a thousand years, after Habeas Corpus ensured citizens could not be imprisoned without due process along came the Mental Capacity Act .

It allows agents of the state via a simple, effectively unopposable, bureaucratic process to remove all freedom for life, for profit.

By secret encagement, total control and enforced medication of our citizens.

All that is needed, for this unimaginable hell, is for the citizen to be 18 or over and suffer from a mental disorder.

And for the Local Authority to suspect, or assess they lack the ‘capacity’ to decide for themselves about ‘the restrictions’, which the state feels it needs to impose upon them, to ensure their ‘care and treatment’ in their ‘best interests’.

And, there is no valid advance decision to refuse treatment or support is in place, which can in any event be overridden by retrospective ‘incapacity’.

As, can any Lasting Power of Attorney, and a Deputyship can be revoked.

So Individual autonomy is lost, and all decisions can be made by the state.

So once ‘incapacity’ is even suspected, which can and does happen, if a person is diagnosed with a mental disorder establishing an MCA ‘impairment of the mind’.

And the state has 375 ‘disorders’ including Autistic Spectrum Disorder and Learning Disability to choose from.

So effectively anyone can have their autonomy removed, if they fail to avoid the state’s mental health detectors.

Once ‘incapacity’ has been found, all that is needed, is a Deprivation of Liberty application by the Managing Authority, this will be the Care Services Providers, who usually own ‘specialist hospitals’, where a person can be ‘rehabilitated’ and ‘community living’ where they  then spend the rest of their lives.

As Health and Social Care Trusts, increasingly work with these private health and social care providers and are effectively paid and used as ‘best interests’ assessors, and ‘treatment’ providers for the Managing Authority, there is a huge conflict of interests

The Deprivation of Liberty Application must be made to the Supervising Authority ,which is the very Local Authority ,who has commissioned the Managing Authority’s ‘care and treatment’ services.

So a Managing Authority, whose services are put in place and approved by a Supervising Authority ,are asking that Authority, for permission to enforce the very services, that Authority commissioned them to provide.

If they were to refuse, their commissioned services would be illegal, and in breach of a citizen’s human rights, and as commissioners, they would be liable to pay compensation, and be in breach of their statutory duty.

Not surprisingly, therefore, it is unlikely a DOL’s application has ever been refused.

Which makes the need for a DOLs authorisation a worthless, tick box exercise.

The close links between the two Authorities, effectively mean, they are asking permission of themselves.

So there are no safeguards against the arbitrary removal of a person’s liberty for life.

Shocking per se, but particularly dangerous, when the services are not independently accountable and are being  run in secret for maximum profit.

The MCA contains pyrric, effectively non existent ‘safeguards’, in the possible appointments of an Independent Mental Health ‘Advocate’ and/or Registered Relevant Person Service.

These so called ‘advocates/representatives’ cannot in any event, take part in the Managing Authority’s ‘best interests’ decision, and may not have even met the incapacitated when the application is made.

Once the LA Supervisory Authority has given the Managing Authority their permission, to deprive a citizen of his liberty, a van and police escort can be sent to the family home, where a doctor/psychiatrist employee attends, to administer ketamine to facilitate removal.

Also to aid removal, it is likely, that neither the family nor the deemed ‘incapacitated’, will have any idea this might, let alone will happen, and the Deprivation of Liberty Order can be handed over on removal.

All that needs to happen now, is for the Supervising Authority- the LA, who commissioned the services, and would be liable if inadequate or illegal, to review this Deprivation of Liberty, annually for life.

Neither the ‘incapacitated’ nor their family can do anything.

If they are already in, or apply de novo to the Court of Protection opposing the removal.

An Official Solicitor will be appointed by the state to act for the incapacitated.

He will support the DOLs , as this is the only support available, and therefore has to be in a citizen’s ‘best interests’.

s 5 or s8 Human Rights Act actions will be dismissed by holding the DOLs, a proportionate interference by the state.

Judicial Reviews of the Local Authorities decision are costly and now legally have been made effectively impossible.

Applications and appeals by family are dealt with on a case management basis, at a local level, and will be unsuccessful.

All is secret and all gagged for life.

This is much, much worse than a Mental Health Act section, as it is in secret, for life, for profit, and a person need not be proved to be a danger to himself or others, but still must remain in the Bedlam, of ‘community living’ for life.

Now look at what, the for profit services can do inter alia, once they have this authorisation

use locks or key pads which stop a person going out or into different areas of a building

use medication, for example, to calm a person- ( but why is he upset- is he in pain ?)

close supervision in the home, or the use of isolation- ( is this not emotional abuse ?)

require a person to be supervised when out

restrict contact with friends, family and acquaintances, including if they could cause the person harm (‘including,’ so proof of ‘harm’ not needed,and who decides type of ‘harm’.  So at any time parents can be excluded from even visits ).

physically stop a person from doing something which could cause them harm

remove items from a person which could cause them harm

hold a person so that they can be given care, support or treatment ( what is meant by hold, care, and treatment?)

bedrails, wheelchair straps, restraints in a vehicle, and splints- (Thomas Rawnsley at 4ft 10 inches, 18 Downs and autistic was put in splints on removal by 2 male guards).

the person having to stay somewhere against their wishes or the wishes of a family member

repeatedly saying to a person they will be restrained if they persist in a certain behaviour.

This looks like authorised abuse, and not much of a community , or home, certainly not a vestige  of independence, and it is for life.

And all this can be routinely imposed upon the vulnerable, by itinerant prescribed workers, for ever more risk assessed, efficient for maximum profit care.

And here, from workers in Lifeways, now Cambian ‘community living’, gives us the only glimpse of what life is like for the incapacitated.

We have seen Thomas Rawnsley’s hell in his homes Norcott Lodge, owned by Homeleigh, a company bought out with million pound windfalls to owners, by venture capital backed Cambian, who then bought Lifeways, again paying the owners millions, who owned Kingdom House, where Thomas died.

Remember, we pay a minimum of £4,000 per week, and huge drug bills, for each resident, and the worse their behaviour becomes, the more  can be claimed for their ‘ care and treatment’.

Here is an Ombudsman’s decision and compensation of an autistic man provided with inadequate Council residential  support.

Yet another example of enforced for profit living by LA of a 36 year old forced away from her family and community to live in isolation with inadequate support.




Care Reform? 136 Million to move LD/Autistic from public NHS Units to Private ‘Community Living ’


In our times of austerity with LA budgets so tight there isn’t support for family carers, beds or equipment, benefits slashed to £62.50 per week for 24/7 care, £103 DLA, the government gives 136 million to transfer 300 LD/autistic from NHS public hospitals to private increasingly venture capital backed monopoly corporation ‘ community living’ care, and replace public but not private hospital admissions of the autistic/LD and/or behaviour challenged

Laing and Bouisson specialist consultants in care development produced this report on care provision back in 2011.

Commissioned by the Director of Learning Disabilities NHS under the Valuing People now  initiative.

Why are the deemed ‘learning disabled’ and autistic being effectively removed for life to not live in the community ?

How is this ‘valuing’ them ?

And why is there not even a ‘costs consideration’ for the much much cheaper option of them remaining with their parents in a real community ?


Five years later and the plan is finally coming to total fruition.

Learning Disability Today featured an article this month entitled,
‘Local Plans To Transform Care for People With Learning Disabilities Launched’.

And National Media followed

A national implementation plan to develop ‘community services’ and close inpatient facilities was published in October 2015 by NHS England, the Local Government Association (LGA), and the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS).

They say,
Building the right support set an ambition of empowering individuals and their families to have more say in their care’

But did not say how ‘community services’ empowered them.

The service users and their families still have no rights, or choice. and ‘community services’ can be enforced by the Court of Protection and the family gagged.

The article continues;
by developing and strengthening good quality support options in their communities.’

There are no ‘options’, as no choice is given, there is only one provider and one community placement.

Where has this ‘good quality’ support suddenly come from ?

Why has it not been utilised before and what is it ?

What is meant by ‘their communities’ ?

As residents are subject to 24/7 surveillance and deprivation of liberty orders, it can only be that they will live and go on accompanied outings in the area they originated from.

Which meant ‘they’ and where they originated from, had to be audited, so in 2013 the Health and Social Care Information Centre published a Learning Disability Census.

Stating it was to deliver action 17 in ‘Transforming Care’. A national response to Winterbourne View’.

This was the first audit of inpatients in the NHS or independent care and assessment Units.

Governments had not even counted the number of ‘Winterbourne type residents’, but had paid out millions of public money for their care for decades.

The audit was needed to shear up the remaining public health provision, between the chosen venture/private capital providers and to ascertain which Local Authority, NHS payments for past/present treatment could be reimbursed from- see Sunday Times 2014

And  to achieve the only change to care services- treating   inpatients in the area they originated from rebranded as ‘community living’.

The last general audit of the total number of LD/Autism/CB  was in 2011.

This 2013 audit hyperboles that it alone ‘marks a significant progression in enabling transformation of care’.

The Article continues
and, as a result, reducing the number of people with a learning disability and/or autism in England who are in hospitals ( public NHS )by up to half over 3 years’.

A third of the ATU 3000, have been there 5 years or more, and will be zomibified from their polypharmacy ‘treatment’, and in need of rehabilitation, so likely to be moved to community living’s ‘specialist hospitals’, but  likely to be medicated on release, as 74% are chemically coshed like Thomas Rawnsley.

The Article continues;
To this end, 48 local Transforming Care Partnerships (TCPs) – which are made up of people who use services, their families, ( without rights ) providers of services, clinical commissioning groups, local authorities and NHS England specialised commissioning hubs – are tasked with taking forward these intentions and designing new, high-quality, community-based services ( big player monopolies Dimensions/Cambian/Hesley   commissioned, and overseen by these TCPs, so a conflict of interests.)

that reflect the wishes and circumstances of local residents. (I assume this refers to local residents and not the vulnerable residents who have no choice).

The first awards from a £30 million, 3-year NHS England revenue fund to help TCPs where there is a need to speed up the delivery of new services have now been finalised.
Funding of almost £6.5 million has been designated to 23 TCPs on a match-funding basis to help get new services up and running while older models of care are still in place, ( unclear what these are) allowing for safe and effective transition between the two.

NHS England has also confirmed that £100 million of funding will be available over five years to support Transforming Care projects – up from the £15 million announced at the time of Building the right support. Investment of more than £20 million has already been provisionally earmarked for schemes across the country in 2016/17, including new housing and services.’

136 million of public money paid over to private, chosen, often venture capital backed service providers to establish ‘community living’ facilities .

These services are untested, monopolised and for profit,  and commissioned by the state with no effective input or choice from the service providers or their families.

The LGA’s community wellbeing portfolio holder, Cllr Izzi Seccombe, said:

Councils remain absolutely committed to supporting people with a learning disability and autism to live close to family and friends, in good quality accommodation with support from highly skilled staff. On occasions when a person’s mental health needs does require an admission to hospital, steps must be taken to ensure it is properly managed with the individual discharged in a safe and timely way.’

Public NHS Adult Treatment Units have merely been replaced by private for profit ‘specialist hospitals’, owned by the ‘community services’ provider.

The number of beds commissioned in NHS is to be reduced by up to 70%,replaced by the community living provision for life, enforced if necessary by the MCA..

In England, about 24,000 people who have a learning disability and/or autism are classed as ‘being at risk of admission.’

It is unknown what ‘risk of admission’ actually means, or, how this figure was arrived at.

Admissions, can be triggered by meltdowns, inappropriate behaviour, violent outbursts, parents unable to cope, reaction to medication or its withdrawal, or assessments.
Or simply a call for help to police, GP , Social Services .

Now it triggers ‘community living’, and this, unlike hospital admission under the MHA, is under the MCA for life and held in secret with parents gagged, and prevented from even seeing their adult children ‘in the community’, if in their childrens ‘best interests’.

These projected 24,000 a year will now be fed into the ‘community living’ industry, and be made a  valuable commodity with an increasing income potential of at least £4000 per week, guaranteed for life.

Plans for a large autistic village community living has already caused concern.

And  those at ‘risk of admission’ and the 3000 ATU are in addition to all other LD/Autistic, whose only adult support service is now ‘community living’ .

So, other than the financing and setting up of local bodies and chosen, private monopoly providers, receiving millions of public money, and billions of future guaranteed income, and the LD/ autistic/CB living in the area they came from, how else has this transformed care ?




Winterbourne View- vital questions that remain unanswered.


Why did the NHS pay Winterbourne View providers on average at least £3,500 per week to drug and baby sit the autistic and so called ‘learning disabled’ ?

Where else could a company charge £4,000 +, and be commissioned privately, to employ workers on 12 hour shifts to drug, torture and abuse very vulnerable adults.

Where were all the psychiatrists, nurses ,social workers, NHS managers who commissioned the services, and prescribed the risperidol  administered to the lady under the chair by pinching her nose?

Why were they not held responsible ?

Why were only care workers prosecuted and sacked ?

How and  why was this deemed ‘assessment and treatment’ under the Mental Health Act?

How and why were the residents legally detained under MHA per se, and for so long ?

Why have successive governments allowed billions of profit to be made out of public money at the expense, and in the name of our most vulnerable ?

Why was insufficient support at home given to the Winterbourne parents, some so desperate they attempted suicide.?

Why did the CQC after being alerted by managers of numerous allegations of abuse for over 3 years from February 2008, and ‘The recorded events between 2008-11 [were} fragmentary’  SCR, do nothing ?

Why did the managers, and the police the abuse was reported to do nothing ?

Why was a BBC Programme only then commissioned, and used to reveal abuse already known to the regulators, the managers and the police ?

Why were no managers/executives sacked or prosecuted, only poorly paid, working 12 hours a day care workers ?

What has been done about, as CQC described, ‘the systemic failure to investigate claims of abuse’ in all present and future residential care providers ?

Why did this scandal not stop the abuse that happened to Thomas Rawnsley, only two years later in Homeleigh House, and then the abuse in Kingdom House where he died ?

Why was Winterbourne View, a private venture capital institution, merely used to convert and rebrand NHS publically managed ‘treatment and assessment’ Units, to privately owned ‘community living’ ones, with the same inadequate safeguards, commissioning, staffing and oversight ?

What has changed to stop Winterbourne abuse happening today, or in future similar institutions rebranded ‘ community living ?

How much profit has been made by investors, managers, banks, accountants. experts, lawyers, consultants, campaigners, PR gurus, pharmacies, care agencies, private company providers?


Read the serious case review here, my blogs and decide for yourself, if anything has changed, or will change, in the long awaited expensive solution to Winterbourne View abuse, which is use of similar institituions rebranded as ‘Community for profit living’, nearer parents.

And read the only plans for all disabled- ‘Community Living for Profit’.





MCA illegality of removal LD/Autistic to ‘Community Living’ and professionals involved.


Thomas Rawnsley escorted to his ‘community  living’.


Thomas’ Independence


A young lady living independently in Winterbourne View.

Far from giving carers rights and support, the Care Act, as shown, conspires to break family carers, and gain evidence, it is not in a vulnerable person’s ‘ best interests’ to remain at home.

This removal from the family home, to profitable private provision, has been euphemistically termed ‘community living’, but is anything but, as this ‘living’ is controlled, in secret, and away from public and relatives’ eyes.

And, often parents are excluded, on grounds visits upset and are not in ‘best interests’.

It is promoted as ‘independent ‘, regardless of the fact, that courts deem such living as deprivation of liberty, 24/7 supervision, all  daily activities enforced, and no choice given.

Is there any evidence that residential living for life is in a persons ‘best interests’?

No, it is assumed,  despite evidence to the contrary

No one measures the outcomes of those who live there, as individuals, or, as a group.

And, there is no effective monitoring of this ‘best interests’

An Adult Services Manager, reviews the Care Provider’s, his employer commissioned ,Care Plan.

The Care Quality Commission, may make a yearly announced inspection of documentation and placement.

A CQC, whose regulation has been critised, as not fit for purpose, and who ignored the Winterbourne View abuse.

And inspected Cambian’s Kingdom House for the first time,  after prior notification, only after Paula Rawnsley’s complained of her son’s abuse, and found none, and rated it ‘good.’

And then 10 months after Thomas had died there of unexplained death, the CQC merely did a second announced inspection rating it again ‘good’.

The state, does not inspect and assess the kind of life, they decide is in a person’s ‘ best interests’, nor review their situation, once a person has been removed there.

So they cannot and do not bother to explain how such a life can be in anyone’s let alone the vulnerables ‘best interests’.

And the vulnerable, his IMCA, or parents are not allowed, to decide what is in their adult child’s ‘best interests’.

And, a family have no enforceable rights, so cannot protect their loved ones, no matter how serious the abuse, or inadequate the care, as Paula Rawnsley found.

The government’s plan is enforced, unaccountable ‘community living’ and medicine, for maximum profit, claimable for life.

And, it has ensured, the captive consumers, have no voice, rights, choice, or means of escape.

The assessors of ‘best interests’ are jointly managed by the Adult Social Services and Health and Social Care Trusts.

And their decision enforced by the Court of Protection.

Their weapons safeguarding, wellbeing and ‘best interests’.

All are part of a multiagency safeguarding hub- MASH which includes GP practices.

Here they share unchallenged ‘information’ illegally, without check on its accuracy or reliability.

All are charged and paid to collaborate to implement government policy, and so potential/future and/ or existing neglect, abuse and safeguarding issues will be found.

GPs, and home nurses monitor and assess, the cared for and carers’ health and wellbeing.
But only as pertaining to actual, or risk of, neglect ,abuse and/or safe guarding.

Occupational Therapists are part of the team, and are now treated as appropriate trained professionals, thanks to lobbying by the College of Occupational Therapists (COT).

They assess wellbeing through day to day activities.

If there is no support , day centres closed, and schools SEN funding ending at 16, such activities are limited.

And family Carers, will find it financially and physically, impossible to continually provide activities and 24/7 support, particularly without respite, again no longer provided.

Occupational Therapists also assess the ‘suitability’ of a person’s living arrangements, and, as housing, equipment, beds, etc, are not funded, this is likely to be inadequate.

Person Centred Planners are funded by the Local Authority.

They assess interests, desires and activities, past and present.

And as stated these are now likely to be limited.

The PCP then writes a statement in the first person, purporting to be the disabled person, describing all they previously did and/or want to do, but no longer can. But may ignore their wish to remain at home, and that they love their family.

And anything suggesting neglect/abuse/ safeguarding may also be mentioned- ”I wish I could see more of Daddy’, ‘I don’t like it when Mummy cries’. ‘I like to help Mummy cook’.

The Developmental Officer, a care worker paid at a higher rate, will assess how the cared for are being ‘developed’ within the family home.

A clinical psychologist assesses the effect of living at home, any emotional abuse and the general psychological wellbeing of carers and cared for.

A psychiatrist looks for signs, or risk of mental disorders of carer and cared for, and the effect of caring on them both.

If any care support is funded, this must, under the Care Act be chosen by the LA, and it will be briefed to assess family carers’ care, and look for safeguarding, neglect and abuse risks.

The team will have regular secret meetings, but concerns, and assessments will not be mentioned to family carers, until disclosed in reports just before a court hearing to decide ‘best interests’.

The LA and HSCT lawyers and the Official Solicitor, will agree these assessments, as will the Judge.

The Emperors Clothes of ‘expert’ corroboration, will appear over whelming, but lack any substance, and remain unchecked and unchallenged , but decides a family’s fate.

In breach of the disabled, and their family’s human rights to privacy, family life and a fair hearing.

And of the Equality Act, and Discrimination Act, as the disabled are being discriminated against.

If an autistic, add the Autism Act, as their autism is not considered .

It is also in breach of the MCA, as blanket capacity assessments are used, the wishes ( to stay at home ) of the incapacitated  ignored, and the most, ( removal) ,rather than the least restrictive option is ordered.

But systemically, these rights cannot be enforced, and are ignored.

And at best 1 family representative must fight 3 lawyers and an army of ‘experts’.

We need actual figures of those incarcerated, drugged, isolated, in misery barely existing and dying in unknown numbers of ‘natural causes’ with no investigation.

All earning millions for their jailers, experts, managers, courts, lawyers and venture capital investors.

And the situation is getting far worse, as numbers are increasing,  and ever larger Units are being built, and the government has fed 433 million to LAs, and HSCTs to encage via safeguarding and MCA ‘best interests’.

We can only glean by comments of care workers, what is happening in these places, the CQC are doing nothing about the chosen venture capital backed monopolies like Cambian/Lifeways.

Our most vulnerable will become audit statistics, to make ever greater profits in ever larger more profitable settings, the bungalows replaced by wards, and families will not even be allowed to know where they are housed, let alone worry about their distance from them.

Justice Munby in Re:S, sums it up for me perfectly:

“115] I am not saying that there is in law any presumption that mentally incapacitated adults are better off with their families: often they will be; sometimes they will not be. But respect for our human condition, regard for the realities of our society and the common sense to which Lord Oliver of Aylmerton referred in In re KD
…, surely indicate that the starting point should be the normal assumption that mentally incapacitated adults will be better off if they live with a family rather than in an institution – however benign and enlightened the institution may be, and however well integrated into the community – and that mentally incapacitated adults who have been looked after within their family will be better off if they continue to be looked after within the family rather than by the State.

[116] We have to be conscious of the limited ability of public authorities to improve on nature. We need to be careful not to embark upon ‘social engineering’. And we should not lightly interfere with family life. If the State – typically, as here, in the guise of a local authority – is to say that it is the more appropriate person to look after a mentally incapacitated adult than her own partner or family, it assumes, as it seems to me, the burden – not the legal burden but the practical and evidential burden – of establishing that this is indeed so. And common sense surely indicates that the longer a vulnerable adult’s partner, family or carer have looked after her without the State having perceived the need for its intervention, the more carefully must any proposals for intervention be scrutinised and the more cautious the court should be before accepting too readily the assertion that the State can do better than the partner, family or carer.

But, as now, if no support provided by LA, as required by Chronically Sick and Disabled Act 1970, but if sued they defend, that support is residential, then likely to be held a proportionate interference by state under HRA, and the lack of available care at home would rebut the presumption.

So Munby’s statements of humanity, and obvious ‘best interests’ can be subverted by LA policy, as can MCA.









Carers Charters-Stitched Up by purported ‘Rights’ ?

The love, devotion, familiarity and lifetime bond of parents, spouses, sons, daughters is assimilated to the ‘care’ of any unknown, itinerant worker , who might never be seen again after a shift .

The only difference being one is unpaid.

Your loved one, reduced to a person who needs ‘safeguarding’   .

A label, to be processed by anyone.

We are lead to believe relatives now unpaid ‘Carers’ have rights.

The Government has set up a Social Care Blog to mislead us.

One post titled,

Effective support for carers must be built on trust and understanding’.

Is written by such an unpaid ‘Carer’. But we are told nothing of who she cares for.

The lady exclaims;

What helped me was speaking out about my experiences, in a constructive way (no negativity allowed by Carers no matter how appalling their treatment) to try and influence policy (set in stone by the government)and social change ( removal to residential care) for people in similar situations to me.’

She continues,

I was asked if I was interested in becoming part of a working group to develop a Carers Charter that could help carers and organisations understand what they could expect from each other. I jumped at the chance. And, ‘Kirklees is now well on the way to becoming a ‘carer friendly community.’

That conspires to remove their loved one to residential care.

These ‘Charters’ are imported from Scotland.

The Lady continues,

This collaborative process ( cabal) involving Kirklees council and also Greater Huddersfield CCG has gone from strength to strength. The main reason for this was that they welcomed challenge from me and other carers (how could they challenge per se? and be collaborative ) and recognised the need to evolve this project from a piece of paper to the toolkit it has now become. Kirklees is now well on the way to becoming a carer friendly community.’

Effective support for carers must be built on trust and understanding

Beware ‘Toolkits’ and Pathways.

So what does this Charter contain ?

The vulnerable and their carers have the right to have the full range of human rights respected, protected and fulfilled.

Note the Right to Privacy and Family Life is not mentioned.

But exploitation, violence and physical, mental or sexual abuse are, and these are safeguarding issues, which could only be occurring in family care, and remedied by removal to state residential provision.

‘Economic, social and cultural rights including the right to an adequate standard of living including, social protection’.

As DLA/PIP max is £103, and benefits  cut to the bone, this right can only be achieved, if the cared for prevail themselves of their right to their £3,500 per week  state RESIDENTIAL care provision.

The right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health’.

As GPs,NHS only appear to assess for safeguarding, neglect and abuse issues, such a standard can only be achieved in a residential placement.

Where 3 a day die needlessly, and their deaths are not investigated.

Charters quote Rights under Article 12 UN Right to Equal recognition before the law.

1.States Parties reaffirm that persons with disabilities have the right to recognition everywhere as persons before the law.

2. States Parties shall recognize that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life.

Now removed on any basis by the Mental Capacity Act illegally, as the mentally vulnerable are declared ‘incapable’ and lose all legal competency and rights and thus any recognition before the law.

3. States Parties shall take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity.

This support cannot be via an independent family carer, but a RRP, IMCA and Official Solicitor, paid by the state, and who have no actual  legal power in the actual decision making process.

And the disabled are deemed incapable of representing themselves.

4. States Parties shall ensure that all measures that relate to the exercise of legal capacity provide for appropriate and effective safeguards to prevent abuse in accordance with international human rights law.

Such safeguards shall ensure, that measures relating to the exercise of legal capacity respect the rights, will and preferences of the person, ( these decisions are ignored see below and made by care provider with a general defence to negligence and breach of human rights in s5,s6 of MCA )

Are free of conflict of interest and undue influence,

( conflict of interests exists,as the LA commission residential placements and oversee them, and are therefore liable if inadequate. undue influence can only be exercised by family members)

are proportional and tailored to the person’s circumstances, ( a state Care Plan) for the shortest time possible ( here for life) and are subject to regular review by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body

.(Once a Placement is in place, courts are no longer involved, and the LA Commissioning, Adult Services is the overseer).

The safeguards shall be proportional to the degree to which such measures affect the person’s rights and interests.

( Risk is deliberately exaggerated, to impose draconian risk adverse regimes in placements for maximum profit.)

The placement service provider makes all decisions for the incapacitated for life, with oversight of the LA, that commissioned them, and the ‘general defence’ in MCA allows the provider to make all future care decisions.


5. Subject to the provisions of this article, States Parties shall take all appropriate and effective measures to ensure the equal right of persons with disabilities to own or inherit property, to control their own financial affairs and to have equal access to bank loans, mortgages and other forms of financial credit, and shall ensure that persons with disabilities are not arbitrarily deprived of their property.

( Billions representing the incapables property has been sequestrated by the Court of Protection/Guardianship Office, who void family Powers of Attorney and Deputyships, allowing the state to control the incapacitated’s property. The incapacitated cannot make any decisions or own property)

Comments made to such Posts, including those in Community Care, starkly contrast with the laudable rhetoric and propaganda

Showing the agenda is in fact,  the opposite of what it purports to be.

One Commentator noting;

‘would agree with Finola Moss. Further, the ‘personalisation agenda ‘ was /is the foundation for this culture to develop, the Standing commission for Carers are aware of this.

Not at any time did the promoters and policy developers say the ‘outcome’ was systematic abuse of Carers to breaking point so that the people we care for can be Justifiably [ in their eyes] removed, because at that time the market still needed to be developed, now it has been developed the system and market needs feeding and supporting and it is our vulnerable family members who will be doing it .

They have all got a price on their heads and are a valuable commodity.

Family Carers are disposable defunct.’

‘Carers’ appear to be being destroyed by their own purported rights, as were the vulnerable by the MCA .

The aim of legislation and policy is to transfer care from unpaid to paid carers.

Both Care Act and Mental Capacity Act are  gross, immoral deceits that makes a mockery of our law, and welfare system.

And steals public money, to finance profit for venture capitalists, with no accountability for its illegality or services or the human misery and even death it causes.