Yes, as someone who has worked in the mental health system in the UK and
Australia since 1972, and as a student of the history of psychiatric
services, I agree with you Doug. Despite the 'antipsychiatrists' and the
'consumer' movements, money was and still is the only deciding factor in
these processes. As for Foucault - no impact whatever.
Colin Holmes,
Western Sydney
>Doug Henwood wrote:
>
>> Nonsense. They were deinstitutionalizing mental patients in New York in the
>> 1950s and 1960s. The clincher was the reduced spending. If F had really had
>> an influence on policy, wouldn't more people have been questioning why U.S.
>> society produces so many people it classifies as mentally ill?
Australia since 1972, and as a student of the history of psychiatric
services, I agree with you Doug. Despite the 'antipsychiatrists' and the
'consumer' movements, money was and still is the only deciding factor in
these processes. As for Foucault - no impact whatever.
Colin Holmes,
Western Sydney
>Doug Henwood wrote:
>
>> Nonsense. They were deinstitutionalizing mental patients in New York in the
>> 1950s and 1960s. The clincher was the reduced spending. If F had really had
>> an influence on policy, wouldn't more people have been questioning why U.S.
>> society produces so many people it classifies as mentally ill?