Why we need to restrict psychiatric diagnoses into criminal and family law?
Psychiatric diagnoses can be used to invalidate witnesses/victims and strategically defend the criminals. It is an abuse of the criminal justice system.
We need to stop using psychiatric diagnoses as evidence and make it clear they are just subjective opinion, not more than that. I believe many law professionals think the psychiatric diagnoses are robust. This situation becomes worse when law professionals feel they cannot question the psychiatrists’ reports, as they thought it was factual reports based on scientific diagnostic tests. Hello, where does this bullshit come from?
The truth is, the psychiatric diagnoses are nothing more than a self-report questionnaire and fabricated short-term interviews and observations. My short question, had you ever seen an individual who was being suspected of psychiatric diagnoses come along with a brain scan or genetic testing? No, right? Simply because psychiatric diagnoses do not exist.
Then, is it possible that an individual can have multiple different diagnoses when being assessed by multiple psychiatrists? The answer is yes. What the hell! How is that fair? The answer is simple as it is easy to challenge if you know enough about the psychometric tools they use and the lack of evidence in psychiatry.
Psychiatric diagnosis to invalidate witnesses and victims.
This happens in the case of child abuse, domestic violence, and rape. The victims are referred for psychiatric assessment, and once the professional sees the victims and labels them with certain psychiatric conditions, there is a quick mistrust. As a result, the police officers and prosecutors tend to discontinue with investigation and prosecution.
If equality means equal, then we cannot say, “You are not a credible witness because you are in a wheelchair”; therefore, we also cannot say, “You are not a credible witness because you have bipolar disorder.” Do you see what I am trying to say here?
Psychiatric diagnoses strategically defend criminals.
This commonly happens in murder cases, such as the Peter Morgan case, who murdered Georgina Symond by strangulation. The defence hired Simon Baron Cohen, who argued Peter Morgan was autistic to deny the murder, even though the murder was clearly premeditated.
As I mentioned earlier, psychiatric diagnoses are just self-report questionnaires and fabricated short-term interviews and observations. And Baron Cohen met the defendant after the murder. The most important question here, does justice uphold when the defence is able to pay someone like Baron Cohen to do so?
In both situations, psychiatric diagnoses can be used to invalidate witnesses/victims and strategically defend the criminals. It is an abuse of the criminal justice system. In fact, you know what, in their manuals - DSM and ICD, there is no single word of “lying”, “exaggerating”, and “sins” are used as diagnostic criteria. See?
My advice, whenever you see the following labelling in the case report of child abuse, domestic violence, rape, and murder—“psychotic”, “delusional”, “manic”, “episodes”, “can’t distinguish reality from fantasy” (whether you believe it or not)—please throw them into the dustbin. They are rubbish!