By Juan Pundik
The authors define disobedience as “the refusal to initiate or complete an order made by another person within a specified period of time (5, 10, 20 seconds, depending on the authors). This order can be made in the sense of doing or in the sense of not doing ”. The psychiatric diagnosis of these behaviors corresponds in DSM IV to Oppositional Defiant Disorder F91.3. They clarify that "these children often have other associated problems, among which hyperactivity and learning problems stand out."
The control strategies they advise are the usual ones for cognitive behavioral treatments: positive and negative reinforcement, rewards and punishments. “The punishment, to be effective, must be intense. In the case of physical attacks (slapping, spanking, etc.), serious ethical problems arise (…) If we decide to resort to physical punishment because the rest of the procedures have failed, perhaps the most convenient thing is spanking the butt, being convenient to establish a fixed number (two or three) ”.
In 1911 Sigmund Freud published On an autobiographically described case of paranoia in which, based on Memoirs of a Neuropath, he developed his theory of paranoid psychosis from the delusions and hallucinations of the author of the Memoirs, Daniel Paul Schreber (1842-1911 ), a German judge who went crazy at 42.
Reading The Disobedient Child reminded me that, researching the family history of Daniel Paul Schreber, the eminent American psychiatrist Morton Schatzman, published a book in which he explains that his father had been Daniel Gottlieb Moritz Schreber (1808-1861), prominent German physician and pedagogue, who had directed and supervised his education. The theories and methods that he applied to the education of children were based on the same basic principles that totalitarian regimes advocate. Like these, he considered that the most important things in a child were obedience and discipline. He published around 20 books and hundreds of brochures and articles aimed at disseminating his pedagogical ideas and methods. He thought that it was “especially important and crucial for the whole of life with respect to character… to form a protective wall against the unhealthy predominance of the emotional side, against that soft sentimentality, a disease of our time, which must be recognized as the usual reason for the increasingly frequent depressions, mental illnesses and suicides (…) If we accustom the child to what is good and just, we prepare him to do what is good and just tomorrow, consciously and according to his free will.
Schreber Sr. continues: “All our effect on the direction of the child's will at this age will consist in accustoming it to an absolute obedience that, to a large extent, will have already been fostered by the application of previously established principles… The child is not given It must never happen that his will could be controlled, but rather that the habit of subordinating his will to the will of his parents or teachers must be implanted immutable in him ... the obedience of a child, a basic condition for any further education, is thus solidly founded for the future (…) The condition, generally most necessary for the achievement of this end, is the unconditional obedience of the child ”.
“Dr. Schreber Sr. fostered the atmosphere of his day and was its spokesperson. But it was only one piece among many; most of his pedagogical colleagues shared his ideas (…) Dr. Schreber's ideas were precursors to those of the Nazis ”. And also those of the Soviets. In a Manual for parents drawn up by the USSR Academy of Sciences, published in 1961, the following can be read: “The child must meet the requirements of adults. This is the first thing you have to teach him: Do what his elders demand of him ”.
These theories and teachings were also similar to those of Skninner, the creator of North American behaviorism: “In the planned society described by Harvard psychologist BF Skinner, the control of human beings from infancy would be so scientific that there would be no disagreements with the established order: 'We can achieve a type of control under which the controlled people feel, despite everything, free. They believe they are doing what they want, not what they are forced to do. This is the source of the tremendous power of positive reinforcement: there is no restriction and there is no rejection. By careful cultural planning, we do not control the final behavior, but the inclination to behave: the motives, the desires, the aspirations. Which is why the question of freedom is never raised ”.
The official magazine of the American Psychiatric Association published an interview with Dr. Judd Marmor, its president. The interviewer asks: 'If a person does not recognize their disease and does not ask for treatment, should society intervene?', And Marmor answers: Yes, because these individuals are suffering, and it is in the nature of their suffering that, very often often they are not in a position to value the fact of being mentally ill. Marmor is the spokesperson for the probation and probation towards which, dangerously, our globalized democracies are being led, whose representatives seek to establish themselves as appraisers and evaluators of our behaviors and decisions and whose most important manifestations are the DSM and the laws that in Europe also wants to decide who can be a psychoanalyst, under what conditions and under what regulations. Big Brother wants submissive, obedient beings, without their own ideas, addicted consumers of objects, substances, information and drugs, docile workers and servants of the masters on duty.
As Vicente Verdú writes in Pills to be happy at work (El País, 02.09.06): “On the first of January the first vending machine for pills began to work at Verizan, a French computer company of work (…) For a cost between 20 and 80 cents of a euro, a range of preparations can be obtained that try to alleviate depression through the effects of omega 4, 5 or 6, or just try to calm the nerves. A sample of anxiolytics to combat anxiety or stress and another of stimulants to overcome exhaustion and reluctance make up part of the assortment of this business psychopharmacy that has also been installed in stations, gas stations and airports in some parts of the world ”.
We are in 2017, the Blade Runner cars do not fly yet, nor do humans reproduce by crops as in Brave New World, nor do firefighters burn piles of books, as in Farenheit 451, but we are closer than ever to 1984 George Orwell's fantasy, his book, a ruthless critique of Stalinism and fascism published in 1949, has become the surprising best-seller of Donald Trump's America.
What does Orwell describe in it that is so disturbing? A post-nuclear totalitarian state in the future that resembles, in some ways, the world we are living in. The protagonist, Winston Smith, works in the ministry of Truth changing not only present events, but past ones. Old headlines and memories are modified in order to manipulate the population, who drink an infected concoction called Victoria gin.
Above him is always the Big Brother, the guardian of society and the supreme judge who sees everything without rest in cameras distributed among the streets, houses and workplaces. A slogan is repeated on the posters of the one-party regime: "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength."
Aldous Huxley writes in Brave New World (1932): “A perfect dictatorship would have the appearance of a democracy, a prison without walls in which the prisoners would not dream of escaping. A system of slavery where, thanks to the system of consumption and entertainment, the slaves would feel love for their servitude ”.
Already in the seventeenth century, ETTIENNE DE LA BOETIE, in his Discourse on voluntary servitudes, had denounced that if tyrannies could subdue us, it was because of our decision not to rebel against their oppression.
The criteria, techniques and cognitive-behavioral or behavioral therapies that predominate in today's society are the expression of totalitarian ideologies that are enemies of democracy, peace, freedom and human rights. There is no substantial difference between those advocated by the Prussian military mentality of Schreber's time, those of Pavlov-Luria reflected in the Parent's Manual of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Nazism or Skinner. This has allowed the complicity of the cognitive-behavioral, psychiatric and neuroscientific currents that have distributed the chairs in Spanish universities, leaving only exceptional loopholes for psychoanalysis, which serve to constitute the exception that confirms the general rule. They accuse us psychoanalysts of being a drag on antiquity, invented by Freud more than 100 years ago. The textual references that I have included at the beginning of this annex indicate that the antecedents of the criteria, techniques, therapies and cognitive-behavioral preventive measures are much older still, but also, embarked on objectives that are destructive of freedom, democracy and human rights.
Opposing these devastating goals is for us, psychoanalysts, rigorous survival and lead us to the need, desire and activity to keep our theories and therapeutic practices permanently updated through the uninterrupted production of publications and conferences.
Psychoanalysis has not had a good fate under totalitarian regimes. Democracies, freedom and human rights are in serious danger in this society. Psychoanalysts have become the representatives of a subversive discourse that advocates the defense of individuality, freedom and the functioning of an authentically democratic society that respects the diversity of subjects, their choices and their enjoyment against the uniforming attempts of the economic power. This is not to all psychoanalysts. Many have been surrendering and submitting to the thinking, demands and legislation of the dominant masters. Professionals who practice CBT (Cognitive Behavioral Treatments), psychiatrists and neuroscientists have become the ideological vanguard of those who want to control and submit our lives, our behaviors, our thinking, our choices and our wishes to the interests of these sectors. dominant. Not all, but almost all.
Some adults, or children, move, move, use their body in an unusual way. These behaviors run the risk of being diagnosed with movement pathologies, hyperactivity and lack of attention. The artists of dance, of corporal expression, of theater, of sport, of spectacle in general move, move, use their body in an unusual way. Fortunate are they who have that capacity and fortunate all of us who can enjoy those abilities as spectators. Although their intolerant and submissive parents and teachers find it annoying and unbearable. It is likely that the parents of Julio Boca, Tamara Rojo, Víctor Ullate, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Sánchez Vicario, Isadora Duncan, Antonio Gades, Maya Plitzeskaia, Sara Baras, Pau Gasol, Mike Jagger, Rudolph Nureyev, Joaquín Cortés, Barashnikov, just as mine did, gave them the possibility not only to tolerate these supposed pathologies in their children but even more to help them channel them. Each of you could do it too. We have succeeded with many parents. It takes more patience, more dedication, more time than giving them pills. But the prize that he can get to enjoy is extraordinary. As much as the level of suffering from which you can break free. Dare See.
To defend ourselves against false neuroscientists and the invasive pharmaceutical industry, forward it and send your adhesion to:
International Platform against the Medicalization of Children