Special Hearings — Mental Health Workshop — 1997-11-20

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you very much.  Just before I put it to the panel for questions, I am curious but I think it will be getting off the subject to examine the relationship between CCHR and Scientology?

<UNKNOWN>: I can answer that quite easily.  CCHR was established by the Church of Scientology when it was Scientology that first noticed the gross abuses that were going on in institutions.
 It is not Scientology's mandate to get involved in investigating and exposing abuses, but to forward its ideology of Scientology.  So it established an independent social reform body to carry out that function, and that was done in 1969.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thanks.  I would have caught you at lunch for that answer, any way.  Okay, can I put it to the panel for questions?

UNKNOWN: Paul, thank you very much, this is the second time.  We missed this opportunity to interact with you when we had our Health Hearings, but I just wanted to ask you for interest sake, one question.
 Why are you not so popular, by you I mean your initiative within established groups, not only here, world wide?  I mean it might sound like an unfair question.
 What you have said, it makes a lot of sense, but you scare people off, why is that?

<UNKNOWN>: Well, the thing is that we go straight for the truth, we confront a lot of the crimes and abuses that occur in the mental health field, that many other people don't want to confront or deny are there.
 We certainly with the Smith Mitchell exposure, were heavily attacked because we are attacking major vested interests both from a business and a psychiatric point of view and people don't like to be shown up for what they are doing.  We are a watch dog of the mental health field.  And we will look in every nook and cranny to find the abuses to ensure that our mandate is carried out, which is to clean up the field of mental health.
 If we were popular, I would say that we weren't doing our job properly.

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.

UNKNOWN: Just one last question.  You see, I don't know, I mean it might not be relevant for our need, but sometimes as I was going through your submission, it is like you deny the relevance of the biological explanation of people's problems completely.  I don't know whether I understood what you are saying, very well.
 I know for the purpose of human rights, our concern, that is really not a problem except that sometimes, we might refer our people to psychiatrists who work within a biological model, but when I was going through this, it was like as far as you are concerned,the biological explanation of people's psychological problem is a farce?

<UNKNOWN>: I think the answer to that is psychiatry and psychology predominantly believe that man is an animal, which comes from studies done by Willem Wund and the stimulant response, studies done by Pavlov to quote just a couple.
 We believe that man is a spiritual being and as a spiritual being, it is that nature of man that needs to be approached when he has a mental problem.
 And that if you are looking at it in that context, as man a spiritual being, then it is function over structure which is the opposite of man being an animal, which is structure over function.
 Does that answer your question?

UNKNOWN: I am sure these people will follow that up, because some will argue that there are other beings besides the spiritual component.

<UNKNOWN>: Well, the belief is that man is as a spiritual being, is a spirit, has a mind and has a body and you approach all three of those, whereas when you look at the standard view point of psychiatry or psychology, they say that the mind is the brain.
 We don't agree with that.  If man is a spiritual being, then surely his mind is an external, non-physical entity that manages this structure of the body.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I think that will continue, that debate.  Can I just say looking to the section, we did say the use of psychology and psychiatry as an instrument for political repression, I don't think we have talked about sort of, I think we have touched on social repression, but I don't think we necessarily political repression.
 I think the indications we have had are quite broad, going back to the Police and the Military and I think we are still yet to pin down psychology and psychiatry's ...

<UNKNOWN>: Well, in summarising down a 150 page submission, we had the dilemma of how do we fit that in into half an hour and with the arrangement made yesterday, we have managed to organise to have it split into two parts.
 Certainly this is very relevant and we do want to see the recommendations we have made on the Smith Mitchell facilities, take place and on the political repression's side, Mr Lawrence Anthony will be covering that as we certainly couldn't have got this down into half an hour.

CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thanks.  All right, then if we all break for lunch now, which I believe is next door.  I presume it is here.
COMMISSION ADJOURNS

CHAIRPERSON: I am going to introduce Dr Bhana from KwaZulu Natal, thanks for coming.  You are one of the ones that have come from far, far away.  It depends on how you look at that, in miles or sort of political situation.
 We look a little bit sparser than we did before lunch, it is a bit concerning, but I would like you to make your submission.