By systematically targeting electroconvulsive therapy as part of its war on psychiatry, experts say Scientology could decimate a treatment that is “saving so many lives.”

The Atlantic’s 2001 article explained that ECT [Electroconvulsive therapy] had emerged from a terrifying past to become a safe and effective treatment for some of the worst effects of serious mental illnesses. But Scientology, through its campaigns and by pushing legislation, was promoting outdated myths about the procedure for a public that knew little about it.

Miscavige’s November 3 speech illustrated that Scientology is still pushing this agenda more than 20 years later—but with one big difference.

While Scientology has continued to campaign against ECT on various fronts, it has pursued a little known but very effective strategy against ECT’s most vulnerable spot: Namely, the two small companies that manufacture the devices that physicians use during the procedure.

For decades, Scientology has quietly waged a litigation war against those two companies, SigmaStim and Somatics, and it has both nearly on the ropes.

Scientology knows that if the two companies go out of business, federal regulations mandate that doctors will no longer be able to use their devices, and ECT will become unavailable in this country and around the world.

Those medical providers say that ECT is a safe procedure that is saving lives every day, and they are extremely concerned that it is nearly on the brink of disappearing—and only because of the relentless attacks of Scientology on the device manufacturers, a war that has flown completely under the radar until now.

  • @dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    973 months ago

    You know, if the US removed the tax-exempt status from churches, the CoS would have way fewer resources to pull shit like this.

    • @GraniteM@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      33 months ago

      Article 3. [Freedom in religion; right and duty of religious worship]

      That all persons have a natural and unalienable right, to worship Almighty God, according to the dictates of their own consciences and understandings, as in their opinion shall be regulated by the word of God; and that no person ought to, or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any minister, contrary to the dictates of conscience…

      —Vermont Constitution, 1793

      Really wish we could have got that “or erect or support” clause in the US Constitution. Would have made for some interesting court arguments about tax exempt status.