Dear Wendy (an Open Letter to Wendy Burn, President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Dear Wendy,

On Wednesday night on Twitter, you posted a tweet about the levels of abuse that had been directed at you and Dr Kate Lovett. You didn't elaborate on where the abuse had come from, or offer any examples of it. Dr Lovett commented that “it was never a great tactic to start a conversation.” Hmm...

I must admit, my first reaction on seeing it was anger. I had spent the previous two weeks, asking you and Dr Carmine Pariente a question that both of you chose to ignore. A question which had been asked initially by Fiona French, who has suffered extensive harm to her health as a result of taking prescribed psychiatric medication. We had asked for evidence of the extraordinary claim Dr Pariente had made during a Radio 4 broadcast that antidepressants were an important and life saving treatment for most people. During the broadcast he had also downplayed the incidence of problems of withdrawal from SSRIs, despite recent research indicating that problems are widespread. 

It left me wondering what is a great tactic to start a conversation? Does it have to be something with which you agree or which praises the actions of psychiatrists and the Royal College? Both Fiona and I had been polite and respectful in our requests. I did not want to be blocked by you. The problem was that this was a question that challenged the veracity of the radio interview claims, a question that potentially put the Royal College in a very difficult position indeed.  But here's the thing, we didn't put the College in that position by asking the question Wendy. Your representative did that by making claims that neither he or you could substantiate. This isn't abuse – it's an attempt to get to the truth. It is a simple boundary issue, and it really does require an honest answer. Muting and ignoring are not the answer.

It is precisely circumstances such as these that make it hard for people to trust the Royal College and psychiatry in general. In a sense I feel for you as you have the misfortune to be President in an age when the whole world is listening, the age of social media. And not only is the whole world listening, but they are now able to talk to each other about what they hear and see. In years gone by, people would have heard such claims in their individual environments, and either thought nothing of it, or would have not known what to do to try and put things right. The world has moved on, and people are now interested in truth rather than marketing and spin, particularly those people who have suffered harm as a result of taking psych drugs. This careless and glib exaggeration is simply not acceptable. It cannot be tolerated, and the silencing techniques of ignoring, blocking, muting and discrediting patients and those who disagree with your point of view needs to stop. No one is suggesting that it is ok to be abusive – it isn't. But please don't mistake justifiable anger for abuse. In addition, you must surely realise that it is not polite and 'kind' to ignore people, just because they are calling your organisation out on such an important principle as telling the truth. This is a matter of life and death, not an exercise in creative marketing and spin.

On Wednesday night, instead of the abuse that you might have been expecting after making such a statement, you were faced with the dignified response of so many who have been harmed directly by diagnosis and treatment by psychiatry. You were given accounts of very real psychiatric abuse, and descriptions of the way in which peoples' lives have been blown apart by prescription drugs. Do these harmed people not deserve the truth Wendy, do they not deserve at least the respect of not being lied to? I believe they do. They are there because they care enough for others not to suffer the same fate that they have. And they are there asking for help with appalling damage that they are not responsible for.

So I would ask you once again, to provide the evidence that Fiona and I have been asking for, or, failing that, to issue a statement to clarify that Dr Pariente's “life saving” statements during the broadcast were inaccurate and untrue. If you are serious about giving more help to harmed patients as you assured us you were on Wednesday night, making sure your representatives are being honest and behaving with integrity in the mainstream media would be a great place to start. I appreciate that things 'move slowly' in psychiatry but this is one way that you can retrieve some credibility and keep open a dialogue with the prescribed harm community. If you want to only offer 'evidence based' treatments, at least make sure that your public statements are evidence based too. Anything less is hypocrisy.

I am aware that you may be away at present, but would be grateful for a response on your return.

Jill Davies.