The Freedom Bulletin

The parents of a Harvard student are suing the university’s health services after they prescribed him three psych drugs and he committed suicide. I hope they win, and for what it’s worth in my non-medical-expert opinion, I believe that the medications were totally inappropriate.

It seems that the only reason that the student, John Edwards, went to see mental health services was because he was not able to study as long as his friends. Because of this, he was diagnosed with ADHD and an anxiety disorder, and a nurse practitioner decided to prescribe him the antidepressants Prozac and Wellbutrin and the anti-ADHD drug Adderall. Five months after his first visit, he killed himself.

From what I can tell by reading about this, there was nothing wrong with John Edwards and absolutely no need for him to undergo any psychotherapy or psych medications. This is just another example of how our society tries to make everyone the same. If someone is bad at anything or has any unusual qualities or is sad about anything, psychiatrists want to give them psychotherapy and medications to turn them into whatever society has arbitrarily decided the perfect person should be like.

When a kid learns to walk later than average, they give them physical therapy. When a kid learns to talk later than average, they give them speech therapy. If someone is shorter than average, they give them human growth hormone. If someone’s teeth aren’t perfectly straight, they have to get braces. If you’re shy, you are diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and have to get therapy. If you’re sad, you have to take anti-depressants. If you have any ache or pain, you are told to go to the doctor. If you aren’t great in a school subject, you have to get extra tutoring.

I could keep going on and on, but I think you get the point. Basically, everyone is expected to eat healthy food all the time, exercise for an hour every day, get good grades, be outgoing, dress stylishly, do prestigious internships every summer, and do a million extracurricular activities. Anyone who differs from this is made to get therapy and medications to make them just like everyone else.

Why can’t society accept all different kinds of people? Some people are optimistic, some are pessimistic. Some are quiet, some are loud. Some are tall, some are short. Some are skinny, some are fat. Some like to socialize, some don’t and instead prefer going on the computer or reading. Some people are athletic, some aren’t. Some people are good at math, some are good at writing, some are good at art, some are good with cars, and some are good with animals. People are good and bad at all different things, and that’s okay!

If you can’t study for as long as your friends, just don’t! Not everyone has to get perfect grades. If you really, really want to, then either drink more coffee, drink less coffee, find a quiet room to study, or play music to help yourself study.

The conformist, authoritarian attitude that much of society, especially the mental health profession, seems to have is evil, and it looks like it cost this young man his life.

The Harvard Crimson wrote a really condescending, insulting editorial the other day, claiming that the Tax Day Tea Parties were “puerile,” hurt conservatism, and had no purpose. I completely disagree with everything that was said in this editorial and feel the need to respond to it. 

I attended part of the Tea Party in Boston, and it was one of the most inspiring things I have ever witnessed. I don’t think I could come up with one negative thing to say about the Tea Party; it really was that awesome. The Crimson, however, managed to come up with quite a few… 

First, the Tea Party was by no means “puerile” and by no means a “tantrum,” as they claim. Crowds of libertarians, social conservatives, and moderate Republicans converged peacefully on the Boston Common, waving flags and holding signs, and then marched to Christopher Columbus Park, where they dumped tea into the harbor and cheered. Somehow I doubt the Crimson would have described a similarly peaceful rally for gay marriage, gun control, or increased taxation as a “tantrum.”

Second, the Tea Parties did not marginalize conservatism but instead united conservatives and provided them with a worthwhile cause to rally around. While many in attendance were Republican and Libertarian activists, there were also numerous people who had simply stopped by during their lunch breaks or had seen the demonstrators and decided to join in. If Boston’s Tea Party was any example, the protests united conservatives of all types and brought normally apathetic people into the movement. 

Third, although the Crimson claims that “it is not entirely clear what the protesters were protesting,” to me it was obvious. We were protesting taxes, and we were protesting spending. We were protesting big government in all its forms, or more accurately, celebrating individual liberty. Why does the Crimson staff find liberty so hard to understand?