Page 30 - 200810 - The 'X' Chronicles Newspaper - October 2008

30 Project MKULTRA & Ewen Cameron 30 Project MKULTRA & Ewen Cameron Ewen Cameron and The Allan treatment could happen now - and try to than a means to an end; the patient cannot be Ewen Cameron and The Allan Memorial Psychiatric delineate where research ends and treatment valued less than the research itself. This begs Memorial Psychiatric begins. the question, where does research begin and Institute: A Study in One would assume that Cameron must treatment end? It seems obvious that Cameron’s Institute: A Study in Research and Treatment not have had a very high regard for his patients’ work at the Allan Memorial was research; to Research and Treatment rights if he was willing to inject them with LSD call it treatment would be farcical, not to Ethics or administer repeated treatments of ECT. mention a complete disservice to all of the Ethics Continued From Page 25 Morgan (1971) points out, however, that this fits patients Cameron "treated". It would seem that Continued From Page 25 with the attitude of Cameron’s time. Research treatment ends and research begins when the At first, it seems perplexing that ethics were previously not something one had to mental health professional / would-be- Cameron would have pushed ahead with worry about; researchers were "…used to researcher values the research or treatment, in light of the adverse effects he must proceeding with their work without thinking or experimentation more than the well being of the have been seeing in his patients. Still more worrying about general ethical questions . . . patient. Any time that the individual’s goal is to intriguing is why Cameron would persist in [t]he usual rule has probably been: if you’re earn accolades, or win recognition, it is developing the treatment against the objections interested, investigate" (p. 276). The public research. Research does need to be done; no of his colleagues at the Allan. Gillmor (1987) would not have any objection to such treatment science, including psychology, can progress points out that most of Cameron’s staff did not of mental patients; while Johannsen (1969) without it. However, new treatments should not approve of the way Cameron was using ECT. points out that the term "mental patient" can be developed if, during the development of One doctor said that the "…refer to anyone who has ever obtained help treatment, the well being of those being "problem . . . was that there was never from a mental health professional." (p. 218), it experimented on is not given the greatest enough money to set up a proper rehabilitation is more often taken by the lay person to refer to importance. program. That would . . . interfere with an individual who has been admitted to a As mentioned, attitudes toward mental Cameron’s ‘quick fix’ solution. It would be less psychiatric hospital. Johannsen (1969) relates patients are changing, but not enough. of a breakthrough . . . if patients required six information regarding a study done by Riverview, a psychiatric hospital in Coquitlam, months of [post-treatment] therapy" (Gillmor, Cumming and Cumming in Canada in 1957, B.C., has gone from having more than 4,000 1987, p. 57). looking at attitudes toward the mentally ill. beds in the 1960s to less than 800 at present In addition, Cameron’s fellow Rather than educating the public, the (lecture, January 30, 1997), largely because of psychiatrists at the Allan did not approve of his "experiment served . . . to solidify pre-existing budgetary constraints. The public is often treatment ideas (Gillmor). Collins (1988) attitudes of fear and defensiveness" (p. 219). In resistant to having former mental patients in explains why Cameron would push on in spite fact, every group Johannsen looked at - the their communities (Holmes, 1997); there is still of all of this criticism; Cameron wanted to win public, general medical practitioners, a great deal of ignorance as to who "mental a Nobel Prize for his research. Even Cameron’s employees in mental institutions, patients’ patients" are and what "mental illness" is, just as son believes that Cameron was driven by this relatives, employers, religious clergy, and Johannsen (1969) described 30 years ago. What goal. I sincerely hope that this was not behind political leaders - had negative attitudes toward does all of this - the events at the Allan Cameron’s push to develop psychic driving and mental patients. These negative attitudes ranged Memorial, the use of ECT, changing attitudes depatterning as a cure for schizophrenia. This from "fear, distrust, and dislike" (p. 219) to an toward mental patients - mean for psychology? does not seem to fit with the man who underestimation of "the seriousness of the I think it means that psychology cannot really developed the open-door policy for his patients constituent’s symptoms" (p. 222). Rabkin move forward as a discipline until it educates at the Allan. It is bad enough that his patients (1972) summarizes the problem nicely in stating people as to what mental illness really is. So suffered severe memory loss, and were left as that the "public tends to reject disturbed many people view mental illness as a sign of shells of their former selves. If this was the behaviour that is socially visible, even if it is not weakness, or an imperfection in the individual, result of Cameron’s ignorance, at least we can severe in terms of incapacitating effects on the when often (at times, at least) it is due to say that Cameron was trying to cure them. patient" (p. 159). nothing more than a chemical imbalance in the However, if all of this is the result of Cameron’s Because such attitudes have been so brain. Without this type of education, it is quest for recognition and acclaim, then he has prominent, research has been allowed that has conceivable that something similar to the events done a terrible injustice to the patients who were ignored the rights of the individual. Morgan at the Allan could happen again. entrusted in his care, to other psychiatrists and (1971) argues that this is because researchers Psychology also has to work at gaining psychologists who are to be scrutinized and working in hospitals were trained in a university back the trust of the public. Events like what distrusted more because of his actions, and to setting. The emphasis in a university setting is went on at the Allan Memorial only make the Canadian public, who supported his work to publish in scholarly journals, win research people critical and distrustful of psychologists. through government funding. If all of this grants, and so on. When they transfer to the We need to educate the public as to what it is happened because of his need for recognition, hospital setting, they take this "university that we actually do now - and I hope that is, to he cannot be called a humanitarian; rather, he mentality" with them. The researcher is faced try to help people - and work at gaining trust. could be said to show a complete lack of regard with factors - such as the rights of individuals - Without trust, we will not have the support and for mental patients and their care. which they are not accustomed to having to deal cooperation of the public, and we cannot move with. The result is that the patient’s rights are forward as a discipline. Attitudes Toward Mental often ignored. Whether or not one believes that The events at the Allan Memorial Attitudes Toward Mental Patients: Have They Changed? this is purposeful depends on how one views the Psychiatric Institute in the 1950s and 1960s set Patients: Have They Changed? academic system as it is set up. The scope of psychology back to its dark ages. As a this paper is far too small to deal with this issue, discipline, psychology is still trying to work its If Cameron truly was more interested in achieving recognition than in caring for his but it is really no surprise that such a mindset way back into the trust of the public. Cameron said that "psychic driving [was] a potent has developed as a result of the academic ideal; patients, then he must not have had a very that is, to publish. procedure" (1956, p. 508); I do not think he positive attitude towards mental patients. This There is some evidence that attitudes realized just how potent it was. I believe, can only be speculated - we cannot know for sure what Cameron’s motivating factors were. toward mental patients are changing. Waterman however, that if psychology can learn from (1974) stresses that we must emphasize the Cameron’s mistakes, and if we can educate the Perhaps we would not be surprised to find out rights of the individual, as "each [research] public to the point that they understand mental that Cameron was driven by his ambition and participant is a distinct individual entitled to the illness and mental patients, then perhaps some had a negative attitude toward mental patients. However, we would be surprised to find out that full protection of his rights" (p. 470). To value good can come out of all this. It is unfortunate that it took the destruction of so many people’s research findings above the individual, to state his attitude did not differ greatly from that of that "most subjects suffered no ill harm" is of no lives for this to happen. society as a whole. Here we will look at whether benefit to those who do suffer (Waterman, attitudes toward mental patients have changed in the last 30 to 40 years - that is, whether such 1974) . Morgan (1971) points out that the More About Project MKUltra and Dr Eewen individual must be regarded as an end, rather Cameron on Page 31.