Debate Over ETC

5 Pages 1264 Words

The Debate Over ECT
Some things doctors never tell their patients, the following is a great example. Would you guess that a form of torture in many countries is used as “therapy” here in the United States? That’s right, “[Electroconvulsive shock treatment] was used on nearly all political prisoners held in Brazil in the 1970s” (Chavin 1). Brazil is not alone in this form of medical torture. South Africa, Libya, Iran and Morocco have all been known to use Electroconvulsive shock therapy (ECT) as a form of torture (Chavin 1).
ECT has been around since the 1930s and is an electrical current passing through the brain, which brings on seizures in the patient. It came from the idea that seizures and schizophrenia did not occur at the same time in one person. The why and how of this therapy is still not known (United States 1). Doctors most commonly use ECT treatments with clinically depressed, elderly individuals (Manly 1). Electroconvulsive shock therapy is a risky procedure with no guarantees and is too dangerous to be using on humans.
The opposition believes that ECT is the best way to treat life-threatening depression due to its immediate results. They also argue that when used in the right settings and under correct supervision, electroconvulsive shock therapy is only as dangerous as anti- depressant medication (United States 1). “ECT is often the treatment of choice in the elderly patient whose depression presents life-threatening symptoms or behavior…” says Dr. David Manly (1). In the Surgeon Generals report, it states, “The antidepressant effect of ECT occurs faster than that seen with medication…” (1). Those opposed also state that the side effects of ECT are temporary and usually only last for up to six months.
The problem is “that electroshock is a form of torture. But placed in a hospital setting and cloaked in muscle relaxants… it is suddenly and inexplicitly pronounced ‘therapy’” (Chav...