According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) estimations it has been observed that ECT (Electroconvulsive Therapy) or Electroshock has been used in Canada to treat severely depressed patients more than 15,000 times in 2007. This treatment involves subjecting the brain of the depressed patients to electric shock. It is known to cause serious and irreparable damages like memory loss and other impairments to the brain. Moreover the patients who have undergone this treatment have described their experiences as traumatic.
A rally was held in Ottawa on Sunday in support of banning this medical procedure by Sue Clark –Wittenburg who had undergone this treatment 35 years ago. According to her, the ill effects of this form of treatment have proved to be obstacles in her career establishment. She opines that it always causes memory loss and brain damage.
ECT dates back to 1938 and has been used as a part of psychiatric treatment for psychotic depression when all the other forms of treatment fail. In Canada this form of treatment seems to be going strong with the mental health physicians and since 2002 there is no decline in its usage.
According to CBC News, Dr. Nizar Ladha, a psychiatrist from St. John’s, who has been using ECT for the last thirty years, says that ECT is a life saving treatment and even though it causes seizures it is not painful. He says that there were many cases where ECT was successful in combating depression preventing suicide. The Canadian Psychiatric Association and the Canadian Medical Association differ in their opinions regarding the effects of ECT. The former say it is safe and effective while the latter say that it causes brain damage. Dr. Paul Breggin is one of those few psychiatrists who acknowledges the ill –effects of ECT and feels that it should be banned. Dr. David Goldbloom, a Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (Toronto) psychiatrist feels that this form of treatment has survived despite repeated pleas to ban it and it is going to become more popular in future.
It is seen that generally the psychiatrists seem to favor the ECT while the rest including the patients feels that it is a traumatic treatment with very serious side effects. This form of treatment has both pros and cons. The pros are that there have been evidences showing that in the most severe types of clinical depression and suicidal tendencies, the ECT seems to have worked as a life saving treatment. The cons are of course the numerous brain related impairments. Given that the treatment of any form of serious ailments has side effects that may be traumatic, for example, chemotherapy for treating cancer, it is upto the common man to weigh the pros and cons and decide upon the acceptability of the treatment. ECT under expert medical guidance may not be that harmful after all.
via: CBC News,
Comments
Urgjh! I am personally strongly against ECT as I feel it is a vulgar and brute force therapy. A bit like throwing a grenade in a room to kill a fly, it may do the job sometimes but at what cost?
~Shiv
MayoClinic.com has a recent blog posting on electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) — and how it can be safe and effective. You can find the post on the Depression blog at MayoClinic.com. (Disclosure: I do some writing for Mayo Clinic, but have not written for this blog.)
It is agreed that ECT is a traumatic form of treatment and it should not be used widely.But when all the other methods fail and saving the life of a person is important there is not much choice left but to go for it. It is just like treating cancer. The side effcets can be very traumatic but we still go for the treatment in order to save the life of the victim.
This article references the more outdated ECT methodologies in the beginning of the article, and the graphic further stigmatizes what can be a life saving procedure for some. Clearly the author has not experienced severe depression first hand.
I agree that ECT should be a treatment method of last resort for unipolar depression. However, when all other alternatives are exhausted, there is clinical proof that the procedure can provide relief. Given the alternative of possible suicide, and the impact to the patient’s family ECT can be the best option sometimes.
It seems the commentator heat v has either not understood the essence of the post or has not read it thoroughly before making his/her comments. If you read the post and the author’s comments carefully you will see that the author has suggested that electroshock therapy is safe under expert medical supervision and should be resorted to in the most severe forms of depression when all the other treatments fail and to prevent the patient from committing suicide.
I did read the whole article. If you look at the graphic, and the anti-ECT slant, it’s fairly obvious. They don’t cite quotes from anyone who has received relief. They also don’t talk about the cousins on this procedure, VNS and TMS. And as far as a last resort treatment, yes, they acknowledge it is a last resort treatment - just like cutting off a leg is the last resort for treating damage from diabetes. It’s all in the framing.