International Association Against Psychiatric Assault 

 Spechtweg 1, 4125 Riehen, Switzerland
The association is a Human Rights organization that opposes psychiatric coercion and aims to abolish psychiatric coercive measures altogether, promoting the fundamental rights of self-determination, liberty, and human dignity.
                                                                                                         Erklärung in Deutsch                      
                 The Psychiatric Hegemony is broken 

16 months after the WPA World Congress in Berlin it's ethic committee president, Paul Appelbaum, suggests "ignoring, re-interpreting or amending the CRPD", and also that the psychiatric organizations should move governments to “ignore the Convention". That's obviously a new approach as psychiatrists are always government-opportunistic and obedient. All of a sudden psychiatrists hope to be able to rule international law and national governments because, mind the conspiracy theory, "..blame is due to a [CRPD] drafting process that was captured by some of the most radical elements of the patients’ rights movement,..." *

In the rush to regain the psychiatric hegemony on "well-being of persons with disabilities", the WPA tries to obscure the deep move which the UN Human Rights department made. In it´s publication „Mental health and human rights“, Document A/HRC/34/32 it dropped the dystopian claim of a right to health formerly phrased thus: „Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity“. Such a right would include the prohibition of death…. The WHO used to argue in favour of this right but the UN Human Rights department decided on a radically different reinterpretation and now it claims instead to a right to health as a right to a state of the art medical treatment but never without informed consent.**
This resulted in the demands by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, one of "the most radical elements of the patients’ rights movement", who „called for the elimination of practices such as forced treatment, including forced medication, forced electroconvulsive treatment, forced institutionalization and segregation", see his report on 4th of July 2018.*** 
To add blame to the shame, the psychiatric profession had to acquiesce, that: 
  • The psychopharmacological research funding has been cancelled due to a lack of prospects for success; basic research has shown that basic psychiatric assumptions are false or invalid. Thomas Insel, the director of the National Institute for Mental Health (NIHM) in the USA, finally admitted in a NIMH publication on April 29, 2013 that up till now all psychiatric diagnonsense has no validity at all. 
  • This became particularly apparent in the so-called „Nun Study“: this is like a nuclear meltdown – the worst case scenario for the psychiatric concept. For if one thing was identified as an unquestionable brain correlation of increasing forgetfulness in old age and as the alleged „Alzheimer’s disease“, then this was the plaque in the brain which is supposed to be visible through brain scans. But the opposite is the case: „A conspicuous result was the deviation of the pathological brain findings (multiple Alzheimer’s plaques) from the repeatedly raised mental/intellectual performance of the same persons during their lifetime. This means that also in the case of persons who were able to solve intellectually challenging tasks right up to their death, in the dissection strongly altered brain findings could be identified“, as briefly summarized in Wikipedia. Thus the psychiatric-neurological „knowledge“, believed to be the most solid, has proved itself to be pure gibberisch about a supposed body-soul correlation. 
    Recently the psychopharmacological research also stopped its engagement,
     proof here
  • The summarized statement by the former President of the WPA, Dinesh Bhugra, is the result of this: Psychiatry is in deep trouble. It needs 10% of medical students, but is only getting 4% and that has been going on for a long time. He blames “teaching experience and clinical experience” as the reasons medical students choose not to do Psychiatry. He says that in the UK, they have trouble getting natives to become psychiatrists – that’s why they have to import them from other countries. 
 The European users and survivors also contradict the WPA, see here
Conclusion: Psychiatry has a broken morale and psychiatrists are rightly described as criminals protected by the state

                  This is a resolution of the IAAPA General Assembly on 11th June 2019

* Editorial page 1+2
** Page 5: 
The right to health contains freedoms (such as the freedom to control one’s health and body and the right to be free from interference, torture and non-consensual medical treatment) and entitlements (such as the right to a health system that provides equality of opportunity for people to enjoy the highest attainable level of health). While, in recognition of resource constraints, the right to health is subject to progressive realization, the freedom element in the right to health is subject to neither progressive realization nor resource availability.  
„The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein,“….. „called for the elimination of practices such as forced treatment, including forced medication, forced electroconvulsive treatment, forced institutionalization and segregation. 
Instead, he“…. „reminded participants that the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities offered the legal framework to uphold the rights of people with psychosocial disabilities — including the exercise of legal capacity, free and informed consent, the right to live and be included in the community and the right to liberty and security, without discrimination.“ 
„In closing, the United Nations Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, Kate Gilmore,“…“condemned the unlawful use of the law to dominate and discriminate, and its conversion into a threat to the enjoyment of rights. She concluded by remarking that everyone held the responsibility of knowledge: change was within reach, it was affordable and it was reasonable, and she thus called upon all actors to co-design services and work together to create health-enabling environments.“ [Page 13 ff] 
The Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment made concrete recommendations for moving forward. He stressed the pressing need to abolish legislation that allowed persons with disabilities to be institutionalized …“ 
He underscored the imperative of recognizing violence and abuse perpetrated against persons with disabilities as being a form of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in order to afford victims and advocates stronger legal protection for those violations.“ 
The following recommendations were proposed: 
States should ensure that all health care and services, including all mental health care and services, are based on the free and informed consent of the individual concerned, and that legal provisions and policies permitting the use of coercion and forced interventions, including involuntary hospitalization and institutionalization, the use of restraints, psychosurgery, forced medication, and other forced measures aimed at correcting or fixing an actual or perceived impairment, including those allowing for consent or authorization by a third party, are repealed. States should reframe and recognize these practices as constituting torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and as amounting to discrimination against users of mental health services, persons with mental health conditions and persons with psychosocial disabilities. States should ensure their enjoyment and exercise of legal capacity on an equal basis with others by repealing laws that provided for substituted decision-making, and should provide: a range of voluntary supported decision-making mechanisms, including peer support, respectful of their individual autonomy, will and preferences; safeguards against abuse and undue influence within support arrangements; and the allocation of resources to enable and ensure the availability of support.“ [Page 14]