🚀 go-pugleaf

I work at Support Coalition International's main office in Eugene, Oregon,
and I'm here to respond to these allegations.

We are a human rights organization with 75 branches and sponsoring groups
all over the U.S. and in several other countries, led by psychiatric
survivors. We fight for the right to not be forcibly treated with
psychiatric drugs, ECT, etc. 

We have absolutely no connection whatsoever to Scientology or the
Citizen's Commission on Human Rights.

Our organization is funded entirely by members and by grants from various
organizations; we receive no government funding.

In article <19980925214049.03779.00000754@ng49.aol.com>,
CARECLIENT <careclient@aol.com> wrote:
>
>David Oaks, Dendron, Support Coalition and the Cult Connection.
> 
>INTRODUCTION
>
>PDXS, a prestigous Oregon newspaper ran a two part 11,000 word investigative
>report on a cult called Re-evaluation Counseling.  It showed how members of

First of all, PDXS is hardly a prestigous newspaper. It is a weekly paper
with circulation limited, for the most part, to the Portland area. 

>this cult which is a spin off from Scientology infiltrate progressive

Secondly, Re-evaluation Counseling is hardly a cult. It is simply a way
for people to meet together and express their feelings in a safe way. 
The founder of RC has some strange ideas about homosexuality et al, but we
at SCI believe that each person is free to believe whatever they want. 
I personally do not use RC or believe in its tenets, but I respect those
who do. SCI has members that are Christian, Jewish, Pagan, Buddhist,
Athiest, Moslem, et al. 

We overlook our differences so that we can focus on what we agree on: that
forced drugging and shock are always wrong. 

This article is merely an ad hominem attack on the beliefs of one board
member. The reason we print her articles and advertise her books is that
she finds re-evaluation counseling helpful, and so do several other
people. Why should we censor something that might save someone's life
because we don't neccessarily agree with all the facets of it? 

No one in RC is forcing people to take part - unlike psychiatry. There are
no hospitals, no needles, no straitjackets, no solitary confinement, no
five-point restraints, or being dragged down the hall. If you don't like
RC, you can just get up, say "This fucking sucks", and leave. If you
decide you don't like psychiatry after being admitted to the hospital, you
can't leave - there are guards and magnetically locked doors and
restraints to keep you there so you WILL get "better." 



>organizations and use their positions in these organizations to sell the
>teachings of Harvey Jackins, Re-evaluation Counseling's founder.  These
>teachings, like those of Scientology are positioned as an alternative to
>psychiatry.  Like Scientology, Re-evaluation Counseling opposes the use of
>medicines for mental illness. Like Scientology, Re-evaluation Counseling
>charges members.  The cost of participating in Re-evaluation Counseling,
>"starts off low"-  around $50. More advanced training, however, is much more
>expensive, and "gets up to $200 to $500."

Keep in mind, this is -training-, for people that are interested in
running an RC group. Taking part in one, e.g. talking with people,
basically peer support, is free.

>
>The second half of the article focused a lot of attention on how Support
>Coalition International functions as a sales tool for Re-evaluation Counseling.

You might more successfully argue that the National Alliance for the
Mentally Ill functions as a sales tool for the drug companies, who fund
NAMI extensively.

>  The article notes that, Janet Forner, a leading member of Re-evaluation
>Counseling is co-coordinator, with David Oaks of Support Coalition.  The story
>details Re-evalution Counseling's funding of Support Coalition and how Support
>Coalition's newspaper Dendron, which is edited by Mr. Oaks, works to funnel

This is an out-and-out lie. Support Coalition International has not
received one cent whatsoever from Re-evaluation Counseling. We have,
however, received grants from the McKenzie River Gathering Foundation,
which has some RC members. Their overall focus, however, is not
re-evaluation counseling.



>recipients of mental health services  away from using medicines and towards the
>cult which  funds his organization.  The article did an excellent job of
>showing the financial ties and interlocking relationships between SCI and
>Re-evaluation Counseling.  

We are pro-choice about psychiatric drugs. That is, if someone voluntarily
wishes to take a drug, that is their perogative. If they do not, they
should not be forced to.

David Oaks will post a more thorough response when he is finished writing
it. 

		David James
		Managing Editor
		Dendron
		Support Coalition International
		P.O. Box 11284
		Eugene, OR