Peter Kinderman

I am stepping away from Twitter. The platform lacks compassion and is now tainted by hurtful values and behaviour, and I no longer wish to be part of it. Thank you for all the positive links made here – please follow me here: bsky.app/profile/peterk…

For decades, those of us speaking about the harms caused by taking and coming off psychiatric drugs have been ignored, denied or dismissed. I’ve been labeled everything from “antipsychiatry,” “anti-science,” and “Scientologist,” to “right-wing fascist” and “anti-vax,” to simply “too mentally ill” to understand what was happening to me. Now the APA’s own annual meeting is full of panels on deprescribing, overmedication, withdrawal, and psychiatrists openly admitting they regret not helping patients come off these drugs sooner. The hundreds of thousands of personal stories of psychiatric iatrogenesis have become impossible to keep waving away as meaningless anecdotes. I have deep compassion for how hard it must be to face the possibility that you’ve been inadvertently causing harm to patients you’ve been trying to help. But fear is the master distorter of truth, and the only way out is through. We are eager to build a big-tent coalition to begin work on these changes we all know are necessary. I hope you’ll join us.

It really shouldn't need to be said but here is @taperingtay in possession of a bleeding lefty heart but also a brain susceptible to the principle of homeostasis in response to exposure to psychotropic drugs re-iterating that this is not a partisan issue but a public health issue that needs to be addressed.

@Mad_In_America … “I guess Aftab assumed that nobody would bother to click on the link..”

Psychiatry’s Attack Dog Is at It Again By Robert Whitaker Awais Aftab's latest post lumps critics as varied as journalists, psychiatrists, and those with lived experience together, inaccurately smearing them by invoking MAHA and Szasz. buff.ly/twr1VcR

@DrLuisACenteno1 Ouch!

I wonder how many patients she has seen last week. A disgrace to psychiatry in particular and human intellect in general.

What is the real link between depression and serotonin levels? Joanna Moncrieff argues that there is no causal link between the two at all, and that this idea has been pushed without sufficient evidence by the pharmaceutical industry. Moncrieff is Professor of Critical and Social Psychiatry at University College London, and a consultant psychiatrist for the NHS. Tap here for her full talk. iai.tv/video/mental-h…

Rearranging deck chairs while the Titanic goes down – The American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology Issues Deprescribing Recommendations By Carrie Clark and Mark Horowitz madintheuk.com/2026/05/rearra… #Deprescribing #PsychiatricDrugs #InformedConsent #MentalHealthReform

I can understand this is a difficult time for my psychiatry colleagues. I am sure they all have good intentions, but it turns out that the most widely used psychiatric treatment, antidepressants, causes significant iatrogenic effects (e.g. severe withdrawal reactions, PSSD), is not very effective (at best) and does not target an underlying biological abnormality after all. Although many people still seek a psychiatric diagnosis and a medical approach, increasing numbers highlight how misleading and disabling this approach can be. Their voices are starting to be heard, and we need to work with them to provide help for people who have been harmed by psychiatric treatment, and to prevent more harm being done. Trying to shoot the messenger doesn’t help anyone.

For years, patients were told that coming off antidepressants was straightforward. But some have described intense and prolonged symptoms. Now, doctors and health officials are reckoning with the challenges of getting off SSRIs. wapo.st/42yetJq

Excellent piece in @nytimes. The 'core ideas [of the alliance] are that mainstream psychiatry is too quick to see normal human suffering as a disease, that its diagnostic labels often crush a patients identity and sense of agency and that psychotropics, for many, do more harm than good'. nytimes.com/2026/05/15/mag….

If you want to help someone who is having psychological problems, “What’s going on, bro? What happened that made you distressed?” helps a lot more than, “Go see a psychiatrist and take drugs.” For more: madinamerica.com/2018/01/public…

For the first time in the history of modern antidepressants, psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry have lost control of the dominant narrative. The long standing consensus, anchored in claims of dangerous and unscientific favourable risk benefit profiles, negligible withdrawal liability and the reflexive assertion that symptoms of withdrawal syndromes merely represent relapse of the underlying disorder, is now fracturing. Decades of accumulated evidence on neuroadaptation increasingly align with thousands of patient reports of protracted withdrawal syndromes, delayed onset symptoms, kindling and persistent post SSRI sexual dysfunction (PSSD). These phenomena were systematically minimised, pathologised as “underlying illness” or dismissed as anecdotal for years. This represents a profound epistemic rupture. For over three decades, the profession maintained near hegemonic authority over the interpretation of clinical data, trial design (where withdrawal was rarely a primary outcome) and the framing of adverse effects. That monopoly is visibly disintegrating as high visibility accounts disseminate mechanistic explanations and lived experience data that the old paradigm could no longer suppress. The gatekeepers’ standard responses, labelling critics as “anti psychiatry,” invoking Scientology guilt by association, labelling as “pill shamers”or issuing ‘reassuring’ guidelines without addressing the full spectrum of neurobiological evidence and patient experience, are losing their potency. Go to the accounts of any of the well known biological psychiatry defenders and iatrogenic harm minimisers, @ompsychiatrist, @ProfRobHoward , @tylerblack32, @DrAnnieHickox , @JRBneuropsiq, @AhmadRehanKhan, @pash22, @mgoldingmd, @patmcgorry, @jonathanstea, @m_aadil and others, and you’ll witness a live action scramble unfolding in real time. It would almost be fascinating if it weren’t so disturbing. This is exactly how psychiatry has been able to inflict incomprehensible levels of harm for decades: a coordinated mix of denial, deflection, patient/critic smearing and institutional self protection, all while the human cost continues to mount. History is rarely kind to medical establishments and clinicians that prioritise institutional self preservation and pharmacological optimism over rigorous accounting of iatrogenic harm. The old paradigm is cracking, and no amount of rhetorical deflection can restore the former consensus.

Don't be taken in by Trump and RFK jnr's apparent critique of psychiatry. Right wing will always use legitimate questions for nefarious ends aljazeera.com/opinions/2025/…

Always gratifying to see someone who has criticised and dismissed your work then copy it (without attribution).

April 30th: Beyond Diagnosis: ‘if there’s no label there’s no help’ madintheuk.com/2026/04/april-… via @MITUKTeam Do we always need a diagnosis to access services? What are the alternatives? @peterkinderman explains.

A global shift in #MentalHealth is happening - powered by @WHO #QualityRights tools that drive rights-based, person-centred, evidence-based care. Real change needs action. Use them. Share them. Advocate for them. Transform services and systems. ▶️ Watch the video

𝗔 𝗯𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗵𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 @WHO 𝗚𝘂𝗶𝗱𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗼𝗻 𝗠𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗣𝗹𝗮𝗻𝘀 provides comprehensive, actionable steps to help countries strengthen leadership, services, workforce and cross-sector collaboration for rights-based, person-centred and recovery-oriented mental health systems and approaches. #QualityRights

@RITB_ Apart from the ones who write books outlining exactly that: abebooks.co.uk/9781137408709/…

"Critical" profs never outline how non-diagnostic MH services (not physical health) would work given they're required by Trusts to list diagnoses which are then put into ICD codes.

@sarafinlayson @justin_garson The issues being discussed here are not in any way obscure. But - yes - I am more disappointed with colleagues who feel that active attacks on compassionate and evidence-based approaches should be a rallying cry for self-serving professional advancement.

@peterkinderman @justin_garson Professional understanding comes with the opportunity to spend time with people experiencing unusual beliefs. Not many have that luxury I suppose, and not all respond with motivated blindness and hostility (although of course I’ve seen that, you often have taken a hammering 🙁)

I’m starting to question the very concept of ‘delusions’: the very act of labeling you as delusional implies a superiority on my part - that my grasp of reality is superior to yours in a way that does not merit argumentation. Why would that ever be an appropriate stance to adopt?