chapter 24 The Citizens Commission on Human Rights and Scientology’s War against Psychiatry Matthew Charet Introduction When devoted Scientologist celebrity Tom Cruise spoke out in May 2005 against actress Brooke Shields’ use of the antidepressant drug Paxil to treat postpartum depression, he unleashed a storm of controversy in the popular press. Cruise’s comments were strongly reflective of the criticism of the psychi- atric and other mental health professions that have underpinned Scientology since its foundation. Ten years on, it is clear that much of the material Cruise references in his criticism of psychiatry comes largely from the literature of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights (henceforth cchr). Founded by the Church of Scientology in 1969 in association with prominent psychiatric critic Professor Thomas Szasz, the officially independent cchr has become perhaps the most active and vocal organisation opposing what it claims are the unethi- cal, immoral and – perhaps more importantly – unscientific bases of psychia- try’s claims to authority in the mental health arena. Since its inception, the cchr has been utilised by Scientology to inform the public about the apparent dangers of psychiatric practice. It does this through public service announce- ments on television, online advertisements and a prominent online presence. It also publishes numerous booklets, several books, dvds, and perhaps most effectively the exhibition Psychiatry: An Industry of Death. In addition to its media campaigns, the cchr also pickets psychiatric conventions, lobbies for mandatory health warnings on psychiatric medication, and exposes the illegal and unethical activities of some members of the psychiatric profession. This latter is perhaps most successfully demonstrated by the exposure of deep sleep therapy at Chelmsford Private Hospital in Australia in the late 1980s. Through these means, the cchr has become one of the most well-known voices raised against psychiatry and the mainstream mental health professions in the world today, aiding Scientology in its self-declared fight against psychiatry for hege- mony over the field of mental health. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi �0.��63/978900433054�_0�6 <UN> 566 Charet A War of Words The dialogue between Cruise and Shields piqued my own interest in Scientol- ogy’s opposition to psychiatry a decade ago, and provides an insight into the arguments raised by Scientology against the psychiatric profession. As back- ground, Shields’ disclosure about her use of psychiatric medication came with the publication of her autobiographical book Down Came the Rain: My Journey through Postpartum Depression, released in early May 2005, in which she wrote about her use of medication to treat depression after the birth of her first child, daughter Rowan, in 2003. Cruise, in an interview with tv show Access Holly- wood which aired on 26 May, expressed the opinion that Shields should have used vitamins and exercise to treat her depression: “These drugs are danger- ous. I have actually helped people come off”, Cruise maintained to host Billy Bush. “When you talk about postpartum, you can take people today, women, and what you do is you use vitamins. There is a hormonal thing that is going on, scientifically, you can prove that. But when you talk about emotional, chemical imbalances in people, there is no science behind that. You can use vitamins to help a woman through those things” (Grove and Morgan 2005). Shields, Cruise maintained, was “irresponsible” to be advocating the use of drugs. He further asserted that, “When someone says medication has helped them, it is to cope; it didn’t cure anything. There is no science. There is nothing that can cure them whatsoever” (Locke 2005). Cruise’s comments sparked a critical backlash, not least from Shields herself, but also served to bring into public prominence Sci- entology’s deep-seated rejection of psychiatry, psychology and the whole edi- fice of contemporary mental health assessment and treatment. In response to Cruise’s attack on national television, Shields was reported on 2 June to have said that “Tom should stick to saving the world from aliens [a reference both to Cruise’s latest movie War of the Worlds and possibly to Scientology’s more exotic beliefs] and let women who are experiencing postpar- tum depression decide what treatment options are best for them” (People Mag- azine 2005). This opinion was further supported by her essay “War of Words” which was published in The New York Times on 1 July 2005 (Shields 2005). Shields observed how comforted she was when “my obstetrician told me that my feel- ings of extreme despair and my suicidal thoughts were directly tied to a bio- chemical shift in my body. Once we admit that postpartum is a serious medical condition, then the treatment becomes more available and socially acceptable. With a doctor’s care, I have since tapered off the medication, but without it, I wouldn’t have become the loving parent I am today” (Shields 2005). Shields was praised in the media for her candour and bravery in coming forward in support of others who suffered as she had and believed that Cruise’s comments were “a disservice to mothers everywhere”. Shields arguably reflects the view of <UN>.