Before reviewers claim Breggin and Cohen are "narrow minded" or "extreme," they need to read eight or ten other source books (among them:From Placebo to Panacea, by Fisher and Greenberg; Blaming the Brain, by Valenstein; Talking Back to Prozac, by Breggin and Breggin; The Tripple Helix, by Lewontin). These are writers of substance, with well-documented arguments. They present clear pictures of the gaping holes in the biopsychiatric model and the shoddy, self-serving research that allegedly supports that model.
Several of these books present detailed indictments of the degree to which huge financial interests dominate psychiatry and drug research; they present clear and verifiable information (of which most psychiatrists, psychologists and social workers seem unaware) about the questionable effectiveness and all-too-common dangers of these drugs.
I don't doubt that a number of people have felt their lives saved by these drugs. But there is much research to support psycho-social interventions which do at least as well as psychiatric meds, without the dangers and side effects. This research is hard to find in the U.S., largely because of the huge amount of money the pharmaceutical companies spend supporting the American Psychiatric Association, NAMI, CHADD, the medical journals, and academic researchers. Studies which don't reinforce drug companies' vested interests are very hard to fund, and harder to publish. The latest figure I've seen: the drug companies in a recent year spent over 13 billion dollars on promotion alone. Dr. Martin Keller, a lead researcher in a major study supporting the use of anti-depressant medication was reported by Glenmullen and the Boston Globe to have received income of over $500,000 dollars from drug companies in a single year.
The efficacy of psychiatric drugs is way overstated. Their damage is vastly minimized by the drug companies, the researchers and the FDA. Read Breggin's Talking Back to Prozac, and Glenmullen's Prozac Backlash. See if you can find, anywhere, a point by point refutation of their specific charges about fudged drug studies and naked economic influence on "scientific" research. You won't find the drug companies, the FDA or the psychiatric establishment addressing these issues head on, fact for fact, because they know they have no response.
Don't just read this one book by Breggin and Cohen. Keep looking. No psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker or counsellor should consider themselves prepared to engage in ethical and informed practice until they have read and seriously considered the other books cited above, as well as several other books by Breggin (e.g., Toxic Psychiatry, Talking Back to Ritalin, The War Against Children of Color).
All this having been said, it's only fair to point out some of the obvious flaws of this book. As mentioned in previous reviews, it is repetitive in places, oddly devoid of any sense of actual experience with emotional suffering, and conspicuously one-sided. To claim that "the degree to which we suffer indicates the degree to which we are alive" is laughably new-agey and useless in a real-world context. Try sharing that bit of fluff with the person so deep in a depression that they can't get out of bed, can't care for themselves or their kids--indeed, can't even cry--and see how it is received. Also, the section on reducing your medications is a bit difficult (even dangerous) to follow if your medication comes in capsule form. Their suggestion that a capsule be opened and its contents separated into smaller doses isn't very helpful--how do you administer the smaller dosages? Couldn't it be risky? All in all, the weakest section of the book is Chapter 13, entitled "Psychological Principles for Helping Yourself and Others Without Resort to Psychiatric Medications". It's rife with mindless psychobabble, offering far too many pat fortune-cookie suggestions without any substantive plan for action. Most disburbingly, Breggin & Cohen tread a dangerous line by zealously condemning ALL use of psychiatric medications (all the while assuring the reader that they don't blame the user). Surely every schizophrenic or bipolar (and their loved ones) won't find solace in the simple realization "that emotional crises and suffering are opportunities for accelerated personal growth" (p210), nor by focusing "on finding a rational, loving, and confident center in yourself that can rise above your emotional crisis or suffer" (p205). Common sense would suggest that sometimes, for some people, a medication can be the sanest, if not the only answer.
At any rate, this book provides a welcome counterpoint to a nation blindly medicating their children into conformity, eagerly requesting prescriptions for psychotropic drugs they see advertised during "Survivor", and assigning a convenient DSM label (with the inevitable, corresponding "miracle" pill) for every emotional fluctuation. In itself, "Your Drug May Be Your Problem" is best regarded as a jumping-off place for further research rather than the end of the line.