Research Paper Start

There are several well-argued reasons that many people are against electroconvulsive therapy. The main reason is that people are misinformed. The first misinformation that turns people against ECT is less common, and really has little to do with ECT itself. This is the information that is presented by ECT experts that supposedly makes ECT look better than it really is. For example, some patients have claimed that doctors played down the side effects of ECT before administering it. There have also been claims that the American Psychiatric Association (APA) falsified reports and statistics regarding frequency and severity of certain side effects, mostly memory loss, of ECT. These claims consist largely of the accusations that the APA report fewer people have suffered memory loss than really have, and that more people have experienced severe or permanent memory loss than the APA reports. However, this form of “misinformation” should not reflect poorly on ECT as it does; if anything, it should be reflecting badly on the doctors that are down-playing the side effects, if indeed they are, and the APA, if they are really falsifying information. In reality, one statistic that the APA is accused of falsifying, the APA claimed was an estimate. Estimating was probably they best they could do, because only four of the fifty United States “require reporting on ECT statistics.”

The other type of misinformation is the kind that misleads people into thinking ECT is worse than it really is. These half-truths usually scare people into their biases. One such variation of half-truth is that presented by the media, which has constantly made ECT appear as an abusive way to control patients rather than a way to help them. [Insert examples.] Another form of frightening half-truth is the overly simplified terms in which ECT is sometimes thought of. People tend to think of electroconvulsive therapy in such expressions as “electrocuting someone’s brain” or “giving someone a seizure,” which are not altogether accurate. Decades ago, these fears may have been somewhat justified, but ECT has made advances in recent years that these are far from the concerns that knowledgeable people have. It is not used for anything other than treating depression, bipolar disorder, and occasionally schizophrenia. ECT has also become much safer than before – in fact, shock therapy’s original origins didn’t use electricity, and medication-induced “seizures” were actually much more dangerous than the electric ones, especially compared to the ones today, with the use of anesthesia, muscle relaxants, and well-controlled amounts of electricity.

[Paragraph about progress of ECT]

ECT isn’t an inhumane treatment, and is certainly making leaps and bounds where progress is concerned – but does it actually serve a purpose? It most certainly does. Electroconvulsive therapy is the quickest form of therapy available for treating depression. [Insert statistic.] Some people might wonder why this is relevant, and these people are probably forgetting one very important thing about depression, and that is how it sometimes ends – death. More specifically, it may end in suicide. [How often does depression cause suicide? How many suicides are planned and how many are spur-of-the-moment?] ECT is a very valuable option in the case of depression when there is a risk of suicide or homicide. In these cases, counseling, and medication may not take effect fast enough to deter these attempts. Because ECT works almost immediately, with results often within one to three weeks [check this with previously inserted statistic], it is the best solution for these solution. However, ECT, like any kind of therapy, is not permanent. It does not prevent suicide, it postpones it. [Insert citation from Verinda Sharma study] This is because depression, for the most part, isn’t curable [Statistic?]. Any time that depression is overcome by any means, it is possible for it to return, so even if ECT is used right away to alleviate the immediate risk of suicide, further treatment is recommended and often necessary.

ECT is not only the fastest form of therapy for depression; it is also the most effectual form of therapy offered. Some patients that are treated for depression may not respond significantly, or even at all, to medication or counseling. Other patients may not be able to take the medications they need due to other health restrictions. In such cases, it is likely that ECT will be able to help. [Insert statistic – regarding success rate of ECT?] There are cases when medication or counseling will be able to build off of what ECT has been able to initiate in a patient, but in more difficult cases, they may use continuous treatment. This hasn’t been very common in the past, due to uncertainty of the effects of long-term exposure to ECT, but has experienced a rise in the medical community. [Insert statistic] One thing that must be handled with special care in the use of continuous ECT is the diagnosis of the person receiving it. They should be properly diagnosed with depression, and it should be made certain that they don’t have bipolar disorder that has been misdiagnosed. There is a risk that, while ECT may help improve bipolar disorder to some extent, excessive use of it may increase the frequency of episodes. For this reason, before receiving continuous ECT for any reason, it is important to be absolutely sure about the diagnosis. ECT is a valuable alternative, and a truly remarkable treatment in many aspects. However, as with any kind of therapy or medicine, it can do damage if used for the wrong purposes.

Electroconvulsive therapy has many advantages over other forms of therapy, and it can produce miraculous results, but in the end, it isn’t a miracle, it is just what it is – it is therapy. Like any kind of therapy, there are downfalls, and these are the downfalls that anti-ECT enthusiasts will emphasize when they try to tear it down. In reality, though, ECT at its worst is no worse than another form of medication or therapy. ECT, like any other type of treatment, can be damaging if it’s misused. A patient can become sick or their condition may actually worsen if they are given the wrong medicine. ECT may hurt the person or make their condition worse if it was the wrong medicine – that’s why it’s so important, as mentioned before, that a patient is properly diagnosed. In addition, there can be too much of a good thing. A patient may overdose, intentionally or unintentionally, by their fault or a doctor’s, on any form of medication – this is definitely harmful, but one would not blame the medication, because that was not the medicine’s intended use. Similarly, if a person receives too much ECT, there will probably be adverse, although most likely not fatal, effects. Any blame for too much electricity being applied or having too many treatment sessions would probably be placed on the doctor in charge – regardless, it isn’t the fault of ECT itself. Harmful amounts of ECT are never the intension. [Dependency on ECT?] However, if any of these things happened with a medication, or another form of more widely-accepted therapy, people would probably not try to deprive the patients of whatever treatment was involved. Similarly, there are no good reasons to try to deprive patients of ECT. If a form of treatment has been misused, the answer should not be to get rid of the treatment – it should be to take better precautions to prevent the misuse.