Is consensual psychiatry just fancy bullying?
If someone consents to have their lunch stolen after being approached by the schoolyard boy, does that mean that there are no ethical problems with the situation?
I'm of the mind that concensual psychiatry doesn't exist in reality. People get lied to about chemical imbalances. It manufactures consent.
Should psychiatric drugs be illegal for adults that want them?
To answer this a bit more in length. The text, workbook lessons, and manual for teachers were in a copyright dispute with FACIM after FIP transferred the copyrights.
FIP is basically Judy Skutch and company while FACIM was Ken Wapnick ad company.
Once Wapnick received the copyright, he proceeded to attempt to quash all other ACIM sites and authors through legal threats. The Endeavor Academy, which I'll just call a cult ( I think David Hoffmeister is from there) with their crazy leader Charles Anderson are the ones to actually challenge the copyright, so for that I thank them.
The challenge was that ACIM should be public domain like the Bible as it is the teachings of Jesus. This is the beginning of Wapnick stating that the Jesus in the course is not the same Jesus of the Bible.
I actually have a rare copy of all the transcripts of the court proceedings and what led up to the trial. It is really strange from all parties involved.
That wasn't the reason that Wapnick lost the copyright though. He lost it because in the early days of sharing the course, Judy Skutch made quite a few xerox copies of it and passed them out for free. Somehow in doing this, this then made it public domain and Wapnick lost the copyright. This is the reason that the earlier editions can be published now.
As far as the later material that is the supplements, this wasn't passed out along with the text, lessons, and manual, so FIP/FACIM were able to keep the copyright to these.