Psychiatrist tries to silence forced electroshock survivor
In New Zealand, a psychiatrist, Stephanie du Fresne, was administering involuntary electroshock (also known as electroconvulsive therapy). During an outing the recipient of the electroshock went to a TV station and got on national television about her human rights abuse. Dr. du Fresne filed a complaint against the television station, claiming the TV station was violating the right of her allegedly-insane patient to “informed consent” about appearing on national television. On 7 February 2008, a New Zealand High Court “quashed” the psychiatrist’s attempt to stifle free speech.
New Zealand psychiatrist Stephanie du Fresne tried to stop one of her patients from speaking out on national television about involuntary electroshock administered by the doctor. A High Court in New Zealand “quashed” Dr. Fresne’s request, and here’s the court ruling.
When a woman who had experienced forced electroshock told her story on a New Zealand television news show, the doctor who had given the involuntary electroshock filed a formal complaint with the TV show, claiming it was the journalist who had violated the woman’s informed consent.
Here is the actual ruling on 26 March 2007 by TV3 of New Zealand squashing a complaint by the doctor who had given Julie Simmonds forced electroshock. The doctor, Dr. Stephanie du Fresne, claimed that it was TV3 that was violating Julie’s rights by airing her story! TV3 found that the doctor’s claim was “inconsistent with the operation of a free and democratic society.”
New Zealand court “quashes” psychiatrist du Fresne attempt to silence survivor of her own forced electroshock
When New Zealand psychiatrist du Fresne tried to stop a TV station from interviewing a survivor of her own forced electroshock, the public was outraged. A court ruled that Dr. du Fresne had no legal leg to stand on.