ChapterPDF Available

Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse


Abstract and Figures

In 1998, Dinah Murray founded APANA (Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse), an autistic-led campaign in the UK to stop the overuse of drugs being given to people with intellectual disabilities. The campaign subverted the medicalization of “challenging behavior” and focused on three cases studies of institutionalized autistic adults who were being overprescribed. Murray compiled statistics on their medications and their visits to doctors, found allies, began spreading the message via the internet and using legal recourse. Espousing a non-pathological model of autism, APANA raised awareness of the harms of overmedication in the learning disability world and, perhaps, more caution in the psychiatric world. It may have impacted on some government guidelines, and on the author’s reputation as resourceful and reasonable, which benefitted her future activism.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse
Dinah Murray
In the mid-90s I had a job as a support worker for people with severe and
multiple learning (intellectual) disabilities including autism, who had been
discharged from National Health Service (NHS)-run long-stay hospitals
into “the community.” Our training for this job was thorough and humane
in many ways, but little was said about the stacks of ring-bound blister
packs of pills kept under lock and key. A community pharmacist explained
to us how to administer the pills in the right order at the right time
with proper regard to hygiene and record keeping. Nothing was more
important, it seemed.
At first I took it for granted there were good reasons for all the pills:
after all, these people had come out of hospitals. However, after a while I
noticed that thioridazine was one of the “medications” and it rang a bell
as one of the “old, dirty” antipsychotics aka “major tranquilizers”—well-
known to cause severe movement disorders inter alia. I started looking up
D. Murray (B)
London, UK
© The Author(s) 2020
S. K. Kapp (ed.), Autistic Community and the Neurodiversity Movement,
52 D. Murray
the other drugs, then someone left this photocopied article in the office
about the use of antipsychotic drugs with adults with learning disabilities
and challenging behavior. These disabled people were being deliberately
sedated with extremely harmful drugs.
One night the young manager, in tears, told me she’d just discovered
that one of our most severely disabled people, who had gone into the old
institution when he was 4 or 5 years old, had ridden his tricycle into the
long stay hospital where he had then lived and been drugged with major
tranquilizersfor 40 years. We knew him as someone who needed help
even to turn over. The period when our people had been hospitalized was
a period of excited experimentation with new drugs and the doctors really
had no idea what they were doing when they prescribed doses of chlor-
promazine (an antipsychotic) to children which would later be regarded
as around twelve times the recommended maximum. I was in tears too.
I became obsessed with the medication. It was increasingly clear that we
were looking at routine, unquestioned, administration of substances that
everybody in the know knew to be dangerous, to people that everybody
in the know knew to be powerless: the rage drove work lasting into the
twenty-first century.
As I got deeper into the general research I was doing, I became more
and more horror-struck by the great range of problematic features of the
whole psychotropic prescribing business, which were stripped bare in the
power structures in which people with no information and no voice were
ultimately vulnerable. I discovered that the drugs had a negative impact on
hormones, insulin, dopamine, teeth, all drives including sex drive; I dis-
covered these drugs kill people as well as twisting their limbs; I discovered
that there was a long-term cumulative harmful impact and that the move-
ment disorders many develop include a terrible restlessness, emotional
and physical, as well as catatonia-like loss of function and uncontrollable
tongue and limb movements; that polypharmacy—multiple prescribing—
was often to counter iatrogenic impacts of other drugs; that it had long
been known that previously sane monkeys had gone bonkers after being
dosed with a neuroleptic for several months which was suddenly with-
drawn, causing not “relapses” but discontinuation syndrome, and gradual
withdrawal was strongly recommended but rarely followed; that people
were being medicated for distressing events and their signs of misery were
4 Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse 53
seen as challenging instead of them being helped to deal with their under-
standable grief and upset; that urinary incontinence was a possible adverse
effect (with huge social consequences) that was regarded as insignificant;
that lactation was sometimes triggered, even in males; that weight gain
to the point of obesity was shrugged off in the research but punished in
the kitchens by stricter diets and locked cupboards. Worse still, all claims
of “successful outcomes” were based on reductions in behavior of various
sorts—given the usual sedating effects of the major tranquilizers, their
ability to reduce behavior was unimpressive—the sedative effect wears off
after 6–8 weeks, few studies at that time lasted longer than 6–8 weeks (see
Fig. 4.1).
So I left my regular job and signed on as a relief worker, a casual worker
status that meant I could never be asked to distribute medications. This
also gave me more time for research and to develop a campaigning website.
Thanks to pharmacologist Paul Shattock who told me about it—he was
publicly concerned about the use of neuroleptics for behavior control long
Fig. 4.1 The chart clearly showed that the vast majority of claimed “benefits”
of medication in this sphere are about reducing behavior rather than enhancing
personal well-being or capacity
54 D. Murray
before his public support for Andrew Wakefield’s dubious research into
the MMR vaccine—I went to an Autism Europe Conference in Brussels
and heard about their Code of Good Practice on Prevention of Violence
against Persons with Autism [1]. Paul also introduced me there to a con-
cerned mother from the UK; meeting her at that conference was the first
necessary step toward getting some activists working together in the tiny
and unstructured group we called Autistic People Against Neuroleptic
Abuse, or APANA for short.
The point of APANA was to be an effective vehicle to raise awareness
of the harms being done to vulnerable people in the name of care, and
to penetrate some entrenched positions in huge and deep-rooted power
structures. For people with access (not the subjects of my case studies!),
the Internet proved a rich source of information about both government
and NGO thinking on these and related issues: there were consultations,
and guidelines, and that was one way to get one’s voice heard.
Getting to Work and Forming Alliances
APANA recruited two autistic people: as Chairperson, David Andrews,
who was in the process of acquiring several psychology-related qualifica-
tions; as Patron, Wendy Lawson (now known as Wenn Lawson), who was
well along a similar path. The rest of the team were all parents of adult
offspring they had seen damaged by psychiatrictreatment. I was spending
more and more time reading research (for example, [26]). I discovered
that an unexpected result of the hospital closures was that prescriptions
of psychotropics had gone up as neighbors of the new noisy people in the
community complained. When I looked into the old prescription records,
I found that this was true for almost everyone in the houses where I most
often worked. The institutions had eventually had a policy of reducing
There was one discovery in the files that tipped my concern from a
commitment to an out-and-out mission. A service user I’ll call Patrick,
who was on the highest neuroleptic dose I found in this group, had become
borderline catatonic. From the files it was clear that he had once been
fairly lively. Then I found a letter, addressed to senior management from
4 Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse 55
the “community” learning disability psychiatrist. She complained in her
letter that support workers had questioned her judgment that Patricks
medication should be increased by 30%. Since the rules that govern care
providers explicitly require them to follow all medical advice or put their
business at risk, this reproach was significant and probably got some caring
and conscientious workers into a bit of trouble. Much worse though were
the repercussions for Patrick: the psychiatrist had increased his dose by
50% after her authority had been questioned in this outrageous way;
without prompting he was no longer able even to complete the action of
putting a kettle on to boil. It is ironic that “health and safety” risk aversion
in social care settings led to routine, authorized, high-risk behavior by both
staff and management toward the people receiving their “care.”
I discovered that distinguished psychiatrist Lorna Wing was interested
in autism and catatonia, and had expressed concerns that neuroleptic pre-
scribing was sometimes implicated in its onset. So I rang Lorna Wing’s
Centre, then known as the Centre for Social and Communication Disor-
ders, in the hopes of speaking to her. She was not there that day but Judith
Gould came to the phone to deal with this unknown support worker’s
anxious query. She listened to the problem, immediately said I should
ring Lorna Wing herself and gave me her home phone number. So next I
picked up the phone and dialed that. The great Wing answered the phone
herself and was so interested and open that I trusted her at once and said
very soon after our conversation began, that all I had found among her col-
leagues was “Arrogance, ignorance, and hypocrisy”—to which, taking my
breath away, she replied with vigor, “I couldn’t agree more!” One couldn’t
hope for a better ally in this particular battle [7].
Communicating Our Message Across Many
I decided to write up case studies of what I’d found in the files in a way
that would make the research as effective as possible. I looked at quality
of life issues and the impact on those of the ramified adverse effects of
the prescribed drugs; I compiled detailed timelines for four service users,
three of them autistic, and their life events [8].
56 D. Murray
Unfortunately, how to carry out quality of life assessments objectively
remains a vexed question to this day [9], so instead I took and followed
advice on assessing relevant costs, such as travel and staff time, in British
pounds and went back through the records adding actual costs or rule-
governed estimates of costs to the timelines.
Our website, run by my friend Sue Craig, had much factual infor-
mation, including all the illustrations to this chapter, and useful links
and ancient advertisements for old drugs and new. Canadian artist Ralph
Smith designed an elegant logo for us (Fig. 4.2). This served us well and
got the message out that Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse was
an active force. Autistic activists in the USA such as A. M. Baggs (now
Fig. 4.2 Summarized comparisons of restrictive or potentially fatal effects of
psychotropic drugs prescribed for autistic adults with learning disabilities and
challenging behavior (ca 2001). From left to right, starting with the antipsy-
chotics: phenothiazines (e.g. Chlorpromazine), thioxanthines (e.g. Fluenthixol),
Haloperidol, pimozide, risperidone, olanzapine; and then various non-neuroleptic
experimental drugs for autism-related perceived problems, viz paroxetine, lithium,
carbamazepine, buspirone, naltrexone, and the beta-blocker propranolol
4 Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse 57
known as Mel Baggs) and Kassiane Sibley (now Kassiane Asasumasu) were
supportive and deepened my understanding of what it is like to be on the
receiving end of interventions designed solely for the purpose of suppress-
ing behavior which other people condemn.
Being able to brand the work as from “APANA” was I think particularly
helpful in being taken seriously rather than assimilated into the vox populi.
Mencap, the main British learning disabilities charity, agreed to circulate
the research to their consortium of service providers in this field.
It also helped that I had some strategically placed friends and allies.
David Branford, a senior learning disabilities pharmacist, was sympathetic,
and encouraged me to attend a conference he was organizing in Leicester
late last century. It was there I first encountered the “psychiatry is to real
medicine as astrology is to astronomy” meme, inadvertently shared with
me by a psychiatrist who misjudged my status until rather late in our
conversation, assuming I was a fellow clinician.
Rita Jordan at Birmingham University gave me a platform for the med-
ication issues on one of the Autism Distance Education Course weekends,
thus reaching everyone doing the course at that time. Almost all of those
were professionals in the field, some in senior positions, including people
who worked with adults. Glenys Jones was in the process of setting up
a new, practical, autism-relevant journal, Good Autism Practice,andshe
invited me to submit my research for the prototype issue, published in
1999. I also got a poster presentation at the Autism Europe Conference
in Glasgow that year and Wen Lawson and/or I were there in person
throughout ready to discuss it.
Pressing Parliament and Leaning on the Law
I undertook a careful analysis of a range of medications proposed
at the time for “ameliorating autistic behavior,” and I scored adverse
effects according to their recognized frequency (using the free Med-
line database). Risperidone, newly popular with prescribers, was only
slightly less harmful than chlorpromazine at the recommended (like-
for-like) dose ranges for psychosis (see Fig. 4.3). Wenn Lawson and
myself addressed a sub-committee of the All-Party Parliamentary Group
58 D. Murray
Fig. 4.3 The APANA logo, designed by Ralph Smith
on Autism about prescribing, illustrated with Fig. 4.1.(Oneofthepeo-
ple who heard us was Virgina Bovell, a mother of an autistic person with
learning disabilities, in whom we found a new ally despite her involvement
with behaviorism—I later came to understand that parents may be pre-
sented with behavioral approaches as the only alternative to a medicalized
attitude and recourse to drugs.)
I got views from as many as possible autistic people with relevant expe-
rience and discovered that some, but not all, were saying that at a very
low dose, they found risperidone positively helpful; that it improved their
mood and could make social encounters less stressful. If someone tells me
that they find a drug helpful and their consumption is moderate, I’m going
to see that as normal human practice. In the case of risperidone or other
antipsychotics, I liken this to accepting that a glass of wine every day may
do a lot of good, while a bottle will not. To me it is the absence of choice,
the absence of relevant information, and the inability to refuse that need
fixing. In the long run, it is worth noting that most of the people I knew
who liked risperidone at a low dose eventually developed adverse effects
that put them off—they were fortunate to have the capacity to articulate
their problems and the autonomy to make this decision.
(Having now, two decades later, read through extensive messages posted
in the last few years on mental health forums, it is clear that low dosing
with risperidone has become commonplace, especially for anxiety. It is
also clear that there is a major division in people’s experiences of this
drug, with some people greeting its effects with joy and others with real
horror.To give something as powerful and unpredictable as this to people
who are unable to tell you how they feel, still seems to me the height of
irresponsibility. People need to understand the potential risks and freely
4 Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse 59
choose to take them. Clearly that did not apply to the people in my case
Though our message was being heard in some quarters, the extreme
power imbalance sometimes seemed overwhelming. So we decided to keep
pushing positive proposals tied to precisely referenced and cited govern-
ment papers, by addressing civil servants, administrators, and Members
of Parliament about the law with some specific suggestions that I set out
at length. These are to be found following the main text of my “Potions
and Pills” piece [8] in the longer version online.
A related line I decided to follow was to get a proper legal view pro
bono (for no fee because for the public good) if possible. Somehow I
found a deeply committed solicitor, Karen Ashton, and barrister Paul
Bowen of the Doughty Street Chambers in London, who were willing
to look to assess the legal situation vis-à-vis medical treatment that flouts
the Hippocratic Oath, Do No Harm—especially to people deemed to be
“mentally incapacitated.” They needed someone to gather the evidence
together and I gave up my job entirely for three months, during which I
created a compendium of abstracts substantiating a great variety of adverse
effects and at the same time demonstrating that reduced behavior was
the key index of “efficacy” in their use (see Fig. 4.1). This resulted in
lawyers Bowen and Ashton producing a discussion paper (available in the
online edition of this chapter), which suggested that medical treatment
can amount to an assault unless great care is taken regarding consent or
“best interests.” They proposed that the Human Rights Court “may well be
willing to exercise its power in relation to the prescribing of psychotropic
drugs, particularly where serious side-effects are well-established.” This
was circulated widely.
In 2001, Ashcroft and colleagues [10] called for better research
into antipsychotic prescribing for “challenging behaviours.” They cited
Brylewski and Duggans [11]Cochrane Review, as showing “over 500 cita-
tions assessing the impact of antipsychotic drugs on challenging behaviour.
Of these only three were methodologically sound randomised controlled
trials, but even these were unable to show whether antipsychotic drugs
were beneficial or not in controlling challenging behaviour” [10].
60 D. Murray
Ashcroft and colleagues frame the issues thus: People with learning dis-
ability sometimes display challenging behaviour. This can be managed by
use of antipsychotic medication or behavioural therapy or both. There is
no solid evidence, however, that these therapies are safe and effective.”
Unfortunately the possibility that behavioral therapy may not be safe was
not pursued, nor was the possibility that a focus on behavior control can-
not preserve mutuality, create trust, or be authentically “person-centered.”
This fixation with behavior, along with skillful marketing of “Positive
Behaviour Support,” has underpinned and undermined a medical cam-
paign against the drugging launched in 2018 (see below).
Consent issues and the best interest concept were soon to be leading
themes in the Mental Capacity Act (2007), (a development to which Paul
Bowen contributed). That is a very strong piece of rights legislation in
principle, though it has thrown up some paradoxes in practice (see, e.g.,
DoLS discussion at House of Lords 2015, or this Parliamentary video
from 2018,
48d8-afc5-b5727a40f05b). The MCA guidelines draw attention to the
possibility that the psychotropic effects of some medications may hinder
judgment, and there are widespread guidelines on administering medica-
tion to people whose best interests must in law be factored in. In 2006
the University of Birmingham published an attempt to address the con-
sent issues by creating a simplified symbol-based system for describing the
medications and their effects [12]. Perhaps our activities contributed to
the wider recognition of such needs, but how much long-term impact did
we have?
Maybe a bit for a while—however, see this from the Foreword of the
Faculty of Learning Disabilities of the Royal College of Psychiatrists [13]:
There is compelling evidence that a significant number of people with intel-
lectual disabilities are prescribed psychotropic medication that, at best, is
not helping them. In particular, there is a risk that doctors are prescribing
medication to treat behaviour that is an expression of distress or a mode of
4 Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse 61
communication rather than a mental disorder. Some people with intellec-
tual disabilities have difficulty communicating their emotional needs and
preferences. Therefore, doctors have a particular responsibility to ensure
that they have fully assessed a persons potential to benefit from medication
before they prescribe. They must also check that the anticipated benefits
have occurred after they have prescribed.
David Branford, whose earlier work [5] influenced mine, co-edited this
careful and strongly worded document produced by a team dominated by
learning disability specialists.
With two provisos, this specialist report’s advice is generally clear and
strongly argues its case for greater prescribing caution. One reservation is
that the advice lumps in autistic people with all other learning disabili-
ties and generalizes that usual dosing practices will be fine for addressing
mental illness when it occurs. Much anecdotal evidence says that autistic
people often have atypical reactions including super sensitivity to drugs.
As Defilippis and Wagner [14] suggest, “Children and adolescents with
autism spectrum disorder appear to be more susceptible to adverse effects
with medications; therefore, initiation with low doses and titrating [adjust-
ing the dosage] very slowly is recommended.” Also, neither they nor the
Care Quality Commission (a public regulator of health and social services
in England) note the need for staff medication training. The latter says
(2017) “We will not consider it to be unsafe if providers can demonstrate
that they have taken all reasonable steps to ensure the health and safety
of people using their services and to manage risks that may arise during
care and treatment.” Since “reasonable steps” will of course include follow-
ing instructions from doctors, this regulation can only have a protective
impact if the doctors are also changing their practices: perhaps the current
alliance between the NHS and the behaviourists (the autism and learning
disability campaign Stopping Over Medication of People, or STOMP)
Sadly, it seems there has been little or no real progress this century—yet
the very existence of these reports shows that the zeitgeist may finally have
penetrated Bedlam. We may have helped let it in.
62 D. Murray
1. Autism Europe. (1998). Draft code of good practice on prevention of violence
against persons with autism. Brussels: Autism-Europe.
2. Kiernan, C., Reeves, D., & Alborz, A. (1995). The use of anti-psychotic drugs
with adults with learning disabilities and challenging behaviour. Journal of
Intellectual Disability Research, 39(4), 263–274.
3. Shiwach, R. S., & Carmody,T. J. (1998). Prolactogenic effects of risperidone
in male patients—A preliminary study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 98(1),
4. Manchester, D. (1993). Neuroleptics, learning disability, and the commu-
nity: Some history and mystery. BMJ, 307 (6897), 184–187.
5. Branford, D. (1996). Factors associated with the successful or unsuccessful
withdrawal of antipsychotic drug therapy prescribed for people with learning
disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 40(4), 322–329.
6. Tranter, R., & Healy, D. (1998). Neuroleptic discontinuation syndromes.
Journal of Psychopharmacology, 12(4), 401–406.
7. Wing, L., & Shah, A. (2000). Catatonia in autism spectrum disorders. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 357–362.
8. Murray, D. (1999). ‘Potions, pills and human rights’ in opening vol-
ume of Good Autism Practice (long version). Retrieved from http://www.
9. McConachie, H., Mason, D., Parr, J. R., Garland, D., Wilson, C., &
Rodgers, J. (2018). Enhancing the validity of a quality of life measure
for autistic people. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48(5),
10. Ashcroft, R., Fraser, B., Kerr, M., & Ahmed, Z. (2001). Are antipsychotic
drugs the right treatment for challenging behaviour in learning disability?:
The place of a randomised trial. Journal of Medical Ethics, 27 (5), 338–343.
11. Brylewski, J., & Duggan, L. (1999). Antipsychotic medication for challeng-
ing behaviour in people with intellectual disability: A systematic review of
randomized controlled trials. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 43(5),
12. Unwin, G., & Deb, S. (2006). Your guide to taking medicine for
behaviour problems: Easy read. University of Birmingham. Retrieved Septem-
ber from
4 Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse 63
13. Alexander, R., Branford, D., & Devapriam, J. (2016). Psychotropic drug pre-
scribing for people with intellectual disability, mental health problems and/or
behaviours that challenge: Practice guidelines. (Faculty Report No. FR/ID/09).
Retrieved from The Royal College of Psychiatry website: https://www.
14. DeFilippis, M., & Wagner, K. D. (2016). Treatment of autism spectrum
disorder in children and adolescents. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 46 (2),
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License (
4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in
any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original
author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and
indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the
chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line
to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons
license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds
the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
Accurate measurement of quality of life (QoL) is important for evaluation of autism services and trials of interventions. We undertook psychometric validation of the World Health Organisation measure—WHOQoL-BREF, examined construct validity of the WHO Disabilities module and developed nine additional autism-specific items (ASQoL) from extensive consultation with the autism community. The sample of 309 autistic people was recruited from the Adult Autism Spectrum Cohort-UK. The WHOQoL-BREF had good psychometric properties, including criterion, convergent, divergent and discriminant validity. The WHO Disabilities module showed adequate construct validity and reliability. The ASQoL items form a unitary factor of QoL, with one global item. Future studies can use the WHO measures alongside the ASQoL items to measure QoL of autistic people. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10803-017-3402-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Autism spectrum disorder is a diagnosis that includes significant social communication deficits/delays along with restricted patterns of interests and behaviors. The prevalence of this diagnosis has increased over the past few decades, and it is unclear whether this is solely attributable to the increased awareness of milder forms of the disorder among medical providers. The current treatment options for the core symptoms of autism are limited to psychosocial therapies, such as applied behavior analysis. Medications have been most effective in treating the associated behavioral symptoms of autism, though studies have examined potential benefits in some of the core symptoms of autism with certain medications, especially the repetitive behaviors often seen with this diagnosis. Risperidone and aripiprazole are currently the only medications FDA approved for symptoms associated with autism spectrum disorders, targeting the irritability often seen with this diagnosis. Children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder appear to be more susceptible to adverse effects with medications; therefore, initiation with low doses and titrating very slowly is recommended. Some complementary alternative treatments have been researched as possible treatments in autism, though evidence supporting many of these is very limited.
The use of anti-psychotic medication with an adult population of people with learning disabilities and challenging behaviours was investigated as part of an epidemiological study covering seven district health authorities and corresponding local authorities in North West England. The study found a high rate of prescription of anti-psychotic drugs (48.1%). Chlorpromazine was the most frequently prescribed drug, followed by Thioridazine and Haloperidol. Three variables, psychiatric diagnosis, where the person was resident (hospital disturbed ward, hospital non-disturbed ward, hostel or family home) and district of origin were found to be significant determinants of prescriptions when all other variables were controlled. Of the variables reflecting individual characteristics those significantly related to prescription suggested that the socially disruptive effects of challenging behaviour were determining prescription. The results are discussed in the context of differing prescription practices across residence and district in the context of the management of socially disruptive behaviour.
Recent papers have again highlighted the consistently high use of neuroleptic agents among people with a learning disability, despite the lack of good evidence to support their role in this population for behaviour management and despite the risks of such medication. Evidence suggests, however, that prescribing habits have remained relatively unchanged; the reasons for this are poorly understood. Given the lack of understanding about the factors contributing to such drug use, and the possibility that use of neuroleptics will increase as people with learning disabilities move into the community, there seems a clear need for clinical guidelines to cover the prescribing and monitoring of neuroleptics within this group. Such guidelines should also ensure that reviews, using reliable measures of treatment efficacy, are carried out regularly.
Many published accounts of drug review programmes have reported reductions in the prescribing of psychotropic drugs prescribed for people with learning disabilities. Rarely though has the outcome for the patient been reported. The Leicestershire antipsychotic drug review programme resulted in antipsychotic drug dose reduction or withdrawal in 123 patients. Data relating to outcomes were analysed in order to identify factors associated with successful withdrawal. Few such factors were identified. The successful withdrawal of antipsychotic drug treatment (31 patients) was associated with low doses, predominantly of the drug thioridazine, minimal psychopathology, the presence of epilepsy, and the lack of hyperactivity, aggression of stereotypy.
This preliminary study describes a case of a male patient who developed gynaecomastia and sexual difficulties whilst taking risperidone for chronic paranoid schizophrenia. Laboratory tests showed raised prolactin levels and depressed testosterone levels which were reversed on cessation of medication. A small study was subsequently conducted on male psychotic patients to compare the prolactogenic effects of risperidone (n=14) with traditional antipsychotic medication (n=15). The results showed a greater but non-significant prolactogenic effect of risperidone.
The existence of discontinuation syndromes following treatment with neuroleptic (antipsychotic) drugs was first outlined in the mid-1960s but the effects of such syndromes have been neglected since then. We have pursued evidence for the existence and nature of discontinuation syndromes following neuroleptics through reports of difficulties following the use of dopamine blocking anti-emetics, the use of chlorpromazine to treat tuberculosis, the use of antidepressant-neuroleptic combinations in affective disorders, the occurrence of tardive syndromes and studies designed to establish the existence of discontinuation syndromes in schizophrenia. Combined these bodies of data point strongly to the existence of discontinuation syndromes after cessation of treatment with neuroleptics which may involve features other than motor dyskinesias. There is at present little evidence on the relative frequency of such syndromes or predisposing factors. The area needs research input to establish the nature of the syndromes that may result, their frequency, predisposing factors and best methods of treatment.
A study was performed to determine the effectiveness of antipsychotic medication for people with intellectual disability (ID) and challenging behaviour. Randomized controlled trials comparing antipsychotic medication to placebo in people with ID and challenging behaviour were identified by electronic searching and hand-searching. Reviewers independently evaluated and analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis. Only three randomized controlled trials could be included in the analyses. These trials provided no evidence as to whether antipsychotic medication does or does not help adults with ID and challenging behaviour. There is limited data on this important issue and good quality research is urgently needed.
The clinical pictures of autistic spectrum disorders include features described in catatonia. To examine the severe exacerbation of the catatonic features of autistic disorders in adolescence or early adult life, which occurs in some individuals. A semi-structured interview schedule was used to collect information from parents or other care-givers concerning 506 referrals to a specialist clinic for autistic spectrum disorders. Individuals with severe exacerbation of catatonic features were compared with a same-age group of referrals without this type of deterioration in skills and behaviour. Seventeen per cent of referrals aged 15 or over had severe exacerbation of catatonic features. They were significantly more likely than the comparison group to have had, before the onset of the change in behaviour, impaired language and passivity in social interaction. Catatonia is a later complication of autistic spectrum disorders, which adds considerably to the burden of caring. More research is needed to identify causes, neuropathology, and early signs of vulnerability.