hi my name Aubrey

that's a misnomer; neuroleptic drugs don't combat a singular biological state of 'psychosis' because there is no such observed or biomarked state. neuroleptics don't have good evidence for their efficacy in actually improving patient outcomes, and are known to cause a range of serious short- and long-term (including permanent!) side effects ranging from metabolic dysregulation to movement disorders (neurological damage) to sedation (they have previously been known as 'major tranquilisers').

on principle i think people should be able to use psychoactive substances of their choosing; in practice i think this is basically a moot point in regards to neuroleptics because the side effects are so common and severe, and the benefits so minimal. these are drugs that continue to be popularly prescribed because they make patients more 'compliant' -- ie, because our current social–economic situation is so profoundly hostile to variation in perceptions of reality that we render people more 'functional' when dangerously medicated into submission.

atypical anti-psychotics are also approved for and continue to be prescribed to treat "aggression and self-injurious behaviour" in children diagnosed with autism for example. i was introduced to this class of drugs and kept on them for half a decade at the request of my parents, without being formally diagnosed with psychosis for the duration, for what amounted to 'disobedience and disruptive behaviour' at home. i was thirteen. my psychiatrists* enabled my parents' abuse by keeping me in a state where i was incapable of defending myself

in many psych wards the first thing they do is give you a very high dose of an anti-psychotic to make sure you won't complain too much, as it dawns on you're in a prison and all your agency has been stripped away. it doesn't matter why you're there, they don't check your file before doing it. they just do it because it's effective at keeping people quiet