A team of researchers, including three recipients of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and three clinical psychologists, have conducted the first ever international survey of people who have had ECT. 1,144 patients and family members, from 44 countries, responded.
The second paper from the survey published on August 15 in the Journal of Medical Ethics.
Read J, Hancock S, Morrison L, Johnstone L, Harrop C, Cunliffe S. (2025)
Most (59%) of the ECT recipients reported that they had not been given ‘adequate information.’ For example, only 17% recall being told that ‘ECT can cause long-term or permanent memory problems’; 12% that ‘ECT can cause heart problems’ and 28% that there are ‘Risks from repeated general anaesthesia’. Only 5% were told that ECT is more likely to cause memory loss in women than in men.
Both recipients and relatives reported being given significant pieces of misinformation, such as ‘Depression is caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain’ (58% and 53% respectively) and ‘ECT corrects chemical imbalance or other brain abnormality’ (42% and 41%).
The findings confirm recent audits of ECT information leaflets, in Australia, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, which also exaggerated benefits and minimised risks.
The paper concludes:
‘If efforts to persuade hospitals and clinics to comply with the ethical principle of informed consent by providing comprehensive evidence-based information are unsuccessful, professional, regulatory and government organizations should intervene.’
First author Dr John Read, Professor of Clinical Psychology at the University of East London, comments.
‘Informed consent is a core ethical principle for all health professionals. Not telling patients and families about the high risk of persistent or permanent memory loss, perhaps for fear they may refuse a treatment, is quite clearly unethical.’
Co-author Lisa Morrison:
‘As an ECT recipient I have permanently lost precious memories of my children’s birthdays and many other milestones in their lives. It’s devastating. The worst part is nobody ever told me this could happen. I was very unwell at the time but me and my husband had a right to know all possible risks. Informed consent can only be given if all benefits and risks are known. We deserve the same rights as every other person’.
Co-author Sarah Hancock:
I wish ECT's risks of injury and absence of medical or rehabilitation interventions (in the event of injury) post treatment was made known to my parents when I was catatonic. Informed treatment choices and informed consent are basic human rights for which even the most gravely disabled--and those who care for them--remain qualified.
The first paper from this survey was published earlier this week:
Read et al. A Survey of 1144 ECT recipients, family members and friends: Does ECT work? International Journal of Mental Health Nursing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/inm.70109
Efficacy was measured in five ways. On all five, most recipients, and most relatives, reported that ECT either made no difference or made things worse.