Jackson’s account has renewed attention on a treatment that can be lifesaving for some patients but can also carry serious side effects. New research centered on women’s experiences adds questions about consent, memory and the information patients receive.
Paris Jackson opened up about experiencing painful electroconvulsive therapy, or ECT, after nine treatments in three weeks. Her account, published Aug. 20, 2026, comes as other women have reported difficult experiences with electroconvulsive therapy in an Aug. 10 study involving 858 participants across 44 countries, including co-author Lisa Morrison, whose first treatment occurred in South Africa.
Jackson said ECT helped during a crisis, but she also described severe head pain and amnesia. That tension matters: ECT can offer rapid relief for severe mental illness when other care has failed, yet the new study raises pointed concerns about women’s outcomes, informed consent and lasting side effects.
Jackson described pain and amnesia
In a recent interview with Page Six, Jackson, the daughter of Michael Jackson, said she underwent nine ECT sessions over three weeks after coming very close to a suicide attempt.
She described waking after her first treatment with what she called the sharpest pain she had felt inside her head. Jackson also said friends visited her during that period, but she cannot remember their conversations.
Her account is not a case against every use of ECT. Jackson said the treatment was working, but said a future involving regular treatments indefinitely did not feel sustainable for her. That distinction is central to the debate: a treatment can bring symptom relief while still leaving a patient with difficult tradeoffs.
What ECT is designed to do
ECT is a medical procedure in which controlled electrical currents are passed through the brain while a patient is under general anesthesia, producing a brief seizure. It is used in some cases of treatment-resistant depression, severe mania associated with bipolar disorder and certain urgent psychiatric conditions.
The modern procedure is markedly different from early forms of ECT, which were administered without today’s anesthesia and safety practices. Clinicians may recommend it when medication and psychotherapy have not brought relief, or when a rapid response is needed.
Supporters point to its potential to reduce severe symptoms quickly. Makesha Joyner, a psychiatrist at Kaiser Permanente, wrote that many patients report improved mood and lower symptom severity within weeks.
But speed does not eliminate risk. The Mayo Clinic lists possible effects including confusion, headaches, nausea, jaw pain and memory loss, along with temporary changes in heart rate and blood pressure during treatment.
The study focused on women
The study, published in Health Care for Women International, surveyed 858 participants in 44 countries about their experiences and outcomes after ECT. Its authors found women were less likely than men to report improved mood and reported worse outcomes across several measures, including short- and long-term memory loss.
Women were also more likely to describe pressure or coercion around consent. In the survey, 36.8% of women reported feeling pressured to consent, compared with 22.4% of men. Fewer women characterized their participation as voluntary: 49.9%, compared with 63.5% of men.
Only 15% of women said they would want ECT again, versus 29% of men. The survey does not establish that ECT causes every outcome reported by participants, and self-reported experiences have limits. Still, the size and international reach of the project give weight to concerns that patients say have often been minimized.
Lisa Morrison’s experience shaped research
Morrison was 19 when she received her first ECT treatment in South Africa. Now 52, she says she was restrained on a treatment table, heavily medicated, frightened and without meaningful choice.
She later underwent additional courses of ECT while dealing with severe depression and trauma from being raped at 14. Morrison said the treatment temporarily lifted her depression at one point, but she believes her trauma was not adequately addressed.
She also says she has no memory of a year when her son was 2 years old. Her experience illustrates why the ECT discussion cannot be reduced to a simple verdict of either success or failure: patients may describe benefits alongside losses they regard as profound.
Study co-author Sarah Hancock similarly reported serious cognitive effects after treatment, including difficulty reading, typing, balancing and forming new memories. The authors differ on the policy response, with some calling for an ECT ban and others seeking stronger Food and Drug Administration regulation.
Consent is the unresolved question
ECT is often considered in situations where someone is acutely ill, suicidal, psychotic, unable to eat or drink adequately, or has not responded to other treatment. Those circumstances can make decisions especially fraught for patients and families.
The study’s authors argue that people need clearer, more current information about possible side effects, alternatives, expected benefits and the possibility of memory impairment. They also contend that clinicians should look carefully at trauma, abuse and other underlying drivers of distress rather than treating symptoms in isolation.
Clinicians who use ECT emphasize that untreated severe depression and related illnesses also carry major risks, including suicide. From that perspective, withholding an effective treatment because it has side effects can be harmful. Critics respond that urgency should not weaken standards for fully informed, voluntary consent.
Both views point to the same practical need: patients deserve time, plain-language explanations and a meaningful opportunity to discuss treatment frequency, anesthesia, memory risks, alternatives and follow-up care whenever their condition allows.
Why Jackson’s story reaches beyond celebrity
Celebrity disclosures can flatten complex medical issues into a single dramatic experience. Jackson’s account does the opposite when placed beside the study: it shows how a widely used psychiatric treatment can be experienced very differently by different people.
For some, ECT remains an important and even lifesaving intervention. For others, the reported pain, confusion or memory loss can shape years of life afterward. The research does not settle every question about ECT, but it strengthens the case for better outcome tracking by sex, more transparent consent and research that takes patient testimony seriously.
Jackson’s disclosure is therefore bigger than one person’s recollection of treatment. It is a reminder that successful mental-health care must account not only for whether symptoms improve, but also for how patients experience the path to that improvement.
Leave a Reply