There are no rational reasons why electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) should not be subject to the same criteria in its clinical application as any other treatment in medicine. Associations referring to historical events and their presentation in the media do not provide convincing arguments against the clinical use of ECT. In order to offer ECT to patients, scientifically solid evidence with respect to its clinical results must be available. As this scientific evidence is clearly given, ECT must be offered to the patients. A well-informed, reflected medicine must not withhold an effective treatment like ECT from the patients and medicine should not be influenced by associations but only by scientific evidence, even though the exact mechanisms of action of ECT are not known in detail. The image of ECT has clearly improved during the last decades thereby increasing the hope that unjustified arguments against ECT will lose their impact.
Keywords: Depression; Ethics; Freedom of therapy; Indications; Rationality.