cal1's commentsComments On: EverythingArticles Blogs Journals Photos created by: Everyonecal1 The Stigma of being a Mental Health Patient - Blog Entry27 Dec 2007 04:28 PM One of my hospitalizations ocurred shortly before my youngest sister's wedding. I never got a call or visit from her, even though she lived near the hospital I was in. I wondered if she even knew I was there. Well, she knew all right. Even though I was released in plenty of time, I was no longer in the wedding party, and she tried to 'uninvite' me from the wedding period. At the reception, I noticed that people kind of treated me differently, conversations getting quiet when I came up, etc. I realized my sister had told everyone. Suicide: My Thoughts on One Case - Blog Entry27 Dec 2007 04:17 PM Hi I'm enjoying reading your postings. I'm just reading things online here to take my mind off of things. A comment I have on this is; as someone who can certainly sympathize with both sides of the issue (my best friend took his own life, and I've been suicidal at times myself) I can say that it really is a selfish act in a lot of ways. Saying that in no way diminishes the pain that the victim is going through; Suicide occurs when pain exceeds resources for coping, and impulse control is low. Anyone in that situation deserves nothing but support and empathy. However, the ultimate consequence is often the transfer of much of that pain onto one's loved ones. In the end, not wishing to impose that on my family is what's been keeping me alive, and sometimes its been hard. When your own suffering is that bad, it's difficult to keep struggling, just because you think quitting's not fair to somone else. Suicide is frightening (when you really come face-to-face with it) but ultimately, it's choosing to live that is the tough decision. Note that I said the act was selfish, not the person. Self-absorbed perhaps, but it's hard not to be when you're suffering that much. In any case, it's extremely poor form to say that at a service for someone, no matter how badly they've hurt you. That person has suffered enough and deserves prayers and empathy despite how you may feel. Depression: The myth of "Chemical Imbalance" - Blog Entry27 Dec 2007 03:22 PM Ms.McHugh: Thank you for your post. My previous post wasn't really intended to disagree with you at all. I guess there's two ways to interpret the Chemical Imbalance thory; from a biological standpoint (which is where I was coming from), it's a "yeah, but so what?" statement that doesn't really say anything. From a lay public perception standpoint it has a 'double-edge sword' consequence. It has helped 'legitimise' depression as an illness (that it needs to be made physically-based to get that status is unfortunate), but as you quite correctly point out, it's made people feel that their moods are both permenant and beyond their control when in fact they are neither. The reality is that our moods and brain chemistry, are constantly changing, and are in fact affected by almost everything we do or think. As for the responsibility question, that's a tough one, there's a fine line between accepting responsibility for yourself and your recovery, and feeling full of self-blame and recrimination. The challenge is to get past the latter and move on to the former. Depression: The myth of "Chemical Imbalance" - Blog Entry27 Dec 2007 03:01 PM Sorry to run on here, but one reason why the simplified 'chemical imbalance' concept has taken such hold in the United States is our culture and fears. Complicated explanations? No thanks! We want soundbite answers and quick solutions. It's enormously reassuring to hear that the reason your teenager cries all the time and won't come out of his room can be explained as a physical illness that requires only a pill to fix. We're very uncomfortable with emotional distress. In the past, many times that depressed kid would be told to 'snap out of it' 'grow up' 'you just want attention' or perhaps get beaten until he has a 'reason to cry'. But in a sense, the imbalance theory's had the positive effect of getting society to accept depression and other forms of mental ilness as "real" diseases, that are not the sufferer's fault. We've always been skeptical of mental and behavioral disorders, determining that the broken nose from a barroom brawl is worth treating and covering under insurance, but the underlying anti-social personality disorder is not. Moreover, we apply a strong sense of morality to what we accept as 'legitimate illness'. Physical maladies are mostly acceptable, garner sympathy and support, and are generally covered by insurance or government. Mental illness brings shame, discrimination, blame, and usually receives a lower level of coverage. We often view the mentally ill as somehow culpable in their own illness. I grew up in the early 1970's and have suffered from depression most of my life. As a child, my mood and behavioral disorders were treated strictly as disiplinary issues by my schools and teachers, and I was shunned by the other students. If labelling something as a 'chemical imbalance' is what it takes to be able to come out of the shadows, and get insurance coverage for something that is not my fault, is every bit as legitimate as a physical ilness, and has made my life exceedingly difficult, than I'll take it. Depression: The myth of "Chemical Imbalance" - Blog Entry27 Dec 2007 02:18 PM The 'chemical imbalance' concept is not a lie. It's a big oversimplification. Our bains are exceedingly complex organs, and they function largely via the interactions of cells and neurotransmitters. Our brain chemistry is influenced by any number of factors, including diet, physical activity and behavior, our thoughts and perceptions, genetics, and drugs (both perscribed and otherwise). In turn this brain chemistry influences our thoughts, moods, behaviors, and somatic responses (such as anxiety attacks). Therefore, excepting such purely physical maladies like tumors and such, virtually any disorder of the mind could be described as a chemical imbalance. The thing is- that's the beginning, not the end of the story. The fact that one's brain chemistry is off, doesn't really say much - it merely reiterates what you already know- that's something is wrong. Then we get into the tougher questions of; why? and how to fix it?. These are harder to address. It relates to the basic question of what is free will vs. predetermined? Is substance abuse a choice or a disease or both? are you depressed because of your brain chemistry, or is your brain chemistry that way because you just got divorced, aren't eating right, and have a stressful job? Note that the brain chemistry is the same - the issue is 'chicken or egg'. Brain scans can show real differences in depressed people, alcoholics, and others compared to controls, but it doesn't tell us why. When you get to the How to fix? question, the answer is there are many ways to improve both your mood and brain chemistry (they go together, remember) therapy and concepts such as CBT, exercise, sunlight, a better environment, and for some, drugs, can all be part of the recovery process. For most people it takes a combination of some kind. We function via constant biochemical reactions, that have many influences and outcomes. The 'chemical imbalance' theory is bad only in the way it's presented, as a huge simplification that suggests depressives have a single, easily defined problem, and that Brand X pill is the only way to fix it. But then, it is an ad after all, should we expect any different? 1 2 |
|
