FYM This...!

[Pearl]

I'm sorry but to say parents should simply love their children more is a bit naive. There are a lot of parents who don't know how to handle any type of emotional problems. Either they look at their depressed/anxious kids with disdain or they avoid the issue because they don't have the strength to deal with the problem.

That, or parents are the reason why some people have problems. Not everyone is lucky to have kind and loving parents who prepare them for the real world.

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by solemole

Mmph. That wasn't my point. My advice is: don't/never take your kids to see a psychiatrist. In the short run, it's a quick fix. In the long haul, it'll be something your family will be dealing with for the rest of your lives.

What would you recommend parents do with a child who is exhibiting behavior that typically leads to medication, then? Say, for example, irrational violent outbursts, threatening harm upon themselves and others, and/or inflicting harm upon themselves and others?

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by Pearl

That, or parents are the reason why some people have problems. Not everyone is lucky to have kind and loving parents who prepare them for the real world.

Not only that, but you may be the most loving, skilled and capable parents in the world and may still not be able to "work out" your child's serious mental disorder.

[Steved1998]

Originally Posted by Diemen

What would you recommend parents do with a child who is exhibiting behavior that typically leads to medication, then? Say, for example, irrational violent outbursts, threatening harm upon themselves and others, and/or inflicting harm upon themselves and others?

Hugs not drugs.

[anitram]

Wow.

I think it is the height of irresponsibility to suggest that you should NEVER take a child to a psychiatrist. Parents can extend all the love they want but they are not trained professionals and cannot always adequately address the needs of their children. To suggest that a child with a mental illness needs more love is implying that if he or she were merely loved enough by the parents, they would be okay. Talk about a destructive way of dealing with that family.

Do medical doctors overmedicate patients? Yes, I am sure that there are numerous instances of this. Lots of medications are overprescribed probably for a host of reasons - patients demanding them, doctors who don't feel like treating anything but the symptoms, laziness, etc. But to state categorically that no drug that helps mentally ill patients should be prescribed is sheer lunacy.

I have two very close examples to give you. One is my aunt, who was a violent paranoid schizophrenic. She was completely healthy, mentally and otherwise, until her early 20s, when she started hearing voices in her head. Not to bore you with the details, but this is a woman who ended up homeless, destitute, somehow managing to drift from Spain to Morocco without a valid passport back in the late 80s, who threatened to kill me and one of my cousins when we were 6 years old, who ran around the house wielding knives and would run into the street doing the same, who attempted suicide three times including one very dramatic jump off a roof which she survived, culminating in her final successful attempt. She died several years ago when she was about 50. When she was properly medicated AND compliant with her protocol, I would not say that she was "well". She still wouldn't manage to hold down a full-time job for a long time, she still had behavioural quirks that were plainly noticeable to anyone, she would still have a tendency to say inappropriate things or dress in inappropriate ways (i.e. not dress at all), and so on. BUT, she was also functional in the sense that she wasn't violent, she wasn't talking about her fantasies of killing little kids, she wasn't fascinated/obsessed with knives, she wasn't living in the street or peeing all over herself. So to suggest that she'd have been better off unmedicated is completely wrong, deeply offensive and frankly predictive - we know what she was doing unmedicated and we also know how her life ended while she was unmedicated.

The second example, and a far less extreme one is my Dad. He is a life-long depressive person. He's 63 right now but if you asked him he would tell you he'd been battling with depression since his teenage years (at least). He hated doctors, psychiatrists and therapists. Until about a decade ago, he maintained that his depression was purely situational - he was depressed because his first marriage failed, because he stopped smoking, because he hated his job, because his father died very suddenly, because he hated winter and snow, because, because, because. All things that can cause depression in people, but this was a guy who essentially lived in a constant state of depression. He tried anti-depressants a number of times but was never compliant. Generally the way things went was like this: try a medication for a month or two, conclude that it didn't do anything for you/didn't make you feel any better, stop taking it. This cycle was literally repeated probably at least a half a dozen times with a half a dozen different drugs. Same result. Despite his doctors telling him that you need to have certain drugs stabilize in your system for many months before you can adequately judge their effectiveness. And don't think that we didn't do anything aside from attempting medication - my parents have been married 35 years, we have a wonderful family and my Mom is basically as close to a saint as you can get. There was plenty of love to go around. When he felt depressed because he was cooped up, we moved to a very large house on a very large property. He loved dogs his whole life, so even though my Mom didn't want a dog, we always had one and those dogs were absolutely wonderful friends to him and also made him go outside every day, socialize with the neighbours and so on. He didn't like living in the city, he loved the outdoors, so we made sure he could buy a boat and go fishing whenever he wanted. There were lots of other behavioural tactics used, as suggested by various therapists and so on. but after about 25 years of this, my Mom had enough and told him that the kids are now grown and she is no longer willing to subjugate herself to his depression when he was not willing to ever commit to dealing with it. That was a turning point for him. He went back to his doctor, he went to a psychiatrist and he tried one drug, then a second. About 6 months into the second drug, my Mom called me in happy tears saying that my Dad was a completely different man and that she had her husband back. His transformation has been absolutely incredible. He has been doing wonderfully for the last 9 or so years. He is enjoying life in a way I didn't see him enjoy it before. He is spending more time with friends, more time with extended family and he loves his kids' spouses and partners and their families. He is no longer a withdrawn man. It is like night and day comparing him to what he used to be when I was a child. Since solemole asked about side effects - essentially no physical side effects aside from high cholesterol. I am actually not sure that is attributable to the drugs entirely because my Dad's parents both had high cholesterol. To deal with this, my Dad started eating fish 5 days a week - probably sounds extreme to most people but his father had died quite young and did have very high cholesterol and generally heart trouble so he is a bit paranoid about this. That lowered his cholesterol to the high side of normal, so not perfect, but he is managing it reasonably well.

That is not to say that everyone should be medicated all the time. It's insane to take a position that with mental illness, something should be done ALWAYS or NEVER. There is a whole spectrum of responses and treatments there. What works well for one person is a failure for the next. But I am seriously bothered by someone basically taking the position that Tom Cruise holds.

[solemole]

Originally Posted by Diemen

I understand this topic is near and dear to your heart, but this sort of tone isn't helping promote a good discussion. If you want a discussion, you need to be able to accept that people will disagree with you.

It's not that. I know they will disagree. But they didn't seem to read my main posts, and just take one line out of the whole post-- that doesn't seem like a discussion. That's nit-picking an opinion--one line at the end of the post, and ignoring the rest of the findings of the book I quoted.

[solemole]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Thanks, Tom Cruise.

This isn't a Scientologist thing. And Irvine, you seem to be here out of contempt.

Hubbard's issue with psychiatry was personal, because the psychiatry community ridiculed his whole E-meter and personal views of whatever, claiming to help people.

Thomas Szasz was at one point standing on an issue with Hubbard, but he renounced their connection.

[solemole]

Antiram,

I'm sorry to hear about the stories with your aunt and dad.

I don't know what to say for everything they been through-- it probably wouldn't do your family experiences any justice.

[solemole]

Hey everyone, welcome to the party! Where were you 12 hours ago?'

Obviously, you people are not going to investigate the facts presented in the book I'm offering with knowledge, and counteroffer your thoughts about THE BOOK.

Since you're going grind my one statement to dust (which I might have not written anyways), I'm outta this argument. You can piss on all you want.

Ridiculous, FYM is one immovable stone.

[BoMac]

Originally Posted by solemole

Hey everyone, welcome to the party! Where were you 12 hours ago?'

Obviously, you people are not going to investigate the facts presented in the book I'm offering with knowledge, and counteroffer your thoughts about THE BOOK.

Since you're going grind my one statement to dust (which I might have not written anyways), I'm outta this argument. You can piss on all you want.

Ridiculous, FYM is one immovable stone.

Okay.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by solemole

Hey everyone, welcome to the party! Where were you 12 hours ago?'

Obviously, you people are not going to investigate the facts presented in the book I'm offering with knowledge, and counteroffer your thoughts about THE BOOK.

Since you're going grind my one statement to dust (which I might have not written anyways), I'm outta this argument. You can piss on all you want.

Ridiculous, FYM is one immovable stone.

[MrPryck2U]

[corianderstem]

Originally Posted by solemole

Hey everyone, welcome to the party! Where were you 12 hours ago?'

Come on. If someone doesn't respond within a set timeframe, they're .... what, exactly? The correct answer is either:

a) off doing something else, possibly not involving Interference

b) they had no idea what this thread was about so passed it over, and this morning had more time to investigate.

We are indeed a stubborn group here in FYM, but it doesn't help when you come to the table with your own defensiveness.

[solemole]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

Come on. If someone doesn't respond within a set timeframe, they're .... what, exactly? The correct answer is either:

a) off doing something else, possibly not involving Interference

b) they had no idea what this thread was about so passed it over, and this morning had more time to investigate.

You're right. But it seems I've been getting flip/sarcastic answers from some people. And others seem to parrot the parent thing like an SNL skit. There has been no contribution to the discussion as far as I can tell, except for a few personal anecdotes.

We are indeed a stubborn group here in FYM, but it doesn't help when you come to the table with your own defensiveness.

Maybe I seem defensive, but I just don't feel like rebutting every "but a parent and a kid" statement.

...

Even though time hasn't passed for people to read into the info I gave, I've already given up they'll take a serious read and do some cross-referencing research.

...

Random facts:

VA recently stopped administering anti-psychotics to veterans with PTSD.

People on meds for most of their lifetime are more likely to end up with Alzheimer's or some cognitive degeneration, and brain shrinkage.

[Irvine511]

seems preferable than having them blow their brains, or other people's brains, out because they weren't put on medication.

i'm sorry if you feel contempt, but a lot of what's being suggested is conspiratorial quackery.

i spent most of the last 12 hours sleeping. then i was working.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by solemole

WARNING: PEOPLE TAKING MEDICATION SHOULD NOT STOP ON THEIR OWN. PSYCHIATRIC DRUG WITHDRAWAL IS VERY DANGEROUS. FOR INSIGHT, GETTING OFF XANAX IS TOUGHER THAN HEROIN.

i think everyone knows that you must be weaned off medication, and no health professional should suggest otherwise. how is this the psychiatrist's fault?

further, do you have anything other than big bold font to substantiate the claim that getting off xanax is tougher than getting off heroin?

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by solemole

Even though time hasn't passed for people to read into the info I gave, I've already given up they'll take a serious read and do some cross-referencing research.

It's a little unrealistic to expect random internet strangers to do substantive research into a topic you just foisted on them not even a day ago. Particularly if you're going to respond to dissenters with the assumption that they simply lack the knowledge to come to your viewpoint.

[solemole]

I'm out and about now.

Sorry about your day, Irvine.

Just to quickly reply to xanax and heroin. Simple: Ask a doctor, or a friend who's a doctor.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

further, do you have anything other than big bold font to substantiate the claim that getting off xanax is tougher than getting off heroin?

From what I remember when I was doing research on my paper for this, it takes longer to wean xanax (and benzos in general) than heroin - referring specifically and only to the length of time when you'll feel physical withdrawal symptoms. But I'm not sure you can say it's "tougher" to get off heroin because heroin addicts have much higher rates of falling off the wagon and typically a much stronger mental dependency on it.

[LJT]

Originally Posted by solemole

Random facts:

VA recently stopped administering anti-psychotics to veterans with PTSD.

People on meds for most of their lifetime are more likely to end up with Alzheimer's or some cognitive degeneration, and brain shrinkage.

A lot of the anti-psychotic meds have quite bad side effects which are quite well known, including parkinsonian type effects such as drooling and ataxias. But I imagine the sample size for people with mental health problems not on meds is quite small to compare with those on meds and might be hard to determine whether cognitive degeneration could be linked to the disease or the meds themselves. That said it would not surprise me if it was the meds, but whatever your quoting from seems quite vague.

Mental health is a hard area to work in filled with ethical minefields, it's one area where it almost feels like people are presumed guilty before convicted of any crime, when they are sectioned for their own safety or others, but what other way is there to effectively manage those who may be a danger to others? I have never heard a psychiatrist recommend wholly medical treatment by itself and the best effects are often had with combined therapy.

There remains much to learn about brain chemistry and the drugs administered, but I do not see this as a reason not to continue with many of the treatments that do effectively work for people. They can be often hit and miss because it is a truth we all have variations in our genes that make us less or more susceptible to certain treatments and this does not just apply to mental health medications.

I am not sure what your aim was with this thread, it seems a scatter-gun attack on psychiatry or meds at least, with little reasoned analysis. There are plenty of issues and problems in the field psychiatry, but they are all fairly recognised by most that work in it.