The Real Problems With Psychiatry (Atlantic Mag)
03 May 2013, 5:30 pm
Verdandi wrote:
nessa238 wrote:
People can be helped to deal with whatever problems they have without the need for a diagnosis of a particular condition
Fear of being diagnosed as schizophrenic has probably stopped many people ever approaching mental health services in the first place
Fear of being diagnosed as schizophrenic has probably stopped many people ever approaching mental health services in the first place
Is it really fear of the diagnosis itself or fear of how they'll be handled within the system? A lot of the problems in psychiatry are related to how clients are treated. Do you think not having a diagnosis will mean that people with severe delusions won't be hospitalized? Would people who fear hospitalization avoid seeing anyone about their delusions whether or not a label is attached go to see a psychiatrist if they're not going to be labeled with schizophrenia?
Fear of being hospitalized is what kept me from approaching mental health services when my depression was at its worst. I didn't fear being diagnosed, I just did not want to be hospitalized because I was suicidal.
Quote:
A lot of the behaviour of mentally ill and autistic people overlaps so they coudlpotentially be diagnosed with a number of conditions. This is confusing the issue as it's the behaviour they want help with, not 5 differing diagnoses for it.
But the reasons for the behavior differ, so is it a good idea to treat behavior without understanding possible origins of said behavior? Someone with schizophrenia may appear as or more suicidal than someone with major depression, but the reasons for being suicidal may differ greatly. Should this symptom be treated the same in each case?
General fear of stigma and possible consequences of the diagnosis eg being sectioned etc.
I think there are many different routes to particular behaviours and that the focus on the cause is far less important than treating the problem behaviours. The system seems far better at diagnosing people than helping them. If all the money spent on diganosing people was put into treatment and support a lot more people might be helped. People get far too hung up on the specifics of diagnosis in my opinion.
Verdandi
Veteran
Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)
03 May 2013, 5:42 pm
nessa238 wrote:
General fear of stigma and possible consequences of the diagnosis eg being sectioned etc.
So instead of getting diagnosed with a label you get diagnosed with symptoms and behaviors that get you sectioned. Is that really the way to change things? Will people feel less stigmatized when they're dealing with all of the symptoms of schizopphrenia but no diagnosis and end up sectioned anyway? Or stigmatized? These problems are not due to labels, and have existed since long before labels were catalogued for everything. The problem is more profound than having labels for various conditions. It is true that labels tend to accumulate negative, stigmatizing baggage (autism being a great example of that), but the baggage itself existed before the label.
Quote:
I think there are many different routes to particular behaviours and that the focus on the cause is far less important than treating the problem behaviours. The system seems far better at diagnosing people than helping them. If all the money spent on diganosing people was put into treatment and support a lot more people might be helped. People get far too hung up on the specifics of diagnosis in my opinion.
But if the behaviors have different origins, how would one expect that treating the behavior as if it's the same regardless of origin would be effective? People with borderline personality disorder are responsive to dialectical behavioral therapy, but not to other forms of cognitive behavioral therapy. This is the case for symptoms that may appear superficially similar to bipolar disorder, autism, ADHD, etc. ADHD has symptoms that are similar to a wide variety of disorders, but the treatment for those symptoms (stimulants) is not applicable to those other disorders.
My mother had alexithymia due to trauma, I have alexithymia due to being autistic. The difference is where she felt emotionally numb and distressed by it, I feel that this is my "normal." It doesn't cause me distress under most conditions, although it is perceived by therapists as problematic. Would I really respond to the same treatments for dealing with it (even assuming I wanted to deal with it) that my mother did? Given the different causes?
03 May 2013, 5:57 pm
Verdandi wrote:
nessa238 wrote:
General fear of stigma and possible consequences of the diagnosis eg being sectioned etc.
So instead of getting diagnosed with a label you get diagnosed with symptoms and behaviors that get you sectioned. Is that really the way to change things? Will people feel less stigmatized when they're dealing with all of the symptoms of schizopphrenia but no diagnosis and end up sectioned anyway? Or stigmatized? These problems are not due to labels, and have existed since long before labels were catalogued for everything. The problem is more profound than having labels for various conditions. It is true that labels tend to accumulate negative, stigmatizing baggage (autism being a great example of that), but the baggage itself existed before the label.
Quote:
I think there are many different routes to particular behaviours and that the focus on the cause is far less important than treating the problem behaviours. The system seems far better at diagnosing people than helping them. If all the money spent on diganosing people was put into treatment and support a lot more people might be helped. People get far too hung up on the specifics of diagnosis in my opinion.
But if the behaviors have different origins, how would one expect that treating the behavior as if it's the same regardless of origin would be effective? People with borderline personality disorder are responsive to dialectical behavioral therapy, but not to other forms of cognitive behavioral therapy. This is the case for symptoms that may appear superficially similar to bipolar disorder, autism, ADHD, etc. ADHD has symptoms that are similar to a wide variety of disorders, but the treatment for those symptoms (stimulants) is not applicable to those other disorders.
My mother had alexithymia due to trauma, I have alexithymia due to being autistic. The difference is where she felt emotionally numb and distressed by it, I feel that this is my "normal." It doesn't cause me distress under most conditions, although it is perceived by therapists as problematic. Would I really respond to the same treatments for dealing with it (even assuming I wanted to deal with it) that my mother did? Given the different causes?
My method would need to be tested out to see whether it worked better or not.
I think people are often divided between those who practically collect diagnoses ie they are proud of them (that's their choice) and those who don't want a label under any circumstances
I can't stand all the endless subdividing of every aspect of human behaviour; I don't think it does people any good in the long run
It will move on to genes next
Once what is going on in each person at genetic level is recorded on a computer, people will really be f-ked - there'll be no more 'I might have it' - it'll be set in stone and people with specific genes and gene sets will definitely be discriminated against
That's where all this categorisation will ultimately lead
03 May 2013, 9:36 pm
Strength is in diversity.
The top minds know if they start to cherry pick genes based on assumptions for a better world via genotype bias, that their choices will invariably lead them to the conclusion that seemingly unwanted genotypes fulfil certain unseen functions.
Engineers are in short supply, aspies much like panda bears should cherish every opportunity to procreate, least the world be overrun with car salesmen of ill repute
