|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 9:30:18 GMT
Actually, I do have a couple more contentions.will post later.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 17, 2022 9:47:51 GMT
My only contention here is how we are defining 'ill' . Which is going to be subjective to the individual, but i think the danger here is in denying mental illness.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 9:57:51 GMT
Defintions are subjective - but have implications Legal Definition of mental illness 1 : mental disease. 2 : a mental condition marked primarily by sufficient disorganization of personality, mind, and emotions to seriously impair the normal psychological and often social functioning of the individual. www.merriam-webster.com › ... Mental illness Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster Mental illnesses are health conditions involving changes in emotion, thinking or behavior (or a combination of these). Mental illnesses are associated with distress and/or problems functioning in social, work or family activities. Mental illness is nothing to be ashamed of. It is a medical problem, just like heart disease or diabetes psychiatry.org/patients-families/what-is-mental-illnessHackney Mental Health Group .1986. Charter of Rights for People in Mental Distress. All people have been mentally hurt but the severity and nature of their distress and the circumstances of thei lives cause some people to seek help or be forced to acceot treatment from the mental health services. We refer to people as "mentally distresses" . We recognise this as inadequate but find it less offensive than mentally ill....
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 10:06:47 GMT
HMHAG. Chater of Rights.
2. PHILOSOPHY ... Mentally distressed people have the same basic human rights to life and personal security to meet their physicak, mental, social, cuktural and emotional needs as ithers. It is crucial that no one has to accept tge label of 'mentalky ill' to receive services. All mentally distressed people should be given the opportunity to lead a fulfilling life and contribute to society. This will require the allocation of material and human resources to these ends. Rights are meaningless without economic reources to back them up '
(UK approach)
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 10:26:32 GMT
Btw. I totally dispute that it is a medical condition like heart disease or diabetes though both those conditions may also have environmental factors and are not necessarily genetic)
But your point of view has prime position , in bold, on the internet. psychiatry.org.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 10:59:59 GMT
You and I will not be able to agree because you accept assertions from biological/physiological research which I would challenge in part because what may be revealed as a probability/possibilty becomes a fact . And we don't often get to see results of psychiatric research which doesn't support the original hypothesis.
And I see harm and the absence of meaningful support arising through this.
But if we could both get better support and service provision from our different standpoints that would be good. Instead there is competition over who is right/not and this spins out into what support/services are/not available.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 13:42:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 14:17:30 GMT
Conclusions the article above
CONCLUSIONS Simple biochemical theories that link low levels of serotonin with depressed mood are no longer tenable. However, experimental and computational accounts of how serotonin influences emotional processing throw an intriguing light on the neuropsychology of depression and its pharmacological treatment.
Whether this information can be harnessed to predict therapeutic response to SSRI treatment at an individual level is an important topic for clinical translation.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 14:44:27 GMT
Dopamine and schizophrenia The Role of Dopamine in Schizophrenia from a Neurobiological and Evolutionary Perspective: Old Fashioned, but Still in Vogue Abstract Schizophrenia is a chronic and debilitating neuropsychiatric disorder affecting approximately 1% of the world’s population. This disease is associated with considerable morbidity placing a major financial burden on society. Antipsychotics have been the mainstay of the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia for decades. The traditional typical and atypical antipsychotics demonstrate clinical efficacy in treating positive symptoms, such as hallucinations and delusions, while are largely ineffective and may worsen negative symptoms, such as blunted affect and social withdrawal, as well as cognitive function. The inability to treat these latter symptoms may contribute to social function impairment associated with schizophrenia. The dysfunction of multiple neurotransmitter systems in schizophrenia suggests that drugs selectively targeting one neurotransmission pathway are unlikely to meet all the therapeutic needs of this heterogeneous disorder. Often, however, the unintentional engagement of multiple pharmacological targets or even the excessive engagement of intended pharmacological targets can lead to undesired consequences and poor tolerability. In this article, we will review marketed typical and atypical antipsychotics and new therapeutic agents targeting dopamine receptors and other neurotransmitters for the treatment of schizophrenia. Representative typical and atypical antipsychotic drugs and new investigational drug candidates will be systematically reviewed and compared by reviewing structure-activity relationships, pharmacokinetic properties, drug metabolism and safety, pharmacological properties, preclinical data in animal models, clinical outcomes and associated side effects. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4032934/SO TAKING A CRITICAL POSITION ON PSCHYCHIATRY IS NEITHER UNREASONABLE NOR ILLOGICAL NOR IS IT DENYING THE SYMPTOMS USED TO DEFINE SHIZOPHRENIA OR ALL TREATMENTS. BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR OTHER EXPLORATIONS AS TO WHAT UNDERLIES THE CONDITION - and HOW WE DESCRIBE IT (in a medical model as largely as personal dysfunction). Neither you nor I have posted about Hearing Voices where perhaps the greatest challenge to a medical model comes from. I don't hear voices as such. I feel presence and perceive messages or get 'insights'
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 17, 2022 14:59:55 GMT
SO TAKING A CRITICAL POSITION ON PSCHYCHIATRY IS NEITHER UNREASONABLE NOR ILLOGICAL NOR IS IT DENYING THE SYMPTOMS USED TO DEFINE SHIZOPHRENIA OR ALL TREATMENTS. BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR OTHER EXPLORATIONS AS TO WHAT UNDERLIES THE CONDITION - and HOW WE DESCRIBE IT (in a medical model as largely as personal dysfunction). i agree that the understandings & treatments could be better as i have campaigned for for 20 years with an integral model & approach - an integrated mind, body, soul, spirit & environment model & for comprehensive integrated health / welfare / social care services & systems - comprehensive front end services as well as healing homes, open dialogue & depth psychology. i can't alter my past / condition / ways that i have been treated / medication dependency etc. i can't change the wider society / system & mental health treatment. Now i think it's going too far towards the recovery model, enforced by right wing neoliberal capitalism. There is a whole hearing voices section on the forum - it hasn't been one of my main symptoms either. i'm tired & burnt out from so much conflict & argument for what should be a unified model & approach to understand, help & support some of the most vulnerable members of society.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 17, 2022 16:02:02 GMT
SO TAKING A CRITICAL POSITION ON PSCHYCHIATRY IS NEITHER UNREASONABLE NOR ILLOGICAL Taking a critical look at psychiatry & wanting better treatment is fine - the issue that i have is with this debate over the nature / severity / causes of mental illness.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jun 17, 2022 17:46:34 GMT
All people have been mentally hurt but the severity and nature of their distress and the circumstances of thei lives cause some people to seek help or be forced to acceot treatment from the mental health services. We refer to people as "mentally distresses" . We recognise this as inadequate but find it less offensive than mentally ill.... what's wrong really in seeing people as mentally ill & what's wrong in seeing it as a biological illness?
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 19:16:31 GMT
What's wrong in seeing people as mentally ill? I was diagnosed as having a severe mental illness that would require - lifetime medication on a mood stabiliser restricting our ranges of emotion and concentration - regular tests to detect possible liver disease caused by the medication - weight gain with health risks - Assumptions about psychosis.Simply seen as being out of touch with reakity. No further questions asked. - Explanations around dysfunctional neuro transmission that later research has shown to be unsarisfactory - popular assumptions abiut mental illness and stigma
It is both logical and reasonable to be critical of the basis underlying 'clinical depression'
And similar points can be made about schizophrenia. But my knowledge there is second hand - as is your about a diagnosis of Clinical deoression with psychosis, .
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 19:22:51 GMT
I had hoped that what I had posted on serontonin and dopamine might have shown what a problem with a wholehearted acceptance of the biological model, but obviously not
I have said many times that our biology and physiology are involved. One of my pist is more careful, talking about 'emotional processing ' without getting into the 'chicken and egg' question of precise causes
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Jun 17, 2022 19:31:19 GMT
But each of us will assess what we are told according to our experience and the information available to us.
What makes you think you are not being accepted for what you believe when you are out to undermine everyone who doesn't think the same. Reliance on internet posts?
Severity of experience/condition is not an adequate response. I'll have to search out the research.
|
|