|
Post by snowstorm on Dec 12, 2018 0:55:04 GMT
“Schizophrenia is a cruel disease. The lives of those affected are often chronicles of constricted experiences, muted emotions, missed opportunities, unfulfilled expectations. It leads to a twilight existence, a twentieth century underground man. The fate of these patients has been worsened by our propensity to misunderstand, our failure to provide adequate treatment and rehabilitation, our meager research efforts. A disease which should be found, in the phrase of T.S. Eliot, in the "frigid purgatorial fires" has become through our ignorance and neglect a living hell.” ― E. Fuller Torrey, Surviving Schizophrenia: A Manual for Families, Patients, and Providers Yeah, this side of it doesn't often crop up in the recovery stories.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2018 7:12:59 GMT
Interesting that the second woman had only been experiencing symptoms for a few months before being diagnosed with schizophrenia. You should have had three episodes before receiving such a diagnosis from what I have heard, so that was surely a bit premature.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 12, 2018 12:58:05 GMT
Yeah, this side of it doesn't often crop up in the recovery stories. The third / quarter recovery demographics are very well studied - 25% of people have one main episode of psychosis & go on to fully recover often medication free. This demographic usually makes up the bulk of the recovery stories as well as 'milder' presentations of bipolar & other affective disorders & neuroses. There are far fewer recovery stories concerning personality disorders. 25% of people have multiple episodes of psychosis with good functioning between episodes. 25% of people have multiple episodes of psychosis with less good functioning between episodes. 25% of people become very unwell & remain very unwell throughout their lives. Is it all the same condition / severity? Part of the problems again in putting everything within a 'few' main diagnostic ranges, & putting the whole of mental health into the 'same' bag.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 12, 2018 12:59:33 GMT
Interesting that the second woman had only been experiencing symptoms for a few months before being diagnosed with schizophrenia. You should have had three episodes before receiving such a diagnosis from what I have heard, so that was surely a bit premature. It took me 3 very major episodes of severe psychosis / 3 hospitalisations, & a serious suicide attempt over an 8 year period before they diagnosed me with schizophrenia.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 12, 2018 17:31:19 GMT
Do you think they are more zealous nowadays in handing out the diagnosis? As opposed to when you received it?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 12, 2018 17:47:30 GMT
Do you think they are more zealous nowadays in handing out the diagnosis? As opposed to when you received it? i think that it is such an in depth & complex field, & i do think that there are massive ranges of severity within different individuals experiences & circumstances. Severe schizophrenia according to the RCP accounts for around 0.2% of the population. i think that everything needs separating out. i can't see that 20% of the country or 1 in 4 / 1 in 3 people are suffering the same levels of illness / difficulties. So difficult with it all. As far as i know, regardless of other variables the demographics of people suffering / diagnosed with schizophrenia, nationally & globally has & does remain pretty constant at 1%.
|
|
|
Post by snowstorm on Dec 12, 2018 18:55:07 GMT
Yeah, this side of it doesn't often crop up in the recovery stories. The third / quarter recovery demographics are very well studied - 25% of people have one main episode of psychosis & go on to fully recover often medication free. This demographic usually makes up the bulk of the recovery stories as well as 'milder' presentations of bipolar & other affective disorders & neuroses. There are far fewer recovery stories concerning personality disorders. 25% of people have multiple episodes of psychosis with good functioning between episodes. 25% of people have multiple episodes of psychosis with less good functioning between episodes. 25% of people become very unwell & remain very unwell throughout their lives. Is it all the same condition / severity? Part of the problems again in putting everything within a 'few' main diagnostic ranges, & putting the whole of mental health into the 'same' bag. I suppose that the stories of the 75% struggling on to a greater or lesser degree don't make such good copy - and don't fit into the 'get back to work/education' policies. I'm very glad for anyone who can recover enough to do a PHD but would be nice to acknowledge the gutsiness and importance of help/ finance/finding meaning in a stress free way for those who can't.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 12, 2018 19:10:42 GMT
I suppose that the stories of the 75% struggling on to a greater or lesser degree don't make such good copy - and don't fit into the 'get back to work/education' policies. Yea. There is a lot of debate as to the variable outcomes / prognosis within different people. A large aspect is imo is that the quarter percent who make the best recovery simply didn't have the same level / severity of illness to begin with & also usually often have access to far better help & support & are often within far more favourable overall life circumstances. i think it's then very cruel when some of those demographics of people & other agendas use the percentage of people with better recovery to blame, denigrate & have expectations on the other less recovered demographics of people, which you get a lot of within the anti psychiatry / anti medication camps. Bonnie Burstow is a prime example of it all - she hasn't ever suffered mental illness, but then nor had Szasz & other prominent anti psychiatrists, past & present. With many of the people within the anti / critical / alternative psychiatry / medication movement it really is highly questionable if / what mental health difficulties there actually were to begin with? & for me it does raise a lot of what they saying into question. i have got more & more opposed to this movement of the denial of mental illness. www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/df13daea-9aa8-4956-8cd1-e28076210fbf
|
|
|
Post by snowstorm on Dec 12, 2018 19:35:17 GMT
Yes, there is no question that levels of support in someone's life makes a big difference, I think in part because it absorbs some of the life stress that can act as a trigger, not to mention the practical help with daily tasks.
Who runs the reform-psychiatry movement?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 12, 2018 20:08:45 GMT
Yes, there is no question that levels of support in someone's life makes a big difference, I think in part because it absorbs some of the life stress that can act as a trigger, not to mention the practical help with daily tasks. Given the realities of some people's lives / circumstances it seems very unfair to make judgements based on the levels of how well different people do out of this society / system, & how much understanding, help & support they do / don't get. The anti psychiatry movement seem most vocal & they state that mental illness is a myth & seek the total abolition of psychiatry, they do seem more prominent in the USA. The sociological / traumagenic camp seem the most popular alternative movement in the UK. The critical psychiatry / reformers ironically seem more left wing / anti authoritarian, but do acknowledge the realities of people's suffering & need for people to be properly treated, cared for, helped & supported. In the USA Robert Whitaker seems to be the main leader of the alternative movement - & he does seem more reformist than extreme anti psychiatry. In the UK it's probably Joanna Moncrieff & the critical psychiatry movement. Until it all translates into people getting proper & good treatment i am personally tired of all the debate / argument / ideologies around it all. i think the last really notable work on all this area was the & work of & book Psycho politics by Peter Sedgwick. All the rest i think is just rehashing all the same arguments.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 13, 2018 10:36:14 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 12:41:28 GMT
The third / quarter recovery demographics are very well studied - 25% of people have one main episode of psychosis & go on to fully recover often medication free. This demographic usually makes up the bulk of the recovery stories as well as 'milder' presentations of bipolar & other affective disorders & neuroses. There are far fewer recovery stories concerning personality disorders. 25% of people have multiple episodes of psychosis with good functioning between episodes. 25% of people have multiple episodes of psychosis with less good functioning between episodes. 25% of people become very unwell & remain very unwell throughout their lives. Is it all the same condition / severity? Part of the problems again in putting everything within a 'few' main diagnostic ranges, & putting the whole of mental health into the 'same' bag. I suppose that the stories of the 75% struggling on to a greater or lesser degree don't make such good copy - and don't fit into the 'get back to work/education' policies. I'm very glad for anyone who can recover enough to do a PHD but would be nice to acknowledge the gutsiness and importance of help/ finance/finding meaning in a stress free way for those who can't. Yes, and because of ignorance around mental health in general if one person diagnosed with an mh problem can do something it is immediately seen as laziness or just not wanting to when someone else with the same diagnosis can't.
Then again with schizophrenia most people are taken aback when they hear you have been to university, as if it implies only the intelligent and sane can go there and you can't possibly be either anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 12:51:16 GMT
People with a diagnosis of schizophrenia tend to be metaphorically thrown on the scrap heap, both by the public and services. They don't see you doing anything of use with your life, even though being a human being should be enough for them to treat those with the condition with dignity and equal respect. Part of the problem here is that they don't see us as humans, in fact they see us as no better than lab rats and treat us accordingly.
If, however they come across as articulate and intelligent, and medication compliant, I think they do get treated marginally better, which is of course wrong. It's not 'good behaviour' which should be rewarded; if they genuinely believe people are ill, then they shouldn't discriminate, as it's not someone's choice to behave as they do.
There is a bias in psychiatry though; not coming across as intelligent or agreeing with everything they say shouldn't lead to worse treatment, or the proverbial scrap heap. Everyone has something to offer others, whatever form it takes, and as said already, being human should be enough.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 13, 2018 13:55:59 GMT
...being human should be enough. Bottom line we haven't been very well treated, & treated as sub human at times. i stand by what i have always felt & said, that there are far better understandings & treatment approaches for people experiencing psychosis / mental health difficulties. On a very human level it also makes logical sense that if you treat people kindly & well they tend to feel better & if you treat them badly they tend to feel worse. There seems to be a combination of factors that makes the treatment of the 'mad' / mentally ill generally shit, & it appears to have all been that way for considerable time. i don't know how to change it all or make more people / society care. i don't think it will all change until there is a unified social movement for the proper treatment of this demographic of people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2018 9:40:06 GMT
|
|