|
Post by Admin on Dec 23, 2021 16:32:01 GMT
No neither of us is responsible for the extent of division i mean that i am not responsible for any of it - other peoples lives & mental illnesses - the way this society / system / psychiatry is - none of it.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 23, 2021 16:46:02 GMT
Certainly my articles have emphasied circumstance and environments because I could see how these had seriously impacted pn my mental health and capabilities for coping with life. And I could recognise cultural significances underpinning my psychosis in addition to the mystical aspects (heightened awarenesses). And I couldnt handle effects that I discovered were linked to the medication i was being given. The suggestion that I would need them l9ng term to 'stabilise' me was unthinkable. So I set out to learn more. There was little openness about the medications when I was hospitalised, but details were emerging, from the States, and within service user/recipient groups that were forming. I also wanted to know more about the clinical model because as you've said elsewhere there was quite a bit of anti psychiatry about then (eg RD Laing.).I started by probing my brother who was a medical student at the time. And I did go on later to study the 0U course Brain: Biology and Behaviour. I didnt enjoy the course but did well in it. It's from combining these areas that led me to think in terms of our neurophysiology as a medium between external and internal factors possibly leading to injury - but not totally dismissing genetics (still waiting for reliable proof)and acknowledging physical brain damage. So, to slot me into a group you need (for starters) to overlap the circle of propsychiatry with that of antipsychiatry and place me in the new set. You agree then on paper with modern psychiatry - Bio-Psycho Social-Spiritual Model med.unr.edu/psychiatry/resources/bio-psycho-social-spiritual-modelThe contention appears to be concerning the ways you have been / could be treated, that you do not see as acceptable. & we are back with all the same arguments / debates around the way the mentally ill / mental illness should be treated - that no one can agree on. What's the solution to all this? i have no idea - when comprehensive alternative social & treatment options are put forward people don't want them - so we carry on as we are, as with everything else.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 23, 2021 16:55:03 GMT
Certainly my articles have emphasied circumstance and environments because I could see how these had seriously impacted pn my mental health and capabilities for coping with life. And I could recognise cultural significances underpinning my psychosis in addition to the mystical aspects (heightened awarenesses). And I couldnt handle effects that I discovered were linked to the medication i was being given. The suggestion that I would need them l9ng term to 'stabilise' me was unthinkable. So I set out to learn more. There was little openness about the medications when I was hospitalised, but details were emerging, from the States, and within service user/recipient groups that were forming. I also wanted to know more about the clinical model because as you've said elsewhere there was quite a bit of anti psychiatry about then (eg RD Laing.).I started by probing my brother who was a medical student at the time. And I did go on later to study the 0U course Brain: Biology and Behaviour. I didnt enjoy the course but did well in it. It's from combining these areas that led me to think in terms of our neurophysiology as a medium between external and internal factors possibly leading to injury - but not totally dismissing genetics (still waiting for reliable proof)and acknowledging physical brain damage. So, to slot me into a group you need (for starters) to overlap the circle of propsychiatry with that of antipsychiatry and place me in the new set. You agree then on paper with modern psychiatry - Bio-Psycho Social-Spiritual Model med.unr.edu/psychiatry/resources/bio-psycho-social-spiritual-modelThe contention appears to be concerning the ways you have been / could be treated, that you do not see as acceptable. & we are back with all the same arguments / debates around the way the mentally ill / mental illness should be treated - that no one can agree on. What's the solution to all this? i have no idea - when comprehensive alternative social & treatment options are put forward people don't want them - so we carry on as we are, as with everything else. Here is what i propose - healingsanctuary.proboards.com/thread/9984/forum-source-documentsi can't however implement it all - i can't make people agree with it all
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 23, 2021 17:03:01 GMT
You agree then on paper with modern psychiatry - Bio-Psycho Social-Spiritual Model med.unr.edu/psychiatry/resources/bio-psycho-social-spiritual-modelThe contention appears to be concerning the ways you have been / could be treated, that you do not see as acceptable. & we are back with all the same arguments / debates around the way the mentally ill / mental illness should be treated - that no one can agree on. What's the solution to all this? i have no idea - when comprehensive alternative social & treatment options are put forward people don't want them - so we carry on as we are, as with everything else. Here is what i propose - healingsanctuary.proboards.com/thread/9984/forum-source-documentsi can't however implement it all - i can't make people agree with it all Is that proposal Not logical?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 23, 2021 17:14:26 GMT
Why would everyone not agree that a better society / system & mental health treatment is in the interests of everyone?
i swear that on one level the whole of humanity is totally insane.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 23, 2021 18:52:45 GMT
Certainly my articles have emphasied circumstance and environments because I could see how these had seriously impacted pn my mental health and capabilities for coping with life. And I could recognise cultural significances underpinning my psychosis in addition to the mystical aspects (heightened awarenesses). And I couldnt handle effects that I discovered were linked to the medication i was being given. The suggestion that I would need them l9ng term to 'stabilise' me was unthinkable. So I set out to learn more. There was little openness about the medications when I was hospitalised, but details were emerging, from the States, and within service user/recipient groups that were forming. I also wanted to know more about the clinical model because as you've said elsewhere there was quite a bit of anti psychiatry about then (eg RD Laing.).I started by probing my brother who was a medical student at the time. And I did go on later to study the 0U course Brain: Biology and Behaviour. I didnt enjoy the course but did well in it. It's from combining these areas that led me to think in terms of our neurophysiology as a medium between external and internal factors possibly leading to injury - but not totally dismissing genetics (still waiting for reliable proof)and acknowledging physical brain damage. So, to slot me into a group you need (for starters) to overlap the circle of propsychiatry with that of antipsychiatry and place me in the new set. What do you expect me to do about it all as one person suffering long term severe schizophrenia / disability? What can i do about it all? What good does going on about things on-line do? Or going on at other mentally ill on social media?
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Dec 23, 2021 23:20:54 GMT
Why should no one have any expectations of you?. The same could be said about my husband and his brother who both had muscular dystrophy and were using wheelchairs by the time they were 20. But both were involved with other disabled people and made significant contributions in different ways. Paul Hunt , One of the founders of the UPIAS also had a form of muscular dystrophy and spent much of teens in a hospital geriatric ward. But none of them thought they could turn things around on their own. Nor did they feel their sole responsibility was to themselves.
But, from what you have posted elsewhere , you have helped others in various ways ( what do we mean by the word 'responsibility'), you have actively tried to change things (but on your own?), you trained as a healer, researched and studied a broad area around mental health , mainta8ned this forum for 10 years ....your illness limits you on some respects, as did my husband's as does my mental health restrict me .
Most of the 'surviors' I knew fairly well in Survivors Speak Out had diagnosis of severe mental illness (a couple had had alcohol addictions but none to 'recreational' drugs as I recall ). My archive collection is a testament to these and other grassroot activists. But achieving our expectations was/is a tough call.
But I'm talking collectively here from small contributions to significant interventions, some successful, some not, some achievements now unravelling. All felt responsible, in the sense of caring about others in similar situations to themselves (as you have done engaging with homeless people).
It depends rather on what we mean by being 'responsible'.You have wanted improved mental health provision for everyone.That's a responsible attitude towards others.
What I dont expect of you is that you can necessarily sort people out through trying to help nor them nor,single handedly, persuade people to take the actions that could lead to mental health provision we envisage as possible, however 'sensible or rational.
I'll leave the issue of a lack of responsiveness or outright hostility to our endeavours for another day. I anticipate you and I will differ here on where 'responsility' for our own actions lies - and the interconnectivity between people when it comes to 'responsibility' (eg covid precautions, morality ...).
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Dec 23, 2021 23:32:43 GMT
I guess i see people more through the lens of the social/political sciences I studied at uni ( for all the theoretical and research limitations ) rather than in terms of personal morality/spirituality (though we, as individuals, make the final decisions concerning our actions and beliefs)
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Dec 24, 2021 7:15:53 GMT
The bio-psycho-social-spiritual model - do I agree with it ? Yes - and no.
Yes, because it includes the main elements that may impact on/be a part of an ndividual's mental health.
No, because of a paper presented by Vic Finkelstein who was a founding member of the UPIAS (Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation) , trained as a psychologist, worked as team leader (I think) on a replacement course for the OU's Handicapped Person in the Community, and much more.
THE BIODYNAMICS OF DISABLEMENT? * Disability and Rehabilitation Systems Research Harare, Zimbabwe - 29 June 1998 Vic Finkelstein .
Vic F first suggested a social approach to disability in the journal of the Disabled Driver's Association 1974/5. This was picked up by the disabled academic Mike Ol8ver who proposed it as a social model.
So, vic was invited to Harare to present a paper on what was considered by some as an updated and broader model. His paper is not easy for anyone not immersed in the politics of disability that VF was engaged in.
Basically he argued that this definition was a management model, one to assist professional workers in managing the lives of dependent people with impairments/disabled people. It was not a political model, like the social model of disability , which switched the focus away from the individual to how society in its organisation and attitudes had added an extra layer to physical impairment, both preventing full participation and seeking to make segregated provisions (housing, education, employment...) instead, thus disabling them.
The biopsychosocial model of itself does not make demands on society to change.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Dec 24, 2021 7:58:23 GMT
From the Biodynamics of disability. Vic Finkelstein. L Leaving aside whether a synthesis ought to be a biopsychosociap psychobiosocial pyschosocialbio sociobiopsycho sociopsychobio approach, in my view the medical and social models (in the ICIDH draft’s interpretation of these models for this word game) are not in fact an opposing dialectic of ‘medical model’ versus ‘social model’ but merely variations of the medical model.
The medical model views the disablement phenomenon as a "personal" problem , directly caused by disease, trauma or health conditions, which requires medical care provided in the form of individual treatment by professionals. Management of disablement is aimed at the person's better adjustment and behaviour change. Health care is viewed as the main issue and at the political level it is health care policy that needs to be modified.
The 'social model' is put this way ... The social model of disablement, on the other hand, sees the issue mainly as a “societal” problem from the viewpoint of the integration of persons with disabilities into society. Disablement is not an attribute of a person, but a complex collection of conditions many of which are created by the social environment. Hence the management of the problem requires social action and it is the collective responsibility of society to make the environmental modifications necessary for the full participation of people with disabilities into all areas of social life. The issue is, therefore, an attitudinal or ideological one which requires social change, while at the political level it is a question of human rights. Hence the issue is highly political for all intents and purposes
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Dec 24, 2021 8:12:05 GMT
I have posted elswhere that i see some significant differences between physical disability and mental health and what is need to support/improve our lives
I have a discussion document published by the Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People 'Distress or Disability' in 1994
an article 'Incorporation,or not, of MH survivors into the disability movement' published in Distress or Disability?.Proceedings 9f a symposiun held at Lancaster University 15-16/11/2011
The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 8n Spandler H, Anderson J, Sapey B.Madness, Distress and the Politics of Disability.
In all these I do challenge the diagnosis/ labellng of mental health conditions as being physical impairments in the way they are for disabled people ( like my husband) but I would emphasise more strongly now that I don't deny the medium of our neurophysiology and brain activity underpinning our mental health conditions, both severe and everyday.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 24, 2021 10:20:17 GMT
The bio-psycho-social-spiritual model - do I agree with it ? Yes - and no. Yes, because it includes the main elements that may impact on/be a part of an ndividual's mental health. No, because of a paper presented by Vic Finkelstein who was a founding member of the UPIAS (Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation) , trained as a psychologist, worked as team leader (I think) on a replacement course for the OU's Handicapped Person in the Community, and much more. THE BIODYNAMICS OF DISABLEMENT? * Disability and Rehabilitation Systems Research Harare, Zimbabwe - 29 June 1998 Vic Finkelstein . Vic F first suggested a social approach to disability in the journal of the Disabled Driver's Association 1974/5. This was picked up by the disabled academic Mike Ol8ver who proposed it as a social model. Socioeconomic / political / environment / trauma - comes under the social.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 24, 2021 10:27:32 GMT
The bio-psycho-social-spiritual model - do I agree with it ? Yes - and no. Yes, because it includes the main elements that may impact on/be a part of an ndividual's mental health. No, because of a paper presented by Vic Finkelstein who was a founding member of the UPIAS (Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation) , trained as a psychologist, worked as team leader (I think) on a replacement course for the OU's Handicapped Person in the Community, and much more. THE BIODYNAMICS OF DISABLEMENT? * Disability and Rehabilitation Systems Research Harare, Zimbabwe - 29 June 1998 Vic Finkelstein . Vic F first suggested a social approach to disability in the journal of the Disabled Driver's Association 1974/5. This was picked up by the disabled academic Mike Ol8ver who proposed it as a social model. Socioeconomic / political / environment / trauma - comes under the social. All areas covered on the forum - Discussion of 'Madness' in Relation to the Insanity of the World healingsanctuary.proboards.com/board/1/discussion-madness-relation-insanity-worldSocial Approaches healingsanctuary.proboards.com/board/5/social-approachesChildhood loss & trauma healingsanctuary.proboards.com/thread/260/childhood-loss-trauma?page=1
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Dec 24, 2021 10:33:17 GMT
The bio-psycho-social-spiritual model - do I agree with it ? Yes - and no. Yes, because it includes the main elements that may impact on/be a part of an ndividual's mental health. No, because of a paper presented by Vic Finkelstein who was a founding member of the UPIAS (Union of the Physically Impaired Against Segregation) , trained as a psychologist, worked as team leader (I think) on a replacement course for the OU's Handicapped Person in the Community, and much more. THE BIODYNAMICS OF DISABLEMENT? * Disability and Rehabilitation Systems Research Harare, Zimbabwe - 29 June 1998 Vic Finkelstein . All very well & good - But same as you ask me how i implement my vision of things - how do you create a society that treats the mentally ill, poor, sick & disabled better? It's the same problem.
|
|
|
Post by flyingcarpet46 on Dec 24, 2021 13:52:47 GMT
How do we approach the issue of how society treats people who are mentally ill, poor , sick and didabled?
From as many different directions as possible, according to our opportunities, capabilities, talents? Not so much agreement as collaboration , a shared goal but from different perspectives? The UPIAS was an interesting collective of people and debate was encouraged through internal circular.
The UPIAS emphasised principles which people took with them into their various involvements. It was similar with members of SSO. But there was always debate around the details.
|
|