Saturday, July 2, 2022

Comments by Terces

Showing 7 of 7 comments.

  • On one hand, I agree Steve! On the other hand I suspect it is because they know there will be legal consequences if they attempt to tackle this without approval from the mental health system. They would surely be blasted and attacked by those who argue that only doctors have the “medical training” needed to save the suicidal, and permitting anyone else to do so is simply “too risky” and will “certainly result in more suicides”. Heck, I expect such a support group would likely be held to a higher standard of accountability than drug companies and their marketers are in this regard.

    Suicide is frequently presented to the public only as a health issue, not also a social and/or spiritual issue, and so professional health workers are still seen as the only saviors despite not truly being any more savior-like than any other person. This also ties back into what Yael has said about liability – the almighty dollar comes first.

  • Thank you for sharing this Yael. I feel suicidal ideation is one of the most misunderstood experiences of the human mind, there are so many assumptions made by those who have not gone through it and so little inclusion of those who have. The voices of those with personal experience and important insight are overshadowed.
    I remember one night I was online and seeking a support group for suicide survivors, I so badly wanted to speak with someone who understood what I was going through but all my internet searches for ‘suicide survivor groups’ only brought up… bereavement groups. I learned the term ‘suicide survivor’ didn’t mean somebody who survived suicidal ideation or even suicide attempts, it referred to someone who lost someone they loved to suicide. It was very depressing as these people did not understand me or what I was going through, in fact in their grief they often expressed anger or demeaning language towards the suicidal. Where were the groups for people like me? Where do I go for support? If I am not a suicide survivor, what am I?
    I’ve called the crisis line once before just to talk about it, and in doing so I discovered that can trigger a series of horrible and dehumanizing events that are somehow supposed to save you from suicidal ideation but instead entrenches it deeper into your mind and deters you from using that service again. When people don’t ever call the line again, don’t ever return to a hospital, don’t seek help anymore… it’s called a successful intervention. What a world we live in.

  • “As psychiatrists, the fundamentally benign nature of what we do has been too obvious for words”
    Dr Morehead has a very unusual definition of benign, to say the least. It sure is something to see grown adults pull down the wool over their own eyes and then so firmly hold it in place even as the winds of reality gust around them. Has he heard of Radical Acceptance therapy? I didn’t find it particularly helpful when I was using it, but I wasn’t living in a fantasy world like he is so perhaps that is the key.

    Thank you for your work, Philip.

  • Heck, I forgot to mention yet another ridiculous thing about this… would Dr. Pierre and his colleagues accept a diagnosis of cancer without any lab work or imaging? Would he agree to undergo radiation, chemo, immunotherapy or surgery without those tests done, showing them the cancer is truly there? Would anyone consider a person’s demand for real cancer pathology testing before undergoing cancer treatment to be unnecessary or unreasonable? Would they assume the person is ‘being difficult’ or use their demand of further testing as proof that they have cancer that NEEDS urgent treatment? “This person is suffering horribly from cancer, so much that it’s effecting their ability to think clearly. They can’t admit that they need help, so for their own good it’s best we commit them under the Cancer Health Act and make sure they undergo life-saving treatment.” If that sounds like nonsense, it’s equally nonsense to push that line of thinking on anyone labelled mentally ill. It will always be absurd to me that a person with primary cancer has a right to refuse treatment even if they will die as a direct result, but anyone with a mental illness is strictly forbidden from doing the same. They get arrested, detained, forced under surveillance and medicated without any real voice in the matter as a response to their desire to pass on. There is a massive divide in how we view those who are deemed physically ill or those who are deemed to be mentally ill.

    I wonder if Dr. Pierre was aware of all this when he posted his tweet. Truly, there is no real comparison between the two and it feels a bit callously ignorant to say there is.

  • Shook my head after I finished reading. I lost a parent to cancer a few years ago… Dr. Pierre’s attempted comparison between mental illness and cancer is ridiculous and harmful for many reasons. Was the previous terrible analogy to diabetes not enough? Is their argument so frail that it can’t even stand up on it’s own, thus it’s promoters have to keep leaning it against completely different medical issues to keep it’s legitimacy?

    When one of my grandfathers was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, he was told his 5 year survival rate was below 10%… what mental illness is comparable to that? In fact, what’s the 5 year survival rate without treatment for any mental illness? I can’t imagine it’s equal or lower to the rates for the majority of untreated cancers. If mental illnesses can’t be diagnosed the same way as cancers, and the treatments are very different, and the risks of death are not the same… how are these two things comparable at all? How is this anything other than grasping at straws?

    You’re right Philip, it is dishonourable and we don’t need people making these comparisons in the first place. It helps no one. We absolutely need honest scrutiny – we need people to ask honest questions, we need people to seek honest answers. Amends should be made, apologies given, lessons learned or nothing will change. I hope Dr. Pierre at least feels the status quo is not acceptable the way it is and there is MUCH improvement to be made, but I have found myself bewildered by some of the thoughts of mental health practitioners before…

  • Agreed with J. Sunada. I enjoyed the topics brought up by Lane and found his questions to be compelling, although at times Spitzer seemed to brush them aside or did not appear to realize the importance of the subject unless it struck a particular nerve with him. Some of the responses Spitzer gave left me a bit dumbfounded as well; that he places so little value in discussing whether or not the term ‘reaction’ has meaning is surprising to me among other terms or words given so little regard. Perhaps it shouldn’t surprise me. The justifications for new ‘disorders’ are indeed flimsy, it is disheartening to read when I can remember back to being a young patient and being told that psychiatry was based on strong evidence-based research.
    I did laugh at Spitzer acknowledging that social phobia and avoidant personality disorder are not different – they were included to make certain people happy. How many other disorders were added for similar reasons? Truly I found the whole interview worth reading just to read these words from one of the authors. Everything from the talk of miss-match between results in a clinical setting vs the real world, the theoretical tug of war between the different psych groups, the apparent mutual agreement that medication side effects should not be mistaken for a disorder (which we all know is happening), to Spitzer being apparently quite fine with his lack of involvement in the 5th edition. Thanks for sharing this Lane, I’m glad this interview was found.