The Mental Illness Dilemna

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
The Mental Illness Dilemna
221
Wed, 08-01-2012 - 10:51am

Advocates for the mentally ill are faced with a deep dilemma each time extreme and deadly crimes are perpetrated by those with a mental illness. Obviously, such acts are not sane or normal; it beggars common sense to suggest that a person who is thinking straight would choose to kill or wound dozens of strangers. And yet most mentally ill people — even those with conditions that have been linked to violence, such as addictions and schizophrenia — are no threat to anyone other than themselves.

[continued]

For the mentally ill, who might be seen as canaries in this coal mine, stigma serves to wall them off from the social support and medical care that are necessary to spur recovery and prevent illness from leading to tragedy. As a society, we need to understand that risk does not equal destiny — and that believing it does is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It’s not wrong to see schizophrenia as a disease or even to appreciate its association with violence, but to view people with schizophrenia as hopeless can in some cases worsen their course unnecessarily.

Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2012/07/31/mass-murder-and-mental-illness-the-interplay-of-stigma-culture-and-disease/?iid=hl-article-mostpop1#ixzz22J3U2hHn

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sun, 08-19-2012 - 9:12am

SUP,

I think we've been down this road many times. I am not really sure where you want ot go with it. I understand certain parts of my posts stand out to you more then others, but, in part, I think that is because you have an agenda or belief you want to make clear.

So, do we keep going in circles?

I have not seen any question of whether or not some people are naturally more resilient than others

?? Question? I am not here to ask you questions. :smileyhappy: I repeatedly said I think some people are just naturally more then resilient then others. I honestly do not know how else or what else to post for you to get my point across.

Many, if not all posters, on this thread have made statements such as "parents do not cause mental illness" and "mental illness is a medical disease".

Yes, yes, you've said this numerous times. But, who said parents cause mental illness?? I do belief some parents can create stress within their children they may lead to bouts of depression or anxiety. Whether this would classify as a chronic condition or clinically dx is doubtful, but I did not think the disucssion was limited to that.

To further this thought, therapist have their handsful with people who want to discuss their upbringing. Not as a way to blame the parents, but rather the understand how their upbringing formed who they are today and maybe to resolve conflicts within themselves.

It sets the stage for a reinforcement of the long held cultural belief that most people are "normal"-ish until parents or some other force screw then up.

And again, a statement you've made numerous times. Sorry SUPS, if this is your belief, then it is. IMO, parents do need to be aware of the impact or influence they have on their children. I have seen many, many parents shift blame to society and others for their own inadequacies. This works both way. To be honest, in life, in work, I've seen more often then not, parents declaring, "what can I do, society has gone wild, it's not my fault, what can I do with drugs out there, kids having sex ... etc, etc" I see more parents placing blame on everything else. And many parents do feel powerless to change things.

So, I think to dismiss the parents role in their child's mental health is just as damning as it is to blame them.

IF some people are fully, resilient what does that say in terms of those who are not?

Again, where does this comment come from. Some people are "more" resilient then others. How does this translate into "fully".

LOL ... but yeah, I do know many people incredibly resilient. What does that have to say about anyone else? Probably what I've already said ... numerous times ... most people or children fall within the normal curve.

If you want to go out a limb and ask this question ... truly, people who cannot let go, people who cannot bounce back ... most likely this will effect their mental health, social life, educational capabilities. And, in some cases, I am sure, their physical health.

They my have bouts of depression, anxiety or a host of other problems.

 

. OTOH, any two informed people will naturally have a lot of overlapping opinions. It is difficult IMO to parse out the considerable overlap from smaller differences

Agreed

My best guess is that this format is difficult. What is written, intended, and read are often somewhat different. Repetition is a necessary evil.

lol ... I don't know about it being a necessary evil. But, yes, I am not sure this format is not the best for discussing such a broad and varying subject. When we take into account individual differences and therapy, there really isn't a concrete answer.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-08-2009
Sun, 08-19-2012 - 8:53am
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Sun, 08-19-2012 - 8:35am

Where the problem lies IMO is that when there is a diagnosed condition - ADD/bi-polar/etc. - resilience should NOT be excused away. Resilience can be taught and it is those kids, especially that can benefit from that.

Ok, but Jams, I agree with this. So, if you think there's a problem, I am not sure why.

However, IMO, you are making generalizations as if teaching resiliency is like teaching a child math ... and, IMO, it is not the same thing. Some people will simply never be the resilient type.

And really, no, I do not think teaching resiliency is as teaching math. The variables and outcomes are endless. And honestly, I've never heard professional treat Cognitive behavior therapy as something of a cure. People with certain condition will usually deal with it, to some degree, throughout their life, as life change, they change, and different stresses come in and out of their lives.

You can't "cure" adhd .... you manage it.

And again, this assertion that I implied people do not benefit from being resilient is kind of absurd.

You've made assertions over and over that some people just aren't resilient and I don't think anybody is disagreeing with you

No, actually, I've made the assertion, over and over again, that some people ARE naturally resilient.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 08-17-2012 - 9:46pm

I found this link and it appears at first glance to be both interesting and relevant to our discussion. I wish I had more time right now to read it. Looking forward to reading over replies after I take a little break.

Snip-it

There is no escaping stress, but there are ways you can learn to handle stress better when it is present, and to 'bounce back' faster from its impact. The collection of skills, characteristics, habits and outlooks that make it possible to remain maximally flexible and fresh in the face of stress is often referred to as "emotional resilience", which is the topic of this document. Learning to become more emotionally resilient can dramatically improve your attitude and your health in the face of inevitable stress.

http://www.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=5778&cn=298

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 08-17-2012 - 9:16pm
A lot of kids are resilient.
Yes, I agree. But are almost all kids or most kids resilient?
It's likely something you might lose (for a variety of reasons)
Do most kids start out inherently resilient and they lose it over time? If so, what causes the loss of resilience?
If a kid is not resilient, what does that mean? Does that mean they are acting out for attention? Does it mean that they are mentally ill? Does it mean that their parents are screwing up?
Can anyone be fully resilient, ie, predictably capable of handling very difficult life circumstances?
than never have had to begin with.
Can someone be born minimally resilient? What does that say about their ability to become resilient? Is it possible? Is it likely?
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 08-17-2012 - 8:54pm

resilience should NOT be excused away.

What does that mean and how is it different from being the Pew Lady?

http://www.coultervideo.com/articles/18/autism-and-pew-lady

Snip- it:

People with ASD often have problems with speech, or have trouble understanding explanations or difficulty expressing themselves.   They may be hypersensitive to light or noise or touch or heat or cold.  They may have obsessive interests and want to talk about them constantly.  They may have unusual mannerisms such as hand-flapping or become upset at some slight change in their routine.  They may lack tact and say things that are true, but socially inappropriate.

So, when you see a parent with a child who's acting volatile or eccentric, don't be too quick to chalk it up to poor parenting.  You may be watching someone struggling to make the best of a very difficult situation.  You'd never knowingly criticize a person in a wheelchair struggling to get up a ramp.  Having a disability that isn't obvious doesn't make it any less real.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 08-17-2012 - 11:47am
In contrast, I believe that resilience can and should be taught, or presented, to students. I believe not only that effective curricula could be but also have been developed, as evidenced by a recent link.
I acknowledge that "resilience" can be viewed as a every day term such as patience, but I also believe that it can olso be a precise term has been defined operationally and can therefore be measured.
I do not believe that lack of resilience, in and of itself, is a sign of mental illness. I do not believe that anyone is fully, resilient. I believe that all people are susceptible to mismanaging the challenges that life hands out.
Therefore I believe that resilience can and should be taught in advance of challenges. I acknowledge that some, but not most,  people naturally develop enough resilience to manage the unique set of challenge Life hands them, but believe that ALL people can be helped in some way by increasing their resilience.
nisupulla wrote:
What I read from your post is that resilience, or lack thereof, is indicative of a problem within an individual. As such the best way to help someone manage problems is to to wait for a challenge or crisis to present itself, then watch for poor coping skills and correct them one on one. Therefore, it would be difficult, at best, to create a curriculum because eachl problem needs individual attention and resilience is a unique characteristic of each person.

 I see these two views as being somewhat different. However, I have no confidence that I have accurately paraphrased your view. As it is written, I can not say whether our opinons are in agreement or not.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 08-17-2012 - 11:27am
ommy94 wrote:

Yes, and I just asked, not how you fit it into a curriculum, but how one would create a curriculum to teach students to be more resilient.

Handling problems, as they occur, throughout the day, is not the same as a formal curriculum teaching resiliency. Yes, no two days are the same and no students are the same. As I said, usually resiliency is tackled on an as needed basis.

I will paraphase. I am not trying to tell you what you said, but rather what "I think you might have said".

What I read from your post is that resilience, or lack thereof, is indicative of a problem within an individual. As such the best way to help someone manage problems is to to wait for a challenge or crisis to present itself, then watch for poor coping skills and correct them one on one. Therefore, Ii would be difficult, at best, to create a curriculum because all problems need individual attention and resilience is a unique characteristic of each person.

 

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Fri, 08-17-2012 - 11:13am

I have not seen any question of whether or not some people are naturally more resilient than others. What I have seen is some question as to whether anyone thinks some people "can be born resilient [period].

Many, if not all posters, on this thread have made statements such as "parents do not cause mental illness" and "mental illness is a medical disease".

To me the implication that some people are naturally, fully resilient, along with questioning parenting behaviors, and a vague suggestion that lack of resilience is, in and of itself, a mental illness, is problematic. It sets the stage for a reinforcement of the long held cultural belief that most people are "normal"-ish until parents or some other force screw then up.

IF some people are fully, resilient what does that say in terms of those who are not?

I am not sure what you are opposing or maybe you are just in agreement, but that is not clear.

Honestly, I don't think I am "opposing" so much as I am trying to figure out what, if any, differences we have. But I am not making much progress toward that end.

Because there is so much room for well informed differences of opinion, it seems unlikely that any two people will have closely matched opinions. OTOH, any two informed people will naturally have a lot of overlapping opinions. It is difficult IMO to parse out the considerable overlap from smaller differences.

My best guess is that this format is difficult. What is written, intended, and read are often somewhat different. Repetition is a necessary evil.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-17-2003
Fri, 08-17-2012 - 9:37am

Thank you. I still fail to see how this is any different then what I've been saying. This article actually supports what I've been saying. :smileyhappy:

 

I think we seem to drift apart when we discuss education. 2+2 will always be 4. With mental health, there are so many variables that will effect how a person reacts, even if the person has been taught the proper skills.

The other area of disagreement, I am not sure of your view, is whether or not a person can just be born more resilient then others. I certainly believe there are people just more resilient then others. The article you just posted discusses resilient "traits". And yes, some people are natural born problem solvers, some are naturally empathetic, some are naturally good at conflict resolutions, some are naturally cooperative, some are naturally optimistic .... and on and on.

And, I quote from the article, "b) Meaning full participation in the home"

*sigh* ... all this I've been saying all along so, again, I am not sure what you are opposing or maybe you are just in agreement, but that is not clear.

 

Pages