Psychiatry, psychology, mental, mind matters

There's some accessible articles written on this...thinking costs energy/can be unpleasant so as a species we rely on heuristics.

Which can lead to mental health issues (inaccurate thinking can cause issues...) and social issues (people closing their minds to actual evidence leading to harmful policies).

Amazon has a bucket load of books on popular psychology...maybe there's a more accessible one? :)
Bucket loads of dross too. I find it hard on there to filter out the great from the decidedly average.

remember being blown away by this way back when

The Politics of Experience and The Bird of Paradise: Amazon.co.uk: R. D. Laing: Books

I guess for that, there's this thread... post them and let the lfgss hive scour?

That's called "crowd sourcing" I think these days :P

Psychology is a discipline of philosophy, although the label 'philosophy' across the various disciplines usually comprised under it is rather unhelpful.

Psychology is now such a broad church that it isn't really a discipline of philosophy (if it ever was). I can't work out if that's what you're saying or not.

'Recovery' seems to be the new buzz word/thinking among mental health professionals and the government when planning a patients care. I was just wondering do any of you have any opinions on this. As for me a user of mental health services feel it is a way of reducing cost and cutting services without considering an individual patients needs. I do not fully understand the term but over the past 5 years seen a reduction in services and greater use of the word.

I don't personally see the correlation between the use of the term 'recovery' and NHS cuts, but I agree there seems to be more use of the term 'recovery', as in 'the process of recovery', rather than 'cure', which suggests a finite outcome.

I'm guessing the term recovery has been picked up from the 12 Step programme, where it's used frequently and broadly. The way I understand it is that it distinguishes those who are aware of their problems and doing something to change/help themselves, from those who are oblivious/in denial/not taking action. In mainstream healthcare, there does seems to be much more emphasis now on patients developing their own 'toolkit' and essentially becoming their own therapist, as well as taking ownership of their own care plans. Still unsure if this is mainly a good thing or cost cutting fail.

I quite like the expression.

The term came from the service user movement. But like most good ideas, once translated into reality through top down service diktats, they loose much of their original essence.

I think that 'recovery' is a far more positive-feeling concept than 'maintenance' or 'abstinence', and that people react better to the idea of recovering from a condition than having an inherent and incurable problem. It may be a bit touchy-feely, but I think it helps doors look like they open, instead of being shut to you.

Like all language, I guess it depends if it works for you?

If somebody would call me "in recovery" for working on my attitudes/behavior, don't we all, my first reaction is "What is it I have to "recover" from, a broken leg??? I'm OK the way I am and thank you very much".

But if you see yourself as "sick"...it may be a very powerful term.

The politics of experience sounds very interesting.

I've met some rather nutty people (model railway society, some professors at uni...eccentric doesn't describe it) that seem perfectly functioning, as in married/working/social network.

What are we trying to "cure" here if all it is is a perceived malfunctioning that is deviation from a norm?

On that note: The infamous experiment where healthy/normal/whatever you call it people said they have a voice that goes "thud"...guess what some ended up on heavy medication...

http://recoverynetworktoronto.wordpress.com/2013/07/14/thud-on-being-sane-in-insane-places-pt-1/

Yesterday as I also volunteer with a leading mental health charity I was called to a meeting about how the centre was being re-organized in attempt to improve services for the users and the term was used frequently. In order to help those 'recover' the centre will no longer allow users to drop in and socialize, volunteers will no longer be able to attend groups, users can only attend groups/services which once were basically free but will have to paid for if they receive DLA, etc.,. services will be on an appointment basis. The list goes on and talking to fellow users I feel this is not aiding recovery as the centre was a life line as many are lonely and isolated and this was the only place they felt comfortable to socialize. The argument is that users should meet away from the centre and not be dependant on it but many felt that they just could not meet outside this environment and were quite distressed. I feel it is not just places like these that are using the term to justify cuts in services. For many years I and many attended a resource centre run by the local hospital partnership trust which provided us with many vital services which we could access at a drop of a hat, support and a place we could go and tbh kept many out of hospital but again it was felt it was not aiding our 'recovery' and was closed by the trust. In practice 'recovery' could be a good thing but I can't help feeling it is being used to mask cut backs. All I can see is services disappearing and many feeling alone and vunerable.

Don't know if anyone watched that Channel 4 doco on Lance Armstrong ....

I watched it. He was most unpleasant.

What I found fascinating was his language - constantly manipulative and overly intimate. I was very impressed - in a horrified way - that he had incorported "point scoring" into almost every sentence he uttered. And he uttered them with such huge cojones that people found it hard to resist playing his games.

Part of me is almost jealous that he is able to do that. I don't think he's repentant at all - again, based on his language patterns.

J Westland - very much up your street.

I don't think he's repentant at all - again, based on his language .

Of course he isn't... Psychopaths tend not to be strong on remorse!

(P.s. I don't actually think he's an actual psychopath btw, but definitely has some traits).

I'm beginning Foucault's Madness and Civilization.
Should be interesting. It was suggested to me by my psychiatry consultant on placement after a discussion about Rampton hospital.

Re: Armstrong. I totally and utterly understand his drive, and his desires. Both documentaries served to remind me of the darkness that drives the competitive nature of us. IMO The thing that frightens people most about 'psychopaths'* is that we can always derive or see some part of ourselves in them, usually not too distant.

*along with sociopath a term that probably shouldn't be used, but is convenient in this case.

Why? Just curious. Both terms come under the Antisocial personality disorder diagnosis. Something like "insanity" I can understand, it is a legal definition not a medical one, but the other two are perfectly good to me. Perhaps things have change since I last studied it.

I watched it. He was most unpleasant.

What I found fascinating was his language - constantly manipulative and overly intimate. I was very impressed - in a horrified way - that he had incorported "point scoring" into almost every sentence he uttered. And he uttered them with such huge cojones that people found it hard to resist playing his games.

Part of me is almost jealous that he is able to do that. I don't think he's repentant at all - again, based on his language patterns.

J Westland - very much up your street.

Tx will put it on my lovefilm list. Well...you could argue he's the ultimate proof of the programmability of humans. I guess it encompasses my issues with all these "positive thinking" and "winner mentality" programs, yet I have to admit these have also helped me discover unhelpful patterns in my competition in sports which I can now work on.

Victoria Pendleton also mentions "there have to winners and losers" and that she's very self-critical, like any program, side-issues can arise. And I work with computers too much perhaps :P

If Lance used the same tactics as a CEO of a major corporation and we were share holders - would we care about his tactics then? The man has shown he's willing to win at all costs. Wall St and canary Wharf workers share very similar characteristics. There's some research I read about CEO personality traits during my undergrad and I was gobsmacked at how similar they were in regards to mental health patients.

Currently doing post grad masters in CBT and starting to question how effective our current methods are. Some use alcohol and illicit substances to cope, and end up in the same place (literally) as secondary care users. Except the ones who used alcohol are in better physical shape. Might do a lit review just on that aspect alone.

Why? Just curious. Both terms come under the Antisocial personality disorder diagnosis. Something like "insanity" I can understand, it is a legal definition not a medical one, but the other two are perfectly good to me. Perhaps things have change since I last studied it.

From what I've read:
Neither are clinical diagnoses, especially not here in the UK.
Much more an often incorrectly used label.

Currently doing post grad masters in CBT and starting to question how effective our current methods are. Some use alcohol and illicit substances to cope, and end up in the same place (literally) as secondary care users. Except the ones who used alcohol are in better physical shape. Might do a lit review just on that aspect alone.

In the category, an uncle of mine ended up in a mental hospital after developing schizophrenia. The amount of people smoking in there was very high, perhaps self-medication. Or sheer boredom.

What was very disappointing there was that while he was there he was barely able to communicate. When moved to an elderly home for people with mental health issues they reviewed his medication and you could actually have a conversation with him.

So he was drugged into oblivion before he moved. Not obviously on purpose, yet we are talking about decades here where nobody reviewed his drugs and he was basically in a daze for which there was no medical need.

Certain drugs to treat mental health issues also lead to massively reduced lifespans and various health issues. Easily take 10 years off...so yes, something needs done.

Feeling a bit sad when I type this actually...as in this case all that needed to be done for him to have more contact with us was somebody to review his medication with the appropriate knowledge on how to change it.

I'm in my fourth year of training in psychotherapy. Currently studying for an advance diploma focusing on existential phenomenological practice.

About to start on Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology of Perception after completing Heidegger's Being and Time earlier in the year, think I'll need at least another five or six goes at it to begin to get my head around it.

I think that 'recovery' is a far more positive-feeling concept than 'maintenance' or 'abstinence', and that people react better to the idea of recovering from a condition than having an inherent and incurable problem. It may be a bit touchy-feely, but I think it helps doors look like they open, instead of being shut to you.

+1

There seems to have been a huge surge lately in the practice of secular Mindfulness, not only in a medical context as part of treatment for mental health illness (that's how I first discovered it), but in schools, work places and even the Houses of Parliament. I listened to this Beyond Belief podcast today, which I thought a well-rounded discussion about the religious origins of Mindfulness, the parallels and differences, how it compares with meditation, and the various uses and effects it can have.

Ah but the research is confusing, relapse and recurring are used as though they're interchangeable terms. They're not, and it makes a difference to whether the papers are robust or not.

In the category, an uncle of mine ended up in a mental hospital after developing schizophrenia. The amount of people smoking in there was very high, perhaps self-medication. Or sheer boredom.

What was very disappointing there was that while he was there he was barely able to communicate. When moved to an elderly home for people with mental health issues they reviewed his medication and you could actually have a conversation with him.

So he was drugged into oblivion before he moved. Not obviously on purpose, yet we are talking about decades here where nobody reviewed his drugs and he was basically in a daze for which there was no medical need.

Certain drugs to treat mental health issues also lead to massively reduced lifespans and various health issues. Easily take 10 years off...so yes, something needs done.

Feeling a bit sad when I type this actually...as in this case all that needed to be done for him to have more contact with us was somebody to review his medication with the appropriate knowledge on how to change it.

That is really sad.
Retrospect is a fine thing - I'm sure we all know someone who could have benefitted from a different course of action.

Yes, smoking seems to be one of the few ways patients can get off the ward/get some space. Thankfully those grim 'smoking rooms' have been removed.

I have a few old friends who are "mental" and have been on various medications and "treatments" but for the most part to me they are normal unless you treat them like an utter cunt or box them off, have seen them take break ups and stresses from work worse than most but the idea of some doctors that they should then instantly jack them up on pills is crazy in itself.

I don't know if it applies to more people but lots of the issues with the pills for them are a kinda as the dose passes the body over compensates on the way back to it's normal(which the doctor feels is out) and then until the next dose they are even more away from the normal the doctor wants which can make some up the dose and then you get either a vicious cycle of ups and downs or a zombie(I'm sorry if there is a better way of putting that but it's sadly true) as they become over medicated 24/7.

Very firm views that diet and lifestyle have a huge impact on mental health and related aspects of life. The body has so many complex ways in which it breaks down and takes in food/drinks/substances which I'm sure go far beyond the simple things like getting hyper off a bunch of sugar. The body can also produce it's own chemicals/stimulants/whatever and lifestyle can put the body into the conditions it needs to churn out things that are good/bad for someones natural offset from "the norm". If you take for example a pro cyclist then a diet and lifestyle could all be geared towards boosting testosterone and junk which inturn could help an aggressive offset grow, on the other hand you could have someone who is the same but the aggressive part is totally nurfed by a lifestyle that produces some other stuff instead like regular meditation or being a book worm.

I'm sure it isn't an exact science that you can't just perscribe a new lifestyle overnight, someone more into that field most likely has a study showing a large improvment for people using a voluntary outreach program in say arts and then a huge decline as it switched to referals. I'm also sure with the way things work that some people will have rare unknown/unchecked conditions in which the body has it backwards somewhere so what for the 99.99% produces x, y and z might only produce y and z with unexpected results or even produce a, b and c to make a real mess.

http://www.robot-hugs.com/comics/2014-06-24-More%20Helpful%20Advice.png