Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

Expand Messages
  • Dr. Chittaranjan Andrade
    Some thoughts in support of Roger s views: 1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and
    Message 1 of 20 , Feb 26, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Some thoughts in support of Roger's views:
      1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and because it happens to almost everybody?
      2. If a grieving person is suffering and is emotionally, functionally, and otherwise impaired because of his grief, and if he wants help, why is it wrong to offer the help?
      CA

      On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Roger Lass <lass@...> wrote:
       

      For some people, according to some definitions, drinking (or doing anything else) to adjust your moods may mean you have a ‘problem’. But if you don’t mind the dependency that goes along with it, it’s not a true problem but a merely definitional one, in that the professional literature has decided to define such behaviour as problematic. There are two kinds of problems: professionally defined ones, and problems in the ordinary language sense, i.e. behaviours that disturb the person exhibiting them. If I get good results, and furthermore hugely enjoy the taste of good whisky, then I don’t have a problem as far as I’m concerned.

       

      As far as simply calling the treatment of natural grief stupidity, that is not a terribly intelligent form of characterisation. It might be an idea to say what you mean by stupid and why. Because it’s ‘natural’? So is osteoarthritis in older people. I think you’re being dualist here, and separating ‘mental’ phenomena out from ‘physical’ ones.

       



    • Robert Karl Stonjek
      ... From: Dr. Chittaranjan Andrade To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:37 PM Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News:
      Message 2 of 20 , Feb 27, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:37 PM
        Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

        Some thoughts in support of Roger's views:
        1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and because it happens to almost everybody?
        2. If a grieving person is suffering and is emotionally, functionally, and otherwise impaired because of his grief, and if he wants help, why is it wrong to offer the help?
        CA
        RKS:
        I think it is reasonable to compare emotional scars to physical scars, at least by analogue.
         
        If you get a cut on your knee then sure, the body is a brilliant self healer and can heal the wound all by itself.
         
        But would that stop you cleaning the wound, putting disinfectant around it and maybe a curative salve on the wound to aid healing?  If the wound is going to be vulnerable if exposed then you put a bandaid over it so that healing can proceed naturally under this protective umbrella.
         
        Now when it comes to traumatic experiences, even those that are going to heal naturally by themselves, it still pays to 'clean the wound' which in the case of traumatic experience involves talking through the event and the emotions that have been disturbed by it.  Some positive reinforcement from a friend or clinician provides that curative salve and if the emotions are to be further exposed in the normal course of that person's life then a protective medication umbrella might be called for so the emotions can heal without further insult from their environment.
         
        Do people scratch the itchy wound and make it worse?  Do they pull off the scab and rub the wound, delaying recovery and possibly causing infection?  You bet they do, and we council them against it.  But if we can't see the wound or the 'scratching' that people inadvertently are compelled to do then we tend to ignore it.  Clinicians, however, should be able to recognise this process and be able to guide the client away from that behaviour.  The technical term is 'reconsolidation'.  It is a normal process of reviewing memories and strengthening those that are important but the process is vulnerable to corruption when a distressing memory is repeatedly recalled and further strengthened each time, thus raising the likelihood of that recollection being recalled again and again.
         
        Hence we could think of the emotional wound like the physical wound that heals naturally.  But like the physical wound, natural recovery does not mean that the wound is left entirely unattended.  And just like that itchy cut, we may be tempted to scratch away at an emotional wound, making it worse and worse and ever more 'itchy'.
         
        Robert
      • Dr. Chittaranjan Andrade
        Nice metaphors and sensible arguments, RKS. Appreciatively, CA On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Robert Karl Stonjek
        Message 3 of 20 , Feb 27, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Nice metaphors and sensible arguments, RKS.
          Appreciatively,
          CA

          On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Robert Karl Stonjek <stonjek@...> wrote:
           

          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:37 PM
          Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

          Some thoughts in support of Roger's views:
          1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and because it happens to almost everybody?
          2. If a grieving person is suffering and is emotionally, functionally, and otherwise impaired because of his grief, and if he wants help, why is it wrong to offer the help?
          CA
          RKS:
          I think it is reasonable to compare emotional scars to physical scars, at least by analogue.
           
          If you get a cut on your knee then sure, the body is a brilliant self healer and can heal the wound all by itself.
           
          But would that stop you cleaning the wound, putting disinfectant around it and maybe a curative salve on the wound to aid healing?  If the wound is going to be vulnerable if exposed then you put a bandaid over it so that healing can proceed naturally under this protective umbrella.
           
          Now when it comes to traumatic experiences, even those that are going to heal naturally by themselves, it still pays to 'clean the wound' which in the case of traumatic experience involves talking through the event and the emotions that have been disturbed by it.  Some positive reinforcement from a friend or clinician provides that curative salve and if the emotions are to be further exposed in the normal course of that person's life then a protective medication umbrella might be called for so the emotions can heal without further insult from their environment.
           
          Do people scratch the itchy wound and make it worse?  Do they pull off the scab and rub the wound, delaying recovery and possibly causing infection?  You bet they do, and we council them against it.  But if we can't see the wound or the 'scratching' that people inadvertently are compelled to do then we tend to ignore it.  Clinicians, however, should be able to recognise this process and be able to guide the client away from that behaviour.  The technical term is 'reconsolidation'.  It is a normal process of reviewing memories and strengthening those that are important but the process is vulnerable to corruption when a distressing memory is repeatedly recalled and further strengthened each time, thus raising the likelihood of that recollection being recalled again and again.
           
          Hence we could think of the emotional wound like the physical wound that heals naturally.  But like the physical wound, natural recovery does not mean that the wound is left entirely unattended.  And just like that itchy cut, we may be tempted to scratch away at an emotional wound, making it worse and worse and ever more 'itchy'.
           
          Robert


        • Roger Lass
          Thanks to both of you for not thinking I m mad. I appreciate this sensible support from professionals I respect. R From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
          Message 4 of 20 , Feb 28, 2013
          • 0 Attachment

            Thanks to both of you for not thinking I’m mad. I appreciate this sensible support from professionals I respect.

            R

             

            From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [mailto:psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. Chittaranjan Andrade
            Sent: 27 February 2013 10:47 AM
            To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

             



            Nice metaphors and sensible arguments, RKS.
            Appreciatively,
            CA

            On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Robert Karl Stonjek <stonjek@...> wrote:

             

            ----- Original Message -----

            Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:37 PM

            Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

            Some thoughts in support of Roger's views:
            1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and because it happens to almost everybody?
            2. If a grieving person is suffering and is emotionally, functionally, and otherwise impaired because of his grief, and if he wants help, why is it wrong to offer the help?
            CA

            RKS:
            I think it is reasonable to compare emotional scars to physical scars, at least by analogue.

             

            If you get a cut on your knee then sure, the body is a brilliant self healer and can heal the wound all by itself.

             

            But would that stop you cleaning the wound, putting disinfectant around it and maybe a curative salve on the wound to aid healing?  If the wound is going to be vulnerable if exposed then you put a bandaid over it so that healing can proceed naturally under this protective umbrella.

             

            Now when it comes to traumatic experiences, even those that are going to heal naturally by themselves, it still pays to 'clean the wound' which in the case of traumatic experience involves talking through the event and the emotions that have been disturbed by it.  Some positive reinforcement from a friend or clinician provides that curative salve and if the emotions are to be further exposed in the normal course of that person's life then a protective medication umbrella might be called for so the emotions can heal without further insult from their environment.

             

            Do people scratch the itchy wound and make it worse?  Do they pull off the scab and rub the wound, delaying recovery and possibly causing infection?  You bet they do, and we council them against it.  But if we can't see the wound or the 'scratching' that people inadvertently are compelled to do then we tend to ignore it.  Clinicians, however, should be able to recognise this process and be able to guide the client away from that behaviour.  The technical term is 'reconsolidation'.  It is a normal process of reviewing memories and strengthening those that are important but the process is vulnerable to corruption when a distressing memory is repeatedly recalled and further strengthened each time, thus raising the likelihood of that recollection being recalled again and again.

             

            Hence we could think of the emotional wound like the physical wound that heals naturally.  But like the physical wound, natural recovery does not mean that the wound is left entirely unattended.  And just like that itchy cut, we may be tempted to scratch away at an emotional wound, making it worse and worse and ever more 'itchy'.

             

            Robert





          • Glynn Owens
            Not sure I fit into the respected category :-) but for what it s worth, I too think your argument is splendid and perfectly coherent - unfortunately it clashes
            Message 5 of 20 , Feb 28, 2013
            • 0 Attachment

              Not sure I fit into the respected category :-) but for what it's worth, I too think your argument is splendid and perfectly coherent - unfortunately it clashes with too many people's sacred cows, I suspect, to end up being widely accepted....

               

              cheers,

               

              Glynn


              From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Roger Lass [lass@...]
              Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013 3:25 a.m.
              To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

               

              Thanks to both of you for not thinking I’m mad. I appreciate this sensible support from professionals I respect.

              R

               

              From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [mailto:psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. Chittaranjan Andrade
              Sent: 27 February 2013 10:47 AM
              To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

               



              Nice metaphors and sensible arguments, RKS.
              Appreciatively,
              CA

              On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Robert Karl Stonjek <stonjek@...> wrote:

              ----- Original Message -----

              Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:37 PM

              Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

              Some thoughts in support of Roger's views:
              1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and because it happens to almost everybody?
              2. If a grieving person is suffering and is emotionally, functionally, and otherwise impaired because of his grief, and if he wants help, why is it wrong to offer the help?
              CA

              RKS:
              I think it is reasonable to compare emotional scars to physical scars, at least by analogue.

               

              If you get a cut on your knee then sure, the body is a brilliant self healer and can heal the wound all by itself.

               

              But would that stop you cleaning the wound, putting disinfectant around it and maybe a curative salve on the wound to aid healing?  If the wound is going to be vulnerable if exposed then you put a bandaid over it so that healing can proceed naturally under this protective umbrella.

               

              Now when it comes to traumatic experiences, even those that are going to heal naturally by themselves, it still pays to 'clean the wound' which in the case of traumatic experience involves talking through the event and the emotions that have been disturbed by it.  Some positive reinforcement from a friend or clinician provides that curative salve and if the emotions are to be further exposed in the normal course of that person's life then a protective medication umbrella might be called for so the emotions can heal without further insult from their environment.

               

              Do people scratch the itchy wound and make it worse?  Do they pull off the scab and rub the wound, delaying recovery and possibly causing infection?  You bet they do, and we council them against it.  But if we can't see the wound or the 'scratching' that people inadvertently are compelled to do then we tend to ignore it.  Clinicians, however, should be able to recognise this process and be able to guide the client away from that behaviour.  The technical term is 'reconsolidation'.  It is a normal process of reviewing memories and strengthening those that are important but the process is vulnerable to corruption when a distressing memory is repeatedly recalled and further strengthened each time, thus raising the likelihood of that recollection being recalled again and again.

               

              Hence we could think of the emotional wound like the physical wound that heals naturally.  But like the physical wound, natural recovery does not mean that the wound is left entirely unattended.  And just like that itchy cut, we may be tempted to scratch away at an emotional wound, making it worse and worse and ever more 'itchy'.

               

              Robert





            • Johan G
              Almost nobody objects to simple pills against head ache. With anxiety there will be more objections. For problems with insomnia still more objections. A common
              Message 6 of 20 , Feb 28, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Almost nobody objects to simple pills against head ache.

                With anxiety there will be more objections.

                For problems with insomnia still more objections.

                A common denominator is fear of dependency.

                Another denominator is physical side effects

                and so on.

                So far I haven't even touched on the Big Pharma complexity and the problem of trust connected with greed.

                JG


                2013/3/1 Glynn Owens <g.owens@...>
                 

                Not sure I fit into the respected category :-) but for what it's worth, I too think your argument is splendid and perfectly coherent - unfortunately it clashes with too many people's sacred cows, I suspect, to end up being widely accepted....

                 

                cheers,

                 

                Glynn


                From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Roger Lass [lass@...]
                Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013 3:25 a.m.
                To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

                 

                Thanks to both of you for not thinking I’m mad. I appreciate this sensible support from professionals I respect.

                R

                 

                From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [mailto:psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. Chittaranjan Andrade
                Sent: 27 February 2013 10:47 AM
                To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

                 



                Nice metaphors and sensible arguments, RKS.
                Appreciatively,
                CA

                On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Robert Karl Stonjek <stonjek@...> wrote:

                ----- Original Message -----

                Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:37 PM

                Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

                Some thoughts in support of Roger's views:
                1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and because it happens to almost everybody?
                2. If a grieving person is suffering and is emotionally, functionally, and otherwise impaired because of his grief, and if he wants help, why is it wrong to offer the help?
                CA

                RKS:
                I think it is reasonable to compare emotional scars to physical scars, at least by analogue.

                 

                If you get a cut on your knee then sure, the body is a brilliant self healer and can heal the wound all by itself.

                 

                But would that stop you cleaning the wound, putting disinfectant around it and maybe a curative salve on the wound to aid healing?  If the wound is going to be vulnerable if exposed then you put a bandaid over it so that healing can proceed naturally under this protective umbrella.

                 

                Now when it comes to traumatic experiences, even those that are going to heal naturally by themselves, it still pays to 'clean the wound' which in the case of traumatic experience involves talking through the event and the emotions that have been disturbed by it.  Some positive reinforcement from a friend or clinician provides that curative salve and if the emotions are to be further exposed in the normal course of that person's life then a protective medication umbrella might be called for so the emotions can heal without further insult from their environment.

                 

                Do people scratch the itchy wound and make it worse?  Do they pull off the scab and rub the wound, delaying recovery and possibly causing infection?  You bet they do, and we council them against it.  But if we can't see the wound or the 'scratching' that people inadvertently are compelled to do then we tend to ignore it.  Clinicians, however, should be able to recognise this process and be able to guide the client away from that behaviour.  The technical term is 'reconsolidation'.  It is a normal process of reviewing memories and strengthening those that are important but the process is vulnerable to corruption when a distressing memory is repeatedly recalled and further strengthened each time, thus raising the likelihood of that recollection being recalled again and again.

                 

                Hence we could think of the emotional wound like the physical wound that heals naturally.  But like the physical wound, natural recovery does not mean that the wound is left entirely unattended.  And just like that itchy cut, we may be tempted to scratch away at an emotional wound, making it worse and worse and ever more 'itchy'.

                 

                Robert






              • Roger Lass
                Well if you want to be modest, note that I only said people I respect, and we all have our own idiosyncrasies. There s a whole barn full of sacred cows here.
                Message 7 of 20 , Feb 28, 2013
                • 0 Attachment

                  Well if you want to be modest, note that I only said people I respect, and we all have our own idiosyncrasies. There’s a whole barn full of sacred cows here.

                  RL

                   

                  From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [mailto:psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Glynn Owens
                  Sent: 01 March 2013 01:35 AM
                  To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

                   




                  Not sure I fit into the respected category :-) but for what it's worth, I too think your argument is splendid and perfectly coherent - unfortunately it clashes with too many people's sacred cows, I suspect, to end up being widely accepted....

                   

                  cheers,

                   

                  Glynn


                  From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] on behalf of Roger Lass [lass@...]
                  Sent: Friday, 1 March 2013 3:25 a.m.
                  To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

                   

                  Thanks to both of you for not thinking I’m mad. I appreciate this sensible support from professionals I respect.

                  R

                   

                  From: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com [mailto:psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. Chittaranjan Andrade
                  Sent: 27 February 2013 10:47 AM
                  To: psychiatry-research@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

                   



                  Nice metaphors and sensible arguments, RKS.
                  Appreciatively,
                  CA

                  On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Robert Karl Stonjek <stonjek@...> wrote:

                  ----- Original Message -----

                  Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 6:37 PM

                  Subject: Re: [psychiatry-research] News: Psychiatrists to brand grief lasting longer than two weeks a mental illness

                  Some thoughts in support of Roger's views:
                  1. Why should bereavement grief be treated as different from other stressors just because it is so common and because it happens to almost everybody?
                  2. If a grieving person is suffering and is emotionally, functionally, and otherwise impaired because of his grief, and if he wants help, why is it wrong to offer the help?
                  CA

                  RKS:
                  I think it is reasonable to compare emotional scars to physical scars, at least by analogue.

                   

                  If you get a cut on your knee then sure, the body is a brilliant self healer and can heal the wound all by itself.

                   

                  But would that stop you cleaning the wound, putting disinfectant around it and maybe a curative salve on the wound to aid healing?  If the wound is going to be vulnerable if exposed then you put a bandaid over it so that healing can proceed naturally under this protective umbrella.

                   

                  Now when it comes to traumatic experiences, even those that are going to heal naturally by themselves, it still pays to 'clean the wound' which in the case of traumatic experience involves talking through the event and the emotions that have been disturbed by it.  Some positive reinforcement from a friend or clinician provides that curative salve and if the emotions are to be further exposed in the normal course of that person's life then a protective medication umbrella might be called for so the emotions can heal without further insult from their environment.

                   

                  Do people scratch the itchy wound and make it worse?  Do they pull off the scab and rub the wound, delaying recovery and possibly causing infection?  You bet they do, and we council them against it.  But if we can't see the wound or the 'scratching' that people inadvertently are compelled to do then we tend to ignore it.  Clinicians, however, should be able to recognise this process and be able to guide the client away from that behaviour.  The technical term is 'reconsolidation'.  It is a normal process of reviewing memories and strengthening those that are important but the process is vulnerable to corruption when a distressing memory is repeatedly recalled and further strengthened each time, thus raising the likelihood of that recollection being recalled again and again.

                   

                  Hence we could think of the emotional wound like the physical wound that heals naturally.  But like the physical wound, natural recovery does not mean that the wound is left entirely unattended.  And just like that itchy cut, we may be tempted to scratch away at an emotional wound, making it worse and worse and ever more 'itchy'.

                   

                  Robert







                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.