Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think anyone really knows if other people experience anything that is similar. I go back and forth on that a lot. But in terms of medicalizing things, who cares if it’s normal. It’s not about being normal, it’s about being better. I get prescribed a lot more medication than I need. I don’t take it often, but I like the options having anti-depressants, sleeping pills, stimulants, and anti-anxiety medication pr…
Better living through chemistry. Not at all what I was thinking when I wrote this post, but I love this take on it. I think if that is truly the drive behind the medicalisation of every day life we would be better off dropping the facade just allow people to live their best life through chemical augmentation, if they so desire. My mind takes the wide application of this to a scary dystopian conclusion, but perhaps it…
Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
61–70 of 70 posts
Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ignoring those negative emotions and keeping a "stiff upper lip" can lead to much bigger emotional problems down the road To me, keeping a "stiff upper lip" isn't so much about ignoring negative emotions, but more about behaving in the right way even when emotions pull you the wrong way. In my experience, exercising that skill doesn't create emotional problems, but solves them.
This is what I feel is meant by stiff upper lip: Be like a rocky promontory against which the restless surf continuously pounds; it stands fast while the churning sea is lulled to sleep at its feet. I hear you say, "How unlucky that this should happen to me!" Not at all! Say instead, "How lucky I am that I am not broken by what has happened and am not afraid of what is about to happen. The same blow might have struck…
This stance is immoral in many ethical systems. Not to mention everyone has a breaking point.
Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just know that in our economic system, humans are capital and anything that compromises their economic productivity is pathologized. Who Fisher was or what he did is irrelevant to this discussion.
Soldiers, children and old-age pensioners are not productive, yet not pathologised. Whole swathes of jobs are not truly productive, e.g. marketing and advertising, psychologists, priests, yoga-teachers.
Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#64Alternative take: some mental illnesses, anxiety disorders in particular, are exacerbated by knowledge of them and their immediate effects. Anxiety is much easier to deal with when you're not anxious about the fact that you are or will be anxious. Maintaining a "stiff upper lip" means learning to ignore unpleasant symptoms, which can both reduce their frequency and severity. There is usefulness in "manning up", to us…
You cannot recommend it without an actual trial, it is not safe.
Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just know that in our economic system, humans are capital and anything that compromises their economic productivity is pathologized. Who Fisher was or what he did is irrelevant to this discussion.
Soldiers, children and old-age pensioners are not productive, yet not pathologised. Whole swathes of jobs are not truly productive, e.g. marketing and advertising, psychologists, priests, yoga-teachers.
Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if they both disappeared at the same time They didn't disappear at the same time. I was on antidepressants for a year and my time on antidepressants was pretty much independent of the degree to which my sleep problems were fixed. I probably was slightly less anxious while on the antidepressants, but this was far overwhelmed by the fact that I get/got anxious & depressed after the nights my sleep was poor and I don'…
> This happened at a far, far slower and more grinding pace than the counterfactual in which I had any competent doctors around me […] I know the details are scarce, but why do you say that a competent doctor would have been able to diagnose and treat your condition quickly? Issues related to mental health and sleep are exceptionally difficult. Literally everyone I know, including myself, with mental health or sleep…
This point is very well-taken, despite what my earlier comments may have sounded like, as is your point that I may be misunderstanding the scope of the problem as deficiencies in the solution process. Believe it or not, I am sensitive to these possibilities and didn't arrive at my current conclusion hastily or lightly. I didn't lazily interpret the system failing to solve my problem instantly as an indictment of the system, particularly given my small firsthand sample size. As I said, I've also talked to a lot of doctors who I'm acquainted with, and the only facts I'm working off of are fairly uncontroversial among them. I'm talking about specific failures like irrational institutional biases against some types of specialists (that both the doctors and the specialists that I've spoken to in a non-patient context admit exist).
When I say that a competent doctor would have been able to solve my problem _more_ quickly, it's because of the multiple challenges that required retreading the steps that a doctor is ostensibly trained in. The economy is built around paying people to do jobs that you are capable of but haven't spent the time to specialize in: it would be considered a failure of each industry if I needed to become a domain expert to get my cable fixed, or have my shirts tailored, or fly on an airplane. I get that medicine is devilishly more complicated than any of the above, but again, I'm talking about specific problems with either the ability or the will to take the time to apply that medical training through critical thinking. Since those with training abdicated their opportunity to do think critically, I had to bring (a very narrow form of that training) to the only person willing to think critically about the patient: me.
I don't think it's a very controversial statement that the healthcare system has lots of issues: the doctors I've spoken to about the way the system works and has worked for me pretty much all agree with me once they get over their defensiveness and realize that I'm not interested in putting most of the blame on individual doctors and their behavior within a difficult system. Slapdash, cookie-cutter engagement with patients is IMO a lot more reflective of the constraints that doctors operate under wrt time and the average patient[1] than it is a commentary on individual doctor's level of intelligence or something like that.
[1] hell, I don't even judge doctors with the all-too-common undercurrent of almost-contempt for their patients, given the average patient they probably have to deal with
Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would bet that the higher rates are about mental health issues becoming more widely known and less stigmatized.
Would you tend to feel that mental health issues are a result of nature, and not nurture then?
Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#68Re: Medicalising everyday life doesn't help anyone's mental health
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Soldiers, children and old-age pensioners are not productive, yet not pathologised. Whole swathes of jobs are not truly productive, e.g. marketing and advertising, psychologists, priests, yoga-teachers.
Aging has surely been pathologized. Childhood is an inevitable stage of development but the prevalence of ADHD and learning disabilities indicate how we have defined our priorities.
- ADHD = boredom
- Learning disabilities = stupid
Again, no connection with capitalism.