tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post3673969112294937061..comments2023-07-13T05:01:01.343-07:00Comments on Holistic Recovery from Schizophrenia: After Her Brain BrokeAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06700295858497275586noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-25427613879963872872011-01-05T11:45:53.402-08:002011-01-05T11:45:53.402-08:00Those who advocate science and biology should be c...Those who advocate science and biology should be capable of demonstrating scientific and biological proof. The fact of the matter is they can`t.<br /><br />From my own experience and observation as a parent I agree with Marian and her experiences. The problem (to the extent that we wish to define it as a problem)lies in the context that the individual lives his or her life within. There is a lack of relatedness to others, the occurring world, and self that is held in the beliefs and interpretation(s)of the individual. The individual, in order to cope, formulates his or her own reality to escape the undesirable and unbearable context within which they live their life.<br /><br />Subsequently, they are force fed psychiatric help and drugs and the earlier context is transformed to one where their beliefs are altered to a new comprehension: `You have a brain disease. It`s uncurable. It`s going to be a deterrent to you leading any semblance of a normal and productive life, and the only hope in hell you have is to take these drugs.``<br /><br />A select few, through their own strength and conviction, their beliefs, and the inspiration and beliefs of those who love them yet again transform their beliefs and context from the limitations described above to screw you...I`m having a life...it will be productive and satisfying and I am not diseased. I do not have mental illness. I am ok and well!<br /><br />I believe those who give up and those who commit suicide generally do so somewhere after the transformation to the second reality.<br /><br />Marian and others who have transformed to the third reality are the models for what can be.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-39916742912714747422010-11-12T18:11:41.139-08:002010-11-12T18:11:41.139-08:00BTW, and a little off-topic, concerning the Nature...BTW, and a little off-topic, concerning the Nature article: I find it quite amusing that scientist seem to think adding false results together would provide a correct final result...Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-41579643885281696562010-11-12T18:02:59.143-08:002010-11-12T18:02:59.143-08:00Wow June, that sounds exactly like the Danish shri...Wow June, that sounds exactly like the Danish shrink I some time ago heard say on TV he'd seen some people, mainly abroad, labelled with "sz", who had gone off their "meds", and it hadn't been an edifying sight, these people didn't have a desirable life. This as an answer to the program's host asking if it were possible for people with "sz" to go off their "meds". Well, I don't know whom the shrink in question has seen, and certainly our society today doesn't provide the support (n.b.<i>support</i>, not <i>treatment</i>) to everyone in crisis they'd need to have in order to get through their crisis and out of it, and these people aren't always the most edifying sight, especially when they chose their freedom in the street over being subjected to others running their lives at some protected housing program (mandatory "treatment" included). But I would love to see the mentioned shrink say the words he said on TV in the face of someone like Joanne Greenberg, Catherine Penney, Will Hall, Rufus May, Ron Bassman, the former clients of Soteria and Open Dialog, and and and (the list is long), or me for that sake. And make a complete fool of himself. <br /><br />As far as brain science concerning "sz" is concerned, this is what Robert Freedman has to say about the "evidence it now has":<br /><br /><i>Freedman thinks the state of knowledge requires caution and humility. "Schizophrenia research is full of people who are sure they know what they're doing, and only later do we understand that the whole paradigm was off. Then we look back in amazement at how wrong they had it. I like to think everyone in my generation would be well aware of this history, and be reluctant to say we're there."</i> -<a href="http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101110/full/468154a.html" rel="nofollow">Nature</a> (This from a bio shrink in a bio article in a bio journal... )<br /><br />Fact is, it has no evidence in favor of the disease model. What it has is evidence of psych drugs causing brain damage, and of trauma to change genes as well as brain structure. Fact is, the disease model is a "never proven hypothesis". What more is, it is a hypothesis made up by people who have no personal experience with crisis, while it at the same time completely ignores the experience of those who are crisis-experienced, and in all regards goes against these people's personal experience.Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-51942998880930210732010-11-11T08:18:40.372-08:002010-11-11T08:18:40.372-08:00June - Thanks for the correction. A quick check of...June - Thanks for the correction. A quick check of the internet makes your former position look quite current. So, my apologies for my getting it wrong. Assuming you are new to this blog, one of my main points about schizophrenia is that I am tired of the pervading sadness that surrounds any information on schizophrenia. The sadness stifles hope and causes both "patients" and relatives to assume a poor outcome from the start. It forces them to run for the meds and to put too much trust in their doctors, when there is much one can do on one's own. I did a quick check of the presentation you gave (to the Ontario Legislature?) in which you indicated that drugs shouldn't always be the first line of intervention in a hospital setting. The more sad stories people hear about schizophrenia, the more they assume it is hopeless. Losing a son is horrible. To me, it is a failure of psychiatry. They've been hiding behind brain chemistry for far too long and demonizing those of us who see the possibilities outside of the medical model. My son is doing well, but it's been a long haul.<br />Again, thanks, <br />RossaAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06700295858497275586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-88248262320166463402010-11-11T07:48:16.913-08:002010-11-11T07:48:16.913-08:00May I please correct Rossa Forbes?
I retired from...May I please correct Rossa Forbes?<br /><br />I retired from Ontario Friends of Schizophrenics more than 15 years ago.<br /><br />But while I was Executive Director, I had the opportunity to learn a great deal about the reality of schizophrenia. This added to my life's experience of watching my son Matthew suffer from this disease which caused him to kill himself. <br /><br />I can only imagine your sad and frustrating journey to help your son. From one mother to another--I know your pain. I hope he is doing well.<br /><br /> I embrace you.june conway beebynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-26640578889047704052010-11-10T11:24:51.979-08:002010-11-10T11:24:51.979-08:00June - "Science" hasn't cured my son...June - "Science" hasn't cured my son. I expected more from it and it couldn't deliver. I was told at CAMH in 2004 that "big breakthroughs" were just around the corner, maybe five years away. Well, where are they? In the meantime, my son had a life to live and no parent should wait around for "science" to get it wrong, yet again. I'm sure you are aware that neuroscientist Nancy Andreasen, who promoted the damaged brain model and the need for medications, suddenly changed her mind, (science is always doing this) and realized that the drugs actually cause brain damage. Why should my relative be at the whim of science? Your paycheque depends on having a clientele of vulnerable people. I have gotten to know a lot of these "vulnerable" people who have recovered, and one of the reasons they probably did is that they refused to see themselves as mental patients. They also read a lot of books written by sociologists, psychologists, Buddhists, humanists that gave them the guidance that science failed to provide. Sincere thanks for your message. I'm glad that people promoting the humanist side are beginning to be noticed.<br />For the benefit of readers: June Conway Beeby is Executive Director Ontario Friends of Schizophrenics<br />Toronto, Ontario M4A 2W3Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06700295858497275586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-65827635818406947382010-11-10T10:45:51.784-08:002010-11-10T10:45:51.784-08:00Let's learn more about brain science,before sw...Let's learn more about brain science,before swallowing the unproveable, magical-thinking ideas regarding a perceived social cause of schizophenia.<br /><br />Let's be intelligently critical of sociology. This soft science has no place in the study of INDIVIDUALS, much less hypothesizing about the cause of mental illnesses. <br /><br />Sociology should stick to studying group behavior as it did with the important Obedience to Authority theory. That's where sociology excels.<br /><br />Stay with that,sociology. Don't meddle in places where you can confuse vulnerable people by promulgating your untestable, never proven hypotheses--mostly based on Freud's centuries-old,untested musings. This,at a time before science had the evidence it now has about the living brain, which would have challenged and corrected him. <br /> <br />Read Freud's primary research: Little Hans and the Wolf Man. You will be surprised that some professionals still cling to Freud's assumptions about human nature.june conway beebynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-41067803739905205012010-05-07T09:16:38.672-07:002010-05-07T09:16:38.672-07:00I agree the family SHOCKS do cause trauma in some...I agree the family SHOCKS do cause trauma in some of the children....<br /><br />I DO believe GOD can heal it all......and we can be 100% restored to sanity.......God made our brain , God made the drugs........God alone knows what help we need..........<br /><br />Praying for GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ....has helped a lot as does reading Scripture.<br /><br />Also exercise and Meditation helps to heal us.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-29786411475007793042010-05-05T11:57:33.551-07:002010-05-05T11:57:33.551-07:00P.S.: Let me put it this way: I had to know my pas...P.S.: Let me put it this way: I had to know my past, that is I had to come to <i>terms</i> (as in verbal language) with it, and find out where I stood in relation to it, in order to be able to let go of it. You can't let go of something you don't know what is. All you can do to escape identification with your past when it is unknown to you, is regress.Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-81090865842062740202010-05-05T11:49:32.021-07:002010-05-05T11:49:32.021-07:00Anonymous: I wholeheartedly agree, that time and s...Anonymous: I wholeheartedly agree, that time and space - and verbal language - are artificial, cultural constructs that do not really exist. Anyhow, I think, we all need to go through the experience of time and space - and verbal language - in order to become conscious and see the ego as what it is, so that we can let go of it. Postmodernism, or -structuralism, seems to me to be stuck with the ego, and to regard time, space and verbal language the ultimate, while it only is a stage, but nevertheless a necessary one, on The Way. "Psychosis" on the other hand is never getting the chance to enter, never mind go through, this stage (cf. "regression" in "psychosis" vs. letting go in consciousness).Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-58354237135513822442010-05-04T09:09:31.709-07:002010-05-04T09:09:31.709-07:00There's no question. He is capable of recoveri...There's no question. He is capable of recovering notwithstanding the fact that he has been prescribed psychiatric drugs.<br /><br />The key is establishing an authentic human connection through relationship, the pursuit of goals that allow him to apply his natural full potential capability and success at achieving attainable and measurable goals. <br /><br />You have stood with him every step thus far and are to be commended for your support and loyalty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-84616984164301838162010-05-04T00:19:14.332-07:002010-05-04T00:19:14.332-07:00Yes, humans are incredibly resilient but it bother...Yes, humans are incredibly resilient but it bothers me that people who have been there say that recovery occurs best off the drugs. This is hard for parents like me whose "children" were given these drugs as a matter of course when they had their first episode. Now, the drugs are the problem as we are told that it would be better to never be on them, if that is in fact what people are saying. There is absolutely no place to go to heal without the drugs, if the situation gets out of hand as it did with my son a year ago. I did not want him back on the drugs, but what were the options? I'm not trying to quarrel with you, I abolutely agree with you, but where is the help for people like me who don't want to go the drug route? Now, I worry that my son will never recover or not recover enough because he was given the drugs in the first place. This is a real concern and there seem to be no programs that give the family a break while not medicating the patient.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06700295858497275586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-50417847114129953702010-05-03T13:58:20.002-07:002010-05-03T13:58:20.002-07:00Interesting discussion. I am struck with a few tho...Interesting discussion. I am struck with a few thoughts:<br /><br />1) Human beings are incredibly resiliant. Even for a considerable percentage of those diagnosed schizophrenic this resiliance allows them to recover fully notwithstanding their experiences and their limiting beliefs. (This recovery best occurs absent biochemical interventions.)<br /><br />2) Space and time are human fabrications. Other living organisms are not in tune with the concepts of space and time. They live entirely in the here and now. I agree that language suffusion is key in establishing a false relationship with space and time. I think that our relationship with space and time is a precondition to assigning any significance to the psychotic state. Other living organisms experience psychosis however it is of no interest other than in the moment to their peers.<br /><br />3) Neurosis, psychosis, and any other number of designated mental illnesses, are responses to real or perceived experiences that threaten the organism. Other organisms will adapt dysfunctional behaviors where they are not in synthesis with their natural environment. (i.e. animals warehoused in confined spaces in zoos.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-51744896449303178942010-05-01T02:11:47.498-07:002010-05-01T02:11:47.498-07:00I agree, Rossa. My mother's mom fell ill durin...I agree, Rossa. My mother's mom fell ill during my mother's pregnancy, and died only a week before I was born, actually ten days early, which I imagine may have been caused by my mother's stress level; I probably couldn't stand the cortisol level in there anymore :D - while the somewhat symbiotic, but also problematic relationship between my mother and grandmother didn't make my grandmother's death easier to deal with for my mother. Both this and the fact that the marriage of my parents had gone down the drain - although no one wanted to admit it - a long time ago, didn't exactly make my mother a happy woman while she was pregnant with me.Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-90636620194484650442010-04-30T23:58:37.562-07:002010-04-30T23:58:37.562-07:00If we believe that the fetus "hears", th...If we believe that the fetus "hears", then we would have to include the time spent in the womb as part of the environment. Do we go even further back than that or further afield? Many mothers report that their babies were a bit like floppy dolls, e.g. seemed unresponsive. Abram Hoffer notes this in one of his books. I can vouch for that and I think the origin was in the womb. Why Chris hardly moved and arrived 27 days overdue is a mystery, and that's why I believe that there is often more to this than the early birth environment. Early birth environment, yes, but more, too.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06700295858497275586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-7947108304287382052010-04-30T12:56:36.823-07:002010-04-30T12:56:36.823-07:002. From my own experience I can say that I used to...2. From my own experience I can say that I used to refer to words as "arbitrary (sound) patterns", freely exchangeable, with no unambiguously defined meaning - and I used them that way. While at the same time I felt boundless, not defined in any way, so to speak, myself (cf. "depersonalization"), and often experienced the world in a similar way ("derealization").<br /><br />I often hear people say that, yeah, but there are people who suffer tremendous abuse, and still, they don't become "psychotic". Or also that the fact that not all children in a certain family become "psychotic" would make the trauma model unlikely. These "arguments" are based on a - very - oversimplified view of the problem, of human nature in general, and they do not hold good on closer inspection.<br /><br />Whether someone manages to establish a safe relationship with language, and through this with themselves and the world, or not, whether for instance someone reacts to trauma with "ADHD", "depression", PTSD or "sz", depends on countless, apparently insignificant factors. Time obviously is one of them. To render a person's relationship with language sufficiently insecure so as to make "psychosis" a possible result, insecurities need to manifest very early, during the first six months of a child's life. And since parents aren't robots, since they are human beings who react to life events, it is only logic that the same parents may raise ten "normal" children, and one who becomes "psychotic". Simply because something happened in the life of this kid's mother (and father; and stuff tends to happen all the time, that's what's called "life"...), that had them in some way treat this one child slightly different from how they treated the others, with maybe just a little less attention for this kid's needs during his/her first months of life. The child then will react to this, well, emotional neglect, in most cases with withdrawal (cf. parents of people labelled "sz" often will tell you, this child was "different" right from the start - while they interpret this "difference" as an early sign of the alleged "illness", not as the child's natural reaction to the parent's emotional absence/distance in his/her life -, much more quiet, not as demanding as his/her siblings), which reinforces the parent's inattentiveness towards this child, and voilà, there you have the recipe. <br /><br />There are a lot of other things that play in, for instance whether someone had something/someone in their life that could provide at least a minimum of security where the parents failed (and I'm sorry that I have to use words like "neglect" and "fail", because I know that, with a very few exceptions, all parents do the best they can, and I certainly don't want to accuse anyone of deliberate abuse/neglect), and nothing is as simple here as the above mentioned "arguments" want it to be.Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-15148916513525756222010-04-30T12:54:36.800-07:002010-04-30T12:54:36.800-07:00Looong comment (sorry), therefor in two parts: 1.T...Looong comment (sorry), therefor in two parts: 1.The question is, why are some people more aware than others, or why do their defence mechanisms (repression/denial) break down at some point (="psychosis"), while others' don't? I don't think, this is something that just happens, if it's because of genes, or a lack of moral ("undisciplined"). French postmodernist analysts Lacan and Kristeva say that whether a person reacts with what formerly went under the umbrella term "neurosis", or "depression", on the one hand, or "sz"/"psychosis" on the other, depends on how anchored the person in question was in language, that is whether she reached to find her place in time and space (boundaries), and to which extent, before the insecurities (sic) took over. - Laing is actually on to something very similar when he talks of a lack of "ontological security" in people labelled "sz".<br /><br />Someone who never reached to establish a "safe" relationship with language (that is, a relationship where the signifier is identical with the signified) before their faith in language was undermined (cf. abusive relationships where words often don't mean what they say, and also Laing's "mystification", and Bateson's "double bind") will have difficulty developing safe boundaries, and they won't feel connected, since it is through language that we become conscious of ourselves, understand ourselves and the world. Something that could be said to distinguish "psychosis" from everything else (although I don't think there really is any <i>clear</i> distinction, "psychosis" lies on a continuum with "normalcy", IMO, and nobody is 100% anchored or not anchored in language) are the "symptoms" that are referred to as "formal thought disorders", and which all more or less illustrate the loss of connection between signifier and signified (= words lose their meaning), characterizing what Kristeva called "psychotic speech", which btw and apropos of creativity lies end to end with "poetic language".Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-18715617074245698122010-04-29T23:05:09.258-07:002010-04-29T23:05:09.258-07:00"It appears clear that the individual has a p..."It appears clear that the individual has a poor self image, is insecure, is fearful, does not feel connected."<br /><br />Our Family Constellation Work, which is based on the work of Bert Hellinger and others, showed us that some individuals are sensitive to family "hurts and transgressions" which can go back generations. One example used, which is beyond most people's abiltiy to understand, is of a family in Brazil that used to own slaves (generations ago). The point was that the only person who felt traumatized by this or even was sublimally aware in the family was the person with schizophrenia. This defies most people's ability to believe, but that's what Family Constellation Therapy teaches. We are all impacted by our family environment. Sexual abuse is way too obvious and often erroneously linked. Unfortunately, people misinterpret abuse, and they think "there was no sexual abuse or physical abusem therefore the trauma theory is nonsense!"Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06700295858497275586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-48625668320634919352010-04-29T17:14:37.951-07:002010-04-29T17:14:37.951-07:00The curious question is what is it exactly that wa...The curious question is what is it exactly that was abusive in our parenting?<br /><br />Certainly sexual, physical, and emotional abuse may all be catalysts where perpetrated by a family member or someone else. Interesting enough however not all victims of these types of abuse will become psychotic.<br /><br />It appears clear that the individual has a poor self image, is insecure, is fearful, does not feel connected.<br /><br />It occurs to me that a factor is these individuals are undisciplined and do not understand where the boundaries are in respect of their behaviours. They were not consistently taught what was acceptable and unacceptable in respect of their conduct. It also occurs to me that these same individuals for the most part are highly creative and that because the physical boundaries of their behaviour are not clearly understood that the boundaries between real and imagined, conscious and unconscious are obscured as well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-19234449208906775982010-04-29T10:26:07.304-07:002010-04-29T10:26:07.304-07:00I can't help but think of Alice Miller when I ...I can't help but think of Alice Miller when I read this post - thanks btw for posting about her death, I didn't know. Both the NYTimes obituary and others I've read almost attack her for "blaming" parents, totally oversimplifying and distorting her work. Sickening. All she did was pointing out that we're altogether, children and parents, victims of abuse, and that we won't get anywhere as long as we repress, respectively deny this truth. And it can't be pointed out often enough, IMO. The biological model is a way to repress, respectively deny. I bet, behind the idyllic family facade Susan Inman is so busy painting, we'd find tons of skeletons in the closets, if we were allowed just a peek. Each time I hear someone bragging about what a wonderful childhood in what a harmonic family they had, I get somewhat suspicious...Marianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16273435151682585281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2894514913516471357.post-63336326376636913962010-04-29T04:30:12.999-07:002010-04-29T04:30:12.999-07:00I started a comment here, and then took it over to...I started a comment here, and then took it over to a rambling post on my blog, and have linked to this article for it.soulful sepulcherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12271584927611299868noreply@blogger.com