Showing posts with label bereavement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bereavement. Show all posts

"I Don't Believe in God Anymore. Just Don't Trust the Guy"

Job 42 - A sermon

Fourteen years ago, I wrote an essay titled, I don't believe in God anymore. It was a response to my grief about my mental illness, the loss of my self-image, my sense of confidence as a person who could rely on the state of my own mind.

I wasn't suicidal at the time. But I was acutely aware that chances are I would be again in the future, because I have a remitting, recurring condition. It appears, it gets better, it flairs again. And suicidal ideation is one of its symptoms, a particularly cruel symptom.

I felt betrayed. Betrayed by God.

I mean, I had given my life, my energy, my health to serving God. And all of those things had been taken away from me. Me!

Okay, I know that bad things happen to good people. Bad things happen even to saints. But, damn!

It wasn't about mental illness so much as it was about grief, grief for the loss of what I thought I knew about myself, what I thought I could count on, my brain, most of all.

And I thought I could count on God, too. So, I wrote, I don't believe in God anymore. Just don't trust the guy like I used to.

Job had a different response to his grief. He never said, I don't believe in God anymore. He continued to challenge God to be the God he thought he knew. But there are ways that the book resounds powerfully for me.

DSM-5 - Passé Before Published

Most of Allen Frances' ranting against DSM-5 bounces back to hit his own DSM-IV just as well.  He acknowledges this in the preface of Saving Normal, which he says is part mea culpa.  You could sum his argument against DSM-5 as It's DSM-IV, only more so!  We could all find some consensus around that line.

So while I am not pleased with this man's rants [did you pick up on that last week?], I do not come to praise DSM.  To keep us all on the same page, I am reposting my piece from November, 2011.  What I wrote below referred to DSM-IV.  Most of it applies to DSM-5, as well.  The differences between the two do not a difference make in my own critique.  The fatal flaw in DSM-5 is that it is DSM-IV's little brother.  That's what Thomas Insel is talking about...

Introducing Allen Frances

Allen Frances was the editor of the DSM-IV, first published in 1990.  He is now the fiercest critic of its next major revision, the DSM-5.  For over three years, he has been blogging weekly to this end at Psychology Today.  This week I will summarize his steady drumbeat.  I hope soon to publish an open letter to him.

Frances' complaint in a nutshell is that the DSM-5 creates fad diagnoses and changes criteria of older diagnoses to medicalize a whole range of normal behavior and miseries.  The link lists these problem diagnoses and a number of the following points, in an article published all over town last December.

These issues have been discussed widely, in public and private circles.  I am not qualified to address each point, though I did give a series over to one of them, the bereavement exclusion.  The best of the batch, if I do say so myself, is Grief/Depression III - Telling the Difference, which got quoted in correspondence among the big boys.

Defending DSM-5 -- Sort Of

Good mental health reporting takes research, careful analysis, nuance and a whole lot of work.  And in the end, it doesn't sell newspapers.  Which is why you see so much bad mental health reporting, even where you thought you'd find better.


[I like to think that opening sentence explains why I post no more often than once a week.  I work to provide a quality product.  But that is for you to judge.]

The long awaited publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Edition V has generated a blizzard of easy-to-whip-off articles with sensationalist headlines, just the thing for you to share on Facebook on a boring weekday afternoon, and get a nice Ain't it awful rant going among your friends when, really, you should be doing your life.

The Spectre of the Butterfly Net

Most of these articles follow the same tired theme, Psychiatrists are out to diagnose half the population, turning normal human conditions into mental illnesses, because they are in cahoots with the pharmaceutical industry to put the nation on medication.

These articles write themselves.  Pick any diagnosis that the DSM-V has dared to update from a work last revised nineteen years ago, add a quote from the disgruntled old man who was editor-in-chief of said nineteen-year-old document, which only barely tinkered with the 1980 edition anyway, plug in a statistic on drug sales, and there you have it.

Next, pick another diagnosis, substitute a humanistic psychologist for the disgruntled old man, and you are good to go with next week's article.

I, who love links, am not going to link to any of this trash.

Now I have my problems with the DSM.  But I do have some sympathy for its revisers, caught in the middle of a sea change, trying to update a system that will be tossed into the deep within the decade, and would have been already, if we spent any halfway reasonable amount of money on research.

For now I will do my own op ed piece and offer for your consideration the following assertion, based on my own experience in the system and reports of friends who have been at this a whole lot longer:

There are no psychiatrists running around on the streets, chasing toddlers with temper tantrums, trolling funeral parlors for grieving widows, whipping up business.  People!  There are not enough psychiatrists to deal with the loonies already identified.  They do not need you!

You don't get to see a psychiatrist and submit to trial by DSM until

  • denial
  • snapping out of it
  • hiding
  • behavioral modification
  • herbal remedies
  • and prayer

have not worked, and there is no choice but to go where you do not want to go, in the face of your drinking buddies who all tell you, You'd have to be crazy to see a psychiatrist.

Well, maybe you are.  Maybe you are on the knife's edge.  Be prepared to stay there a while longer.  It will take three months to get an appointment.  Longer, if you don't have insurance.

Seriously, they don't need you.

Diagnosis is Your Best Friend

Do you know anybody who has suffered for years with some unidentified illness, bouncing from doctor to doctor, treatment plan to treatment plan, feeling crazy and out of control, because there is no reasonable explanation for these vague, though debilitating symptoms that come and go, and your friend begins to think that you all think he/she is crazy and not really sick at all?  Lyme Disease, Fibromyalgia, TBI, MS, ALS, Lewy Bodys...

The day that person receives a diagnosis, even a difficult one, is a day of rejoicing.  Now he/she knows, can make plans, can learn about the illness, follow a course of treatment, maybe even find one that helps.

Diagnosis, if it is the right diagnosis, even if it is more serious than the previous diagnosis, even if you really, really don't like the diagnosis, is the first step toward recovery.

I mean, think about it.  If you get out of breath climbing a flight of stairs, do you listen to your friends tell you to rest mid-flight?  Or do you go to a doctor who might tell you that you have a blocked artery?  Is the doctor drumming up business?  Or is he/she saving your life?

Mental Illnesses are Made of Normal Experiences

Let's break out some dialectical thinking.  I know, it's hard.  That is why mental health reporters for USAToday and even the New York Times don't ask you to do it.  Prozac Monologues does ask you to do it.  But we can take it slow.

First, what is dialectical thinking?  It is when you hold two truths that seem to contradict each other in your mind at the same time.  Truth is not about either/or.  It is mostly both/and.

So our first statement is this:

Mental illnesses are made of normal experiences.  Everybody gets sad.  Everybody gets angry.  Everybody gets up in the morning sometimes and just can't get started on the day.  Everybody who walks by a group of scary people thinks they are saying bad things.  Everybody catches something out of the corner of the eye that isn't really there.  Everybody throws something against the wall.  Everybody persists in believing something that is false.  Everybody has an occasional impulse to jump off the bridge.

The symptom lists of the DSM are filled with behaviors that everybody does.

News Flash:  Us loonies inhabit the same planet as everybody else.

That is the first truth in our venture into dialectical thinking.  And it is the source of all those headlines about how the DSM is turning normal behavior into mental illness.  How is this for a thought -- mental illness really is not that weird after all.

The Suffering of Mental Illnesses is not Normal Suffering

But.  Here is the other statement to hold in your mind while remembering the first one:

There is a difference.  You get a diagnosis of some sort of mental illness when a whole lot of normal experiences and a whole lot of normal suffering pile up beyond your ability to function in a normal world.

That's it.  If you are not at the end of your rope, you do not have a mental illness.  Rather you are having a bad day, or week, or year.  If you are functioning well in the world, you do not make an appointment with a psychiatrist, and do not receive a diagnosis.  And the psychiatrist is just fine with that, because he/she doesn't have time to see you anyway.  The DSM is not about you, and does not try to be about you.  So leave it alone and let it help those of us who need its help.

When your loved one dies, you will not be diagnosed with depression just because you are going through a normal grieving process.  A normal grieving process looks like depression, but only on the surface.

If what you have is Major Depressive Disorder, then you don't go through a normal grieving process.  You don't think about your loved one; you don't remember the good times; you don't share those scandalously funny pokes in the ribs during the funeral; you don't cling to your sister; you don't even get mad at the person who deserted you by dying.  You just sit under a black cloud and think about how miserable you are.  So you do not get better, and -- get this -- you do not do normal grieving, until you get treated for your depression.

Grieving widows are in no danger from the DSM, if their grieving really is normal.

When your child throws a temper tantrum, you don't run out for a diagnosis of Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder.  A badly behaved child has good days and bad days.  If the parents are consulting with school and other resources and genuinely working on the issue, things get better.  When they have tried every recommendation in the book, when they fear for their lives, when the child is out of control and scared and miserable about his/her own behavior, and this has gone on for years...

then it is insulting, it is cruel and it is simply not helpful to tell these parents that there is nothing wrong with their child and that the doctor's attempts to figure it out are part of some grand conspiracy that threatens to medicalize normal behavior.  If you don't know, if you have not walked in their shoes, then shut the hell up.

Naughty children are not diagnosed in the DSM, if they can get better without it.

Diagnosis of Mental Illness is Not Easy

The DSM V does not make diagnosis easier.   Yeah, well -- diagnosis of any sort got more complicated when they threw over the four humours theory.

There is more to say in the DSM's defense.  I will get to it.  It will make me work and make you think.  And I don't imagine you will share it on Facebook.

Oh well.  My ad revenue never did pay the mortgage.

flair from Facebook.com

Ring The Bells That Still Can Ring

Liturgical Christians, Catholics, Lutherans, Episcopalians keep a season called Advent, four weeks before Christmas.  It is a difficult practice, because it calls us to be thoughtful.  Thoughtful?!  You mean making a list and checking it twice?  No.  Advent is a time to acknowledge the truth that we hide from, behind our shopping lists and party schedules, the truth of emptiness and brokenness, in ourselves and in the world.  We are surrounded by Ho Ho Ho.  Advent says Hmm.

Advent says, Yes we will rejoice, because the baby, The Baby is born.  And yet.  And yet...

This has been a hard week.  Our defenses against the darkness have been found wanting.  And yet.  And yet...



Grief/Depression IV - Not the Same/Maybe Both

So a woman goes into the doctor's office, three weeks after her husband died. I got through the funeral just fine. But now I feel awful. There is this ten ton weight on my chest. I'm exhausted; I don't have the energy to wash the dishes. I'm trying to pack up my husband's things, and I am too weak to pick up his shoes. I can't eat. Sometimes I get hit so hard with this wave of anxiety, I think I'm going to throw up.

What are the chances the doctor will say, Of course you feel awful. These are all very natural symptoms of grief. You just need time. But if you still feel like this a month from now, call my nurse and set up an appointment. What are the chances the doctor will not pull out the stethoscope and listen to her chest?

Answer: It depends on whether the doctor is stupid.

Or a psychiatrist.

These are classic symptoms of heart disease. There is significant overlap between the symptoms of heart disease and the experience of grief. But there is no Bereavement Exclusion for a diagnosis of heart disease. Instead, family physicians and cardiologists take the time to examine whether the person presenting these symptoms may have both.

Grief/Depression III - Telling the Difference

Once, when I was seriously under and still headed down, a friend said to me, There have been times in my life when I was sad, so sad I couldn't imagine being any sadder. But it seems that what you and others with depression are describing is a whole different level that I know nothing about.

See, that's what would be helpful, instead of, I know just how you feel. I remember when [fill in the significant loss]... I knew that he knew times of deep sadness, because I knew some of those times, and because he is a person is thinks and feels deeply. And listens deeply. Everyone should have such a friend.

It was Social Hour. We were in a corner to protect me from all those people being social. I leaned against a wall, because I was very tired. I guess the wall gave me the idea. I said, Yes, there are times I have been so sad I couldn't imagine being sadder. It's like the sadness became a wall I could lean against, because I was so tired. But Depression IS different. Imagine if the wall gives way. Imagine there isn't a limit. You lean and the wall gives way.

Grief/Depression II - Rise in Rates of Mental Illness

Are we really getting sicker?

A New York Times article, When does a broken heart become a diagnosis? sells papers with its usual technique - latch onto a fringe element and substitute good writing skills for substantive analysis.

I am all for good writing skills, and perhaps stumble in the same direction at times. But depression is my beat. So God willing and the brain permitting, I am going to beat this bit to the ground. Two weeks ago I discussed three contexts for the discussion, the cost of health care, the scientific value of the DSM and the hobby horse of the author featured in the Times article. I promised more contexts to come.

Are We Getting Sicker? - Context IV

James Wakefield's thesis is that we are turning natural human emotions, (the ones we want to get rid of, because they are unpleasant), into a diagnoses. His beat is depression, as well, but the Times is on this bandwagon with autism and no doubt other diagnoses to come.

Well, I grant some validity to the concern in general. Is it shyness or Social Anxiety Disorder? Is it artistic nonconformity or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder? Is it the sleep disruptions of normal aging or Overactive Bladder Disorder? Was it all those wings, doritos and beer you guzzled Superbowl Sunday (and most Sundays), or Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease?

Grief? Depression? Both?

The New York Times reports this week on a proposed change to the definition of depression for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) V. Asking, When does a broken heart become a diagnosis? it raises the specter that normal grief at the death of a loved one could be classified as a psychiatric disorder.

An estimated 8 to 10 million people lose a loved one every year, and something like a third to a half of them suffer depressive symptoms for up to month afterward, said Dr. Jerome Wakefield, author of The Loss of Sadness. This would pathologize them for behavior previously thought to be normal.

Okay, before we get our knickers in a twist -- oops, too late. Knickers in a twist is the current US national pastime. Nevertheless, there is a larger context here. Several, in fact.

DSM Context I - Follow The Money

Popular Posts