|
|  | | | | Put It In A Bottle; Keep The Cap Tight: Healing Through Repression | | | | | found on The NY Times
written by ms_sue_collins, edited by Liam (Plastic) [ read unedited ]
posted Mon 24 Feb 12:25pm | | | | |
 | The extraordinarily eloquent and erudite ms_sue_collins writes, "When a person suffers a traumatic experience, he or she must talk about it, face it, but definitely not keep the narrative locked up inside. This 'debriefing' philosophy has spawned an almost inviolable industry of mental health professionals, writers, and, of course, talk show hosts. But new research shows that sometimes the most healthful approach is repression. Richard Gist, a psychologist and trauma researcher, is one of a few in the field who have begun to question conventional wisdom:
Basically, all these therapists run down to the scene, and there's a lot of grunting and groaning and encouraging people to review what they saw, and then the survivors get worse. I've been saying for years, 'Is it any surprise that if you keep leading people to the edge of a cliff they eventually fall over?'
| |
| | | In a recent Israeli study, Karni Ginzburg and colleagues followed 116 heart-attack victims to determine whether a repressive coping style was effective. Of those who were more talkative about their experience, 19 percent developed post-traumatic stress disorder, compared with only 7 percent of those who were more 'stiff-lipped.' Rather than rely merely on self-reporting, George Bonanno, an associate professor of psychology, asked bereaved widows and widowers to talk about their loss while he monitored their heartbeat and pulse rates. The repressors, those who denied distress but had high heart rates, were psychologically healthier in the long run. Bonanno had the same results after completing a study of young female sexual-abuse victims. Those who repressed their abuse had 'fewer internalizing symptoms like depression and anxiety and fewer externalizing symptoms like hostility and acting out. They were better-adjusted.'
Both researchers believe that their findings disturb an entrenched approach that favors intervention and catharsis for political, historical, and most important, pecuniary reasons. And many critics are indeed disturbed. While some question the methodology of such studies, more take to task the idea that repression is healthful in the long run. Dr. Bruce Rabin, medical director of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center's Healthy Lifestyle Program, worries that repression just postpones the inevitable reckoning:
People aren't generally encouraged to repress feelings because that can cause a lot of anxieties later on," he said. We encourage people to use behavior that will minimize the stress of the disease, talk to friends, engage in social relationships, be optimistic and laugh about things, actively pursue religious activities if religious, do whatever works for you to calm you down.
Dusty Miller, a Massachusetts psychologist, might agree with part of that sentiment. Rather than encouraging reflection, she and her colleagues direct the women at their trauma resource treatment center toward actions. Miller believes that 'debriefing' and talk therapy merely reinforce negative feelings and that the mental health system 'tells women to recover by walking around clutching teddy bears and crying,' a feeling shared by Richard Gist:
For all we know, the repressors are actually the normal ones who effectively cope with the many tragedies life presents. Why are we not more fascinated with these displays of resilience and grace? Why are we only fascinated with frailty? The trauma industry knows they can make money off of frailty; there are all these psychologists out there turning six figures with their pablum and hubris.
"
|
| | |
[ more plastic... ] |
| | | | | | | 1. Trauma is traumatic | | | | by Dvandom |  | | | at Mon 24 Feb 12:57pm | score of 1.5 helpful | | | | | | |
Accepted wisdom: keeping it bottled up is bad, because you don't deal with (resolve) it.
New studies: talking about it is worse, because you dwell on it.
Trauma sucks. Maybe the bottlers just suffer a little for a long time instead of a lot for a shorter time. I'd like to see more than "gets/does not get a syndrome" and "immediate results are better/worse" before deciding if I'm going to seek counseling for any future traumas.
---Dave, tends to bottle it up, FWIW.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 49. Re: Trauma is traumatic | | | | by peabody |  | | | at Tue 25 Feb 12:15am | score of 2.5 compelling | | in reply to comment 1 | | | | | |
Traumatic experiences leave an implicit emotional memories that are stored in a different part of the brain than explicit memories. The evolutionary purpose for this is to give context to experiences perceived as threats so that when people are presented with similar circumstances they respond appropriately. i.e. (snake! -> RUN!) Unfortunately if these memories get 'stuck' they are triggered repeatedly even if the actual circumstances aren't a real threat. (stick! -> RUN!) For those interested in learning more, the short version is covered in the Feb 24 issue of Newsweek or the March issue of Discover. For those interested in the long version, see Joseph LeDoux's book, The Synaptic Self. The theory behind spending a long time in therapy is this: revisiting trauma in a safe environment allows for a series of corrective emotional experiences. Kinda like a conditioned response, except there is no response to the stimulus. During the time spent working with a shrink, a person doesn't so much repress the memory but to learn to contain the biology based panic reaction from the limbic system's malfunctioning early warning system.
There was a time when I would have been first in line telling people to just get over it, except that a couple years ago, I found myself in a situation that by all rational considerations should have been no big deal. Instead, I found myself feeling completely out of control. For awhile, just stepping into my shower would trigger an attack of despair, depression and self loathing. Believe me, I wanted nothing more than to move on down that highway. My brain just wasn't cooperating. It's not strictly a willpower issue and feeling normal again has taken a long, long time time. I suspect that resiliency and coping mechanisms have roots a lot deeper than the most recent experience and treatment.
After doing a lot of reading, I am convinced that I experienced a post traumatic stress reaction. I suspect that the original trauma was related to some scary hallucinating I did when I was 3 1/2 yrs old and had pneumonia and an especially high fever. The triggering experience didn't involve showers or bathrooms at all, that just happen to be what my amygdala latched onto in the aftermath. Sorry if I'm a little vague about details here. It still triggers a bit of toxic shame, even though I understand intellectually it shouldn't.
Is long term therapy effective? I dunno for sure. I can't draw a straight line connecting the time I spent with the shrink to recovering my sense of self, but my outside research strongly suggests that having another person empathize and validate the experience as real goes a long way toward helping the brain eventually recover its equilibrium. I can say I got no pressure either way as far as when to quit. In fact, I got very little advice at all. I suspect that if I had better access to my close friends at the time, spending time with them would have been just as effective.
Therapy's just like anything else, there are a few cheats and incompetents and there are a few especially talented types and then a big bell curve in the middle. If practitioner is good at the job (s)he can structure an emotional environment that moves a person through the process quicker.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 70. Re: Trauma is traumatic | | | | by bigeyes | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 12:46pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 49 | | | | | |
I think you're dead-on there, but something these studies don't seem to really touch on is the individual reaction. Some people may be helped by talking it out. Other people not so much. Isn't it possible we're all just different? Does there seem to be a connection between outgoing personalities doing better in therapy than introverts...or the other way around? I think there is much more to explore here.
For the record, I think the standard confrontation so many therapists are so fond of is CRAP. Anybody know an abuse victim who confronted their abuser and got anything besides denial &/or excuses? I don't.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 71. Re: Trauma is traumatic | | | | by ignoblus | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 1:23pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 70 | | | | | |
Those who are hardest to treat, with medication or talk therapies, are those with personality disorders - a pervasive and inflexible personality style. Cluster A is the "odd" cluster. Those disorders are rarer but more severe. People with cluster A disorders tend toward extreme introversion. Cluster B is the dramatic, extroverted cluster. People in this cluster tend to use the most resources with less improvement than those without PD or in Cluster C, the introverted cluster.
It never was that simple, and it still isn't.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 84. Re: Trauma is traumatic | | | | by mythologynut | | | | at Fri 28 Feb 7:48am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 83 | | | | | |
I am totally amazed at some of the responses to the idea of "therapy" in the comments so far. It is as if psychologists and psychiatrists are "them".
I don't understand where one would get the impression that therapists DON'T treat each case individually and take into consideration the cultural and emotional background of each person.
It's called a "case history" for a reason.
Some of the most facinating therapeutic work and research has been collected in treating people with Borderline Personality Disorders.
These are the people that one usually "hates" in the every day because they seem so angry, rude and in general, very difficult to get along with and are constantly so (a very simplistic description, look it up for yourselves).
It has been shown in research however, that the best therapy is one in which the therapist actually LIKES the patient. It takes a great deal of work to build this kind of relationship with your patients in the first place, let alone with ones that have these disorders.
Its amazing that we have such a negative impression of a field of study that is designed to help. Maybe we ought to think about the underlying reasons why we have such a reaction to news of this kind as an individual - instead of relying on a group to make us feel justified in our reactions.
it's just a theory of mine - D Dennett
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 2. Repression existance | | | | by MonkeyBoy | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 12:58pm | score of 1 irrelevant | | | | | | |
The other side of this coin is the wide spread notion that people can repress a memory to the point that they are unable to recall it. Say, your uncle rapes you when you are 8, but the experience is so horrible that you completely forget about it. There is no scientific evidence for such repression, even though there is an industry built upon it. In fact, many people, e.g. war vets, wish such repression was possible.
I think the place where repression exists is in society - a family may refuse to talk about or acknowledge what the uncle did even though the child remembers it.
I agree with the study that dwelling upon some bad experience (to keep somebody from repressing it) is probably harmful. However acknowledging that the experience happend is probably helpful.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 21. Re: Repression existance | | | | by halfwit | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 2:52pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 2 | | | | | |
I agree with you. I don't know if repression is the best word to use.
I think perhaps the path that works best is to acknowledge the event in its fullness, but then not think about it. Don't try to fool yourself or anyone else into forgetting that it happened, but don't dwell on it either.
Would you label that repression?
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 34. Re: Repression existance | | | | by kallisti |  | | | at Mon 24 Feb 6:31pm | score of 3 compelling | | in reply to comment 2 | | | | | |
I'm going to get really personal here. It really pisses me off when people claim that repressed memories don't happen, because I have them.
No, it's not like forgetting to take your laundry out of the drier. As a matter of fact, I think the word "forget" should be abandoned, at least if you want to talk about what happened to me.
I was raped when I was three. I "remembered" when I was 17 or so. My mother has confirmed that something happened in the time frame I asked about - that my persona changed dramatically in a few short days. She and my father fought about whether to take me to see a psychologist; I didn't end up seeing one.
So anyway... the thing is, I didn't "forget" much about the experience. I am, actually, blissfully unable to recall certain portions of it; however, the vast majority of the experience was splintered in my head, different memories that might come back to me when I see a specific face or hear a sound. I remembered the face of my rapist, and was alarmed to see him when I was 5 - I was afraid of him, and hid behind my mother. I remembered his house, where it happened, and was deeply shaken, when we dropped of his neighbor when I was 13. I remember his penis.
I say I "remembered" at 17, because that's when I finally took a few deep breaths and pieced the memories together. Wait, this place DOES exist, this man DOES exist, these things DID happen.
No one cued me - no one suggested, "Maybe you've been molested as a child!" No planted memories, no false memories - I've got corroboration on the time frame, I was allowed to go off alone with the man, and, most damningly for those of you who would like to believe that I'm full of it anyway, he was caught molesting his stepdaughter six years later, and tried to get frisky with another (13 year old) person in our little town a year or so after that.
So, with that in mind, take your lack of "scientific evidence" and shove it. Thanks!
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 39. Re: Repression existance | | | | by MonkeyBoy | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 7:53pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 34 | | | | | |
It really pisses me off when people claim that repressed memories don't happen I'm sorry if I upset you. I worded my example with an 8 year old to exclude the problem of very young children.
I don't think your experience is a case of repression, but more a case of being unable to understand what happened until you were 17. You do say you recalled unrepressed splinters before then.
People understand and rember only things that they can relate to their prior understanding of the world (The mind is most definitely not a movie camera).
As young children develop their conceptual framework rapidly changes. This is why people have very little memory of their experiences at ages 6 months, or 1 or 2 years. Kids at these ages obviously can remember things but their memories have been organized around a framework that later gets replaced and these memories get deleted (or some might say they become inacessable).
As for your experience, finally at age 17 you were able to piece your memory fragments into a rational whole. Your reconstructed memory is probably mostly correct, however the mind is notorious for altering facts in order for them to fit together.
Personally, I have only memories from 4 years on, though I have read that girls are earlier at remembering than boys and I would think nasty things would up memoribilty.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 41. Re: Repression existance | | | | by kallisti | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 9:46pm | score of 1.5 informative | | in reply to comment 39 | | | | | |
I'm sorry if I upset you. I worded my example with an 8 year old to exclude the problem of very young children.
The difficulty here, though, is that I have no more reason to believe in your framework than you would to believe in repressed memories in general.
I have written and re-written the rest of this post several times, and I can't get it right. It's a little personal and a lot weird. I just finally hit upon something I can say that isn't so extremely personal to me, and maybe will illuminate this conversation some more.
Specifically, I think you're wrong about it being a function of age and the mechanism of memory. I think the thing that causes repression of memory is a lack of sufficient coping methods employed at the time of formation.
My logic has to do with the fact that I didn't "remember" until I was 17, in spite of having all of the separate memories available since I was 13 or so. (Actually, as a kid, I remember remembering the actual event, although in a bizzare and exaggerated manner.) The thing that I had when I was 17 and not when I was 13 was not a method of remembering sequentially; no, I gained a support network upon moving out of my parents' house and making some good friends.
Now, keep in mind that my disagreement with you is really based on my personal experience; I think that my memories of this event fit pretty well into the category of "repressed memory" as people have thrown it around. Is it possible to implant false memories? Sure. Is it possible that memories get repressed? I believe it's more possible - I can't immediately identify any false memories I've had to deal with, but I've got a good example of a repressed memory. ;) I didn't want to drag out all the dirty laundry and try to describe what it's like knowing that you don't want to remember something, so I decided to take a conclusion of my musings - that maybe memories get repressed because of the lack of coping mechanisms - and see where the discussion went.
Oh, and as for memories and the timing of things; I have been told that it's biologically impossible for me to have a memory from when I was one-and-a-half, but I'm pretty sure I do. (My family took a canoe trip and didn't take a camera. I kept looking for a "photograph" from the trip, until someone pointed out that no such photo existed but that sounded like this place on this bend of the river we were on where...) Also, I have a distinct and corroborated memory of my paternal grandmother. I last saw her about a week after I turned two. ;)
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 43. Re: Repression existance | | | | by shatov | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 10:36pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 39 | | | | | |
I feel that you are stretching a little. Grasping the experience of rape could be done well before the age of 17, I would have thought. Somebody who was 13 or 14 should be able to understand. (I'm not going to set a particular age, because I don't know)
I am reminded of a comment by Ben Bridenbaugh in the thread on the Columbia disaster. He doesn't remember the Challenger disaster at all despite being really enthusiastic about space shuttles, trying to get his teacher on the shuttle through the 'teacher in space' program , and having a good memory for most things from age 5 onwards.
I don't know enough about psychology to make any certain statements, but it does appear that there are some repressed memories.
A forged document can also be a weapon of mass destruction.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 46. Re: Repression existance | | | | by charlies | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 11:15pm | score of 2 informative | | in reply to comment 43 | | | | | |
Once again we are surprised to discover that people are different, and we currently lack the intellectual tools to understand the differences and unify them.
Complete repression does, in fact, exist. About five years ago the Journal of the American Psychological Association published a study. The researchers went to a county trauma center in Los Angeles and collected about 150 records from 1967-68 of children from birth to mid-teens who had been raped. They were able to locate and interview about half the patients and found that one-third had no recollection of the event or the exam.
It's hardly earth-shaking, but it did show there are alternative ways of dealing with trauma.
We're fighting in a war we lost before the war began.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 73. Re: Repression existance | | | | by Petronius | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 1:45pm | score of 1.5 compelling | | in reply to comment 39 | | | | | |
Maybe the issue is not so much of memory repression as it is of convenient recall, where people remember certain events only when they encounter a therapist with an agenda and there is no other evidence.
Another issue is the age of the alleged trauma. When I was 8 years old my grammar school caught fire, with great loss of life. I have many terrible memories of that day. Yet my parents tell me that in the aftermath we went to a local funeral home to attend the wake of a child who died. The undertaker was hosting 4 wakes that night, each of a fire victim. I have no memory of this evening whatsoever. I draw a complete blank when I try to recover it. This is not so much a repressed memory as an erased one, yet I was not a toddler but someone old enough to read and write. I suspect that something is going on inside me over this event, but I find the complete lack of recall downright spooky.
What rescues us from insignificance is the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. Carl Sagan
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 3. Do pro-repression psychologists = Jews for Jesus? | | | | by katieo | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:02pm | score of 3.5 succinct | | | | | | |
Hmmm. At the risk of sounding like a psychology grad student defending the status quo, I find this hard to believe.
Bonnano's study is particularly problematic. How does he measure the term "psychologically healthier"? By using a functioning scale? That's like saying 50s-era families were healthier than families today. In some ways - notably functioning - that's very much true, but in other, arguably more important ways, it's clearly not.
And the press release describing the study repeatedly uses the terms "repressing" grief and "letting it go" interchangeably, when in fact one encourage you to talk about grief up to a point, and the other doesn't encourage you to talk about it at all. I hate to call into question the practices of Catholic University, which has a fine psychology department, but they have long taken an anti-psychotherapy approach to psychology, and it's not unsurprising that this bias is reflected in the study. (It's the equivalent of a Baylor University study showing that religious beliefs make people "psychologically healthier".)
Again, there are perfectly respectable psychologists who don't believe in talk therapy - basically they're behavioral psychologists. And there are ones who might argue that we've gone too far in our national, collective belief in "talking things out". But that's a long way from advocating "repression". Its more than just a matter of semantics, and I can't believe these psychologists don't bother making the distinction.
Kids, you've tried and you've failed. The lesson is: never try.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 37. I think the problem is the Media, not the research | | | | by mythologynut | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 7:35pm | score of 3.5 helpful | | in reply to comment 3 | | | | | |
As with many scientific articles, the research paper and the end product in the media aren't necessarily the same.
Dr. Bonnano's study is particular to PTSD in relationship to heart-attack victims; not ALL victims of PTSD. Also, its a 7 month follow up which may be enough for monitoring heart-attack related PTSD, but not (for example) child abuse, which can have affects for YEARS after.
All of the links and such are meshed together to create a drama - the drama of reporting boring medical texts in a way to evoke emotions in the readers.
it's just a theory of mine - D Dennett
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 68. Re: I think the problem is the Media, not the | | | | by katieo | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 12:07pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 37 | | | | | |
You're certainly right that the media has tendency to distort studies; I have no doubts that I'm misinterpreting it on some level. So we'll leave it only to discussing the conclusions.
Good differentiation between relatively time-limited, adult heart attack PTSD and child abuse PTSD, but unfortunately Bonnano himself makes no distinction. He performed the exact same study on young female sex abuse victims and claimed similar results. (One would think that, just for political reasons, the CUA would refrain from conducting a study with the hypothesis that repression is the best way to deal with the psychological effects of child sexual abuse. But I digress.)
Basically, I think most psychologists - and obviously people in general - would agree that psychotherapy is a limited tool. It just strikes me as particularly extreme to suggest that it is so limited that traumatic incidents don't merit discusssion. In fact, Bonnano seems to go even further by suggesting (by referring to those who "denied distress" entirely as being healthier) is that not only should people not be discussing their unhappiness, they should be denying its very existence!
Kids, you've tried and you've failed. The lesson is: never try.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 78. Re: I think the problem is the Media, not the | | | | by mythologynut | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 8:28pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 68 | | | | | |
"So we'll leave it only to discussing the conclusions."
The question becomes then; what conclusions are there to discuss? What becomes the issue is "How the scientific community views this data"?
Scientists do not conduct research based on what is (or is not) politically correct in the views of American readers, nor do they base their conclusions on research that cannot be verified or repeated.
A clinical psychologist is not going to change their approach to Posttraumatic stress disorder therapy based on any one research. If Dr. Bonnano's reseach is proven to be flawed, then it will be dismissed, if not, then more studies will be conducted to see if this disorder should be treated differently if caused from different stressors.
By its very nature, mental illness is not treated from knee-jerk reactions to this research or that. Nor, if there is some truth to repression coping strategies and long-term health, then this needs to be "incorporated" into therapy techniques, not "in place of".
In other words, one has to look at the data with no emotional investment. There is no threat here.
it's just a theory of mine - D Dennett
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 4. the trappings and the suits of woe | | | | by veratrine |  | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:04pm | score of 0.5 disingenuous | | | | | | |
I think it's interesting that psychologists are finally realizing that cathartic wallowing may not be the answer for everyone. But I don't think that what works for people who are fortunate enough to be able to "effectively cope with the many tragedies life presents" should necessarily be used as a model for everyone's therapy. After all, reactions to stress, like everything else, are cultural:
In many societies and cultural groups, traditional patterns of expression of emotional distress take the form of combinations of symptoms that have no exact equivalent in standard international categories of mental illness. The intermediate term response to disaster may take the form of one of these "culture-specific disorders." And, just as some cultures have different physical expressions of stress, some cultures have a tradition of handling things with a 'stiff upper lip' and some don't. That said, I think Americans, by and large, are wallowers, and as an unusual representative of the "stiff upper lip" school, it bothers me. I don't want to be around people who are enjoying a loud dramatization of their emotions, and I don't want to be expected to express myself in the same way. Some people, I'm sure, feel great after unburdening themselves like that, and more power to them, but it isn't for everyone.
eggiwegs...I'd like to smash 'em!
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 11. Hire a professional | | | | by MonkeyBoy | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:32pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 4 | | | | | |
I don't want to be around people who are enjoying a loud dramatization of their emotions
I think many people don't. I have heard from psychiatrists that often their job is just to function as polite listeners. Their clients want to moan about how badly they are being treated but most people get tired of this without pay.
It goes against the interests of many psychiatrists to limit rehashings of wrongs.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 13. Re: Hire a professional | | | | by eduardo | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:46pm | score of 1.5 intriguing | | in reply to comment 11 | | | | | |
You are dead on. I wonder if psychiatrists tell their patients brutal truths, instead of just letting them ramble on and on. Cuz I sure don't...
Friend: {rambles on about ex-gf} .. may be I am an idiot for feeling like this, but she...
Me: Yea you are an idiot for feeling like that. Try to figure out what's relevant for your life at this point. I think some stupid girl you went out with for 3 months is not sufficient cause for you to feel all out of whack.
Friend: {speechless because for the first time someone told him the truth instead of indulging his sobs}
J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 23. Re: Hire a professional | | | | by ignoblus | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 2:57pm | score of 1.5 informative | | in reply to comment 13 | | | | | |
I wonder if psychiatrists tell their patients brutal truths, instead of just letting them ramble on and on. Yes, they do. Though rarely as coarsely as you put it. But it does go so far as some existentially oriented shrinks saying things like, "I don't know what you're doing here. It seems you're just wallowing in your pity. I think you would probably be better off if you to just leave." Granted, existential shrinks are rare, but there is still a big difference between talk therapy and uncritical supportive listening.
It never was that simple, and it still isn't.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 44. Re: the trappings and the suits of woe | | | | by Anonymous Idiot | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 11:08pm | score of 0.5 informative | | in reply to comment 4 | | | | | |
Let me assure everyone that "Cathartic Wallowing" is not on the list of empirically validated treatments for trauma last I checked. Nor is it a "technique" any respectable psychologist would use. There is absolutely a time to process a traumatizing experience in order to come to terms with it, and there are times when talking about such an experience might even exacerbate the problem. Among the factors that leads a psychologist to decide to process the event with a person, or not, would be the person's personality and belief system, among many other variables. All trained psychologists, and good counsellors, know as much.
By the way, 'repression' is an unconscious process. Hence, you don't remember - unless it surfaces to consciousness down the road. 'Supression' is a conscious process - deliberately pushing something out of mind. Confusing these two seems to have created a lot of misunderstanding and errors in the posted comments.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 47. Re: the trappings and the suits of woe | | | | by charlies | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 11:36pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 4 | | | | | |
There are cultural differences, which is why the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association, beginning with the third edition in 1980, has a section on culture-specific disorders, like the lethal dreams of Tagalog speakers. Very interesting disorder.
We're fighting in a war we lost before the war began.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 5. Conan | | | | by David Flores |  | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:05pm | score of 4 helpful | | | | | | |
This article reminded me of a scene from "Conan The Barbarian," a fine B-rate film that I couldn't resist buying when I spied the DVD at "Best Buy" the other day. In the scene, Conan is burying his girlfriend, who has just been felled by one of Thulsa Doom's magic snake-arrows. It is evening, and the flames of the funeral pyre leap high into the air as Conan stands nearby. Statuelike, he betrays no emotion, though we, the audience, understand the pain and anger that surely must consume him. After all, following the murder of his mother, at the hands of Thulsa Doom, Conan was raised as a slave and a gladiator. He has known neither love nor companionship 'till recently, and now, Thulsa Doom has robbed him of that all too fleeting kinship for the second time. And then, as we plumb the depths of Conan's silent anguish, the wizard notices that Subotai, Conan's sidekick, is quietly weeping. "Why do you cry?," the wizard asks. And to this Subotai responds: "He is Conan, a Cimmerian, he will not cry... so I cry for him!"
So, Ms. Sue Collins simply provides more evidence for something I've always known: Conan is a badass., and what is good in life is not the steppe, a fleet horse, a falcon on one's wrist, and a 4:30 appointment with one's analyst, but rather, what is good in life is to crush one's enemies, to see them driven before one, and too hear the lamentations of their women!
GAFB and GAFB2
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 6. Moving On | | | | by Ursa Minor | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:07pm | score of 2 clever | | | | | | |
Tan'si,
I'm all for talking about a traumatic experience and getting it off your chest. However, some people get carried away with this need to dump their emotions, it becomes compulsive. People often do not realize that just like they have a routine of putting on their pants, they often have a routine of 'putting their emotions on'.
It can be the psychological equivalent to picking at your scab- after a time, you just have to shut up and deal.
Ursa Minor
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 7. Third Option... | | | | by eduardo | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:16pm | score of 1.5 obnoxious | | | | | | |
I am a fan of a third option, and that has worked fairly well for me.
It sounds very simple: move on.
Look at life as a highway. If you keep dwelling about the near-miss five minutes ago, you're not going to be well prepared to deal with the next batch of shit. When something is in the past and you don't have to actively deal with it, stop worrying about it. Learn a lesson from it, and that's it.
Whether you talk about something is your choice. One of my ex girlfriends used to be all weird around me until she told me about some bad shit that happened to her when she was younger. I helped her realize that whatever happened in the past has nothing to do with me or with other people in her life. Eventually she accepted that. She's very comfortable with her relationships now. I guess if she had never opened up to me about it I'd never be able to point her towards the solution - but it's not endless blabbing that resolved her issues, it was an attitude change.
I had some dark moments in years past, too. Political instability and civil war don't make for good childhood, I guess. But I don't dwell on that shit, because it's in the past. If anything, it has impacted me only in the positive way in the long run - by allowing me to appreciate my life in the US more than most people seem to.
I guess it's hard to come up with a recepie for staying sane. I think being productive and busy has a lot to do with it. I have 2 jobs, go to school, have tons of fun, have a girlfriend, etc. I wouln't have time to be miserable about the past even if I was so inclined...
Which I am totally not ;-)
J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 20. Re: Third Option... | | | | by Tashtego | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 2:44pm | score of 2.5 astute | | in reply to comment 7 | | | | | |
I wouln't have time to be miserable about the past even if I was so inclined...
That's great Cookie. I'm so happy that you're so well adjusted and that you're able to so adroitly help your ex-girlfriend not be all weird around you anymore.
Hmmm...life is a highway...move on. Gosh it seems so simple...and yet...just can't get my mind around it.
C'mon. Do you really think that you've stumbled onto some fundamental truth in life that's so simple that it can be summed up into a single smug imperative, 'Move on', and yet somehow it's so complex that there are multitudes of miserable people who just can't get it for some reason? Or is it more likely that you just don't know what you're talking about? Stop handing out glib advice. It's insulting to people who have real problems.
Liberals are always right about everything.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 24. Re: Third Option... | | | | by eduardo | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 3:06pm | score of 1.5 helpful | | in reply to comment 20 | | | | | |
multitudes of miserable people who just can't get it for some reason?
...
Stop handing out glib advice. It's insulting to people who have real problems.
Multitudes of miserable people can't change their oil or multiply fractions. This doesn't mean that it's insulting to point out the simple solutions to these tasks.
It's hardly useless to advise someone to glance back rationaly at things that are hurting them and make them ask of themselves "can this stuff from so long ago hurt me now?" If someone never thought of the issue this way, it may make a difference. It may take a load off their shoulders to realize that the stuff, no matter how bad, is safely in the past.
Of course this is too simple and shouldn't be considered. How dare I suggest a solution? If someone is a smoker, quitting is never as simple as "never smoking again," right? Except for thousands of people that quit exactly that way.
The only way I see you having a point is if you're in the field of mental health and it would hurt your livelyhood if people started thinking this way.
J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 30. Re: Third Option... | | | | by deeluxx | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 4:46pm | score of 1 funny | | in reply to comment 20 | | | | | |
Hmmm...life is a highway...move on. Gosh it seems so simple...and yet...just can't get my mind around it.
Maybe this'll help:
Life's like a road that you travel on
When there's one day here and the next day gone
Sometimes you bend sometimes you stand
Sometimes you turn your back to the wind
There's a world outside every darkened door
Where blues won't haunt you anymore
Where the brave are free and lovers soar
Come ride with me to the distant shore
We won't hesitate
Break down the garden gate
There's not much left for today
Life is a highway
I want to ride it all night long
If you're going my way
I want to drive it all night long
Apparently, cookiepus is actually Tom Cochrane.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 53. Re: Third Option... | | | | by drcron | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 4:00am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 20 | | | | | |
as I tap tashtego lightly in the back of the head.
yes and no, as always
It is rare for someone to move on just because someone says "move on" (though I have heard that it works now and again), but that MUST be the end goal. It is complex and simple at the same time (think rocket science). If you don't move on then you might as well just sit in a corner and mope. You deal with issues to get on with a more comfortable life. For many people this means looking at it, figuring out the problem and getting past it. It can be hard, it can be slow, but yes it can be summed up by "moving on".
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | | 10. forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit | | | | by Astuo | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:25pm | score of 2 scholarly | | | | | | |
...by a simple speech Aeneas
Comforted his people:
"Friends and companions,
Have we not known hard hours before this?
My men, who have endured still greater dangers,
God will grand us and end to these as well.
You sailed by Scylla's rage, her booming crags,
You saw the Cyclops' boulders. Now call back
Your courage, and have done with fear and sorrow.
Some day, perhaps, remembering even this
Will be a pleasure. Through diversities
Of luck, and through so many challenges,
We hold our course for Latium, where the Fates
Hold out a settlement and rest for us.
Troy's kingdom there shall rise again. Be patient:
Save yourselves for more auspicious days."
So ran the speech. Burdened and sick at heart,
He feigned hope in his look, and inwardly
Contained his anguish. Vergil, Aeneid, 1.198-209 (trans. Fitzgerald)
Vernacular? That's a derby!
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 12. Psychologistical coercion toward profitability | | | | by Imp777 | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:38pm | score of 1 | | | | | | |
One of the big problems of modern psychology is that it seems to predate understanding of the "Observer Effect". Especially considering how much status is afforded to it's practitioners and weight to their opinions.
When I was in High School, and depressed, the threshold for action used by all counselors and therapists was the admition of suicidal ideation. So whenever I was noticeably upset, I'd have a flock of adults asking me if I was thinking about suicide. I didn't consider it as any more of an option, but I sure did think about suicide more.
I think it's the same problem here. Psychology has a few good ideas, but precious few hard facts. There's a tendency to herd the patient toward a problem which the practitioner feels they have a better chance of solving. If a touch of repression helps one enjoy an evening out with close friends over the alternative of crying at home trapped in a repeating clip of horrible memory, I'm all for it.
Onion, Potato, zucchini, carrot, STEW!
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 14. Opening a can of Coke | | | | by thomp | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 1:56pm | score of 4 brilliant | | | | | | |
How do you open a shaken up can of Coke? Do you pop the tab as if nothing is wrong and let it soak everyone around you? Do you pop the tab and 'cannonball' the entire can? Do you put it back in the fridge for later? Do you pop the tab just enough to let the CO2 pass slowly? Do you tap the sides of the can until it seems like it's safe to pop the tab?
Could it be there's more than one way to release all that pressure? Surprise.
That's my pop psychology for the day ...
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 66. Re: Opening a can of Coke | | | | by HerbieTheElf | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 11:48am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 14 | | | | | |
That's my pop psychology for the day ...
That is, by leaps and bounds, the most audacious and exhileratingly awful pun I've heard in years. I'm still wavering between chuckling and moaning even 20 minutes after first reading it.
Bravo!
"You never ask questions when God's on your side." -- Bob Dylan
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | | 17. Is Everyone Asleep At The Wheel, Here? | | | | by Saint_Waldo | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 2:10pm | score of 1 | | | | | | |
I mean, this is fucking plastic, ferchristsake. How can we be past the first dozen posts on such a juicy topic without the obligatory obvious Simpson's quote?
"Take your anger and squeeze it into a tight little ball, and then release it at an inappropriate time. Remember when daddy hit that referee with the whiskey bottle? Hmm? Yeah..."
I feel so much better now.
Saint Waldo
…the Renaissance will not be Midævalized…
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 18. My 2 Centavos | | | | by dave78981 | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 2:18pm | score of 1 | | | | | | |
Drinking to excess usually does the trick for me. 'Course, I'm out of work, my truck just died, my girlfriend left me and my dog ran away, so what do I know?
Well, as I always say, a family of freaks is better than no family at all.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 19. Cornering the Market | | | | by conundrum | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 2:27pm | score of 1.5 astute | | | | | | |
As long as we're concerned whether repression or heavy processing is the correct strategy, we're missing the boat.
Encouraging a protracted relationship with a theory-steeped professional can lead to a compartmentalization of the process which is essentially isolating. Patients can bottle it up, knowing there's that one person there for them. Sort of like holding all your stress in at work until the 4 drinks with your buddies afterward. Get drunk and dis the boss behind his back rather than make sober, upfront progress with each bothersome interchange.
A therapeutic relationship has the potential to function like an addiction, and to discourage, for some, healing in the real world.
However, if therapists focus the sessions to help the patient discover what he needs to perceive when and with whom bottling or gushing works the best, that's productive.
Any therapist who marches through their calendar with a pre-formed concept of what best serves patients based on statistics, generalizations, or anything other than a fluid awareness of each individual and their evolving experiences belongs in marketing, not psychology.
You don't know what you don't know.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 22. pop psych and all that ails | | | | by chasing | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 2:53pm | score of 1.5 clever | | | | | | |
If your particular human condition asks that you keep it "bottled", then by all means, do so. After all, that instinct has evolved with you over absolute ages, whereas pop psychology, bless it's widdle heart, is still newborn and crying upon this mortal coil. Are all such evolutionary traits healthy, by necessity? No, of course not. But I'm still much more inclined to place bets on Mother Nature than Doctor Phil. Pop-psych, although well-meaning ("take charge of your own life"), is too often romantic. It's the same school of thought that promotes "closure" (as distinct from Gestalt 'closure', or Elizabeth Kubler-Ross's final step of 'acceptance'), another popular, albeit misguided notion (as though one could call up to the Heavens and say to your Creator, also your Editor, "Here, here, I want that chapter of my life to end exactly...wait for it, wait for it.....HERE.)" So, please, don't blow your recovery by blowing your top.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 35. What does repression do? | | | | by shatov | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 6:45pm | score of 1.5 nuanced | | | | | | |
It is suggested that repression is the best way to deal with trauma. The reasoning is that by talking through the experiences, you are reinforcing them.
Repression stops a lot of the reinforcement, but the steps that you take to carry out that repression may be harmful themselves. If you are repressing memories of childhood abuse, for example, will you also be less likely to believe other tales of sexual abuse. By denying the abuse, will it let the abuser get away with it? Basically, if the cause of trauma is a problem that needs to be dealt with, repressing that trauma may not help in solving the problem.
If we look at the contrast between repression and debriefing in this way, then we can get a better grasp on the difference. On their own, neither method can solve practical problems. They are both, at their root, concerned with how the individual deals with their psyche. Repression is the negation of debriefing.
But if we consider the individuals interactions with the world, then we can measure each by its usefulness in those interactions. Sometimes it is good to repress: talking about a car accident all the time probabley won't help your fear of cars. On the other hand, sometimes debriefing is better: talking about child abouse may help your younger siblings.
View each technique as a tool to facilitate better engagement in the individual's life. The individual sets their goals, and then adapts their actions to fit those goals. Repressing memories that disturb your mood is useful as long as it doesn't conflict with other goals that you have.
Take your mind as a object external to yourself, and work upon that object just as you would work upon any external object. Know that mind, and make decisions about how to use that mind. Knowing and acting have to have equal weight here, and you have to see your mind as something that you can change, something which is other than you.
A forged document can also be a weapon of mass destruction.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 36. Emotional Growth is Difficult | | | | by TreeHouseHero | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 7:24pm | score of 2 funny | | | | | | |
I am definitely an Alice miller fan when it comes to growing past emotional trauma. I think the only way to truly get over this kind of stuff is a combination of understanding what made you a total fucking asshole in the first place, and what do you need to do to get over it.
In the short term repressing trauma would definitely be easier than going deep into ones demons. To be honest with ones self is not easy work. To recover from ones childhood trauma often requires cracking yourself open like an egg, becoming a raving lunatic for a while, and confronting what you are most afraid of. This will take a while. My boss, a great man, despite his conservative politics always says "There are not any shortcuts to greatness."
If you repress abuse, grief or whatever, it will only come out in negative, self-defeating ways (read; bad relationships, violent behavior, alcohol and drug addiction, anorexia etc.). People often become what they fear most in an attempt to gain a sense of power and control over their own abuse. To overcome abuse on a deep, deep level Alice Miller advocates.
1.relive the trauma
2.feel the vulnerability and fear completely
3.get angry
4.engineer a rescue for yourself (tell yourself what you would do if you were there to protect yourself)
4. Construct a scenario of what should have happened.
5.get sad, grieve
6.forgive your abuser, or god, or the dog or whatever hurt you when you really feel it.
7.get over it. Live your life in a way that you don't repeat the cycle.
The "get over it" part is the hardest part for alot of people. The easiest way to not "dwell" on shit is to help other people.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 40. My own quack theory | | | | by M. Mosher | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 8:59pm | score of 2.5 intriguing | | | | | | |
I've always been skeptical of the psychiatric profession because I came to believe somewhere in high school or college that most psychiatrists become psychiatrists to find answers to very deep seated problems that they have. This is OK in itself - a search for deeper understanding of ourselves, yada, yada, yada.
Where I get suspicious is when I wonder if many of these self-curing psychiatrists are unable to admit that they might be deviant or abnormal or even in some cases bad or evil and that they have constructed a paradigm that says no one is to blame for his actions, that morality is relative, that there are no such things as good and bad, only societal norms, etc.
To put it more bluntly, I fear that the profession is filled with nutcases - potential serial killers and child molesters - who have way bigger problems than I might have.
These professionals then testify in criminal cases that maniacal killers can be rehabilitated or that they weren't responsible for their crimes due to insanity or a rough childhood or road rage or whatever.
In other words, our concepts of right and wrong, of crime and punishment, of responsibility and accountability have been altered over the last 50 years or so by people who are crazy and who have worked hard to eliminate "crazy" from our vocabulary.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 52. Slight shift in focus | | | | by Arkestra | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 3:19am | score of 1.5 compelling | | in reply to comment 40 | | | | | |
One might instead say that having abnormal experiences makes one more interested in the effects of abnormal experiences.
Those of my friends following a psychiatric or counselling path (3 in total) have had somewhat unusual childhoods, in 2 cases ones that you could safely call unpleasant.
Having dealt with such things oneself might make one a lot better at helping others tackle them. After all, one of the most effective routes to learning is by doing.
And, if I had kids, I would trust the aforementioned friends with them.
I'm just glad I haven't met the psychiatrists that you appear to have met.
Down pokey quaint streets in Cambridge / Cycles our distant spastic heritage
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 55. Re: My own quack theory | | | | by jandrese | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 8:22am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 40 | | | | | |
I always figured it was full of people who discovered they weren't really smart enough to be "real" doctors and decided to go for the soft science part of the medical field.
They're kind of like Economists without charts and graphs. 90% of what they do is just wing it and bullshit, but that's OK because nobody can tell you're bullshitting. That's the essence of a soft science.
There's some entertainment value in watching people juggle nitroglycerin. -- Larry Wall
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 56. Re: My own quack theory | | | | by eduardo | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 8:28am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 40 | | | | | |
came to believe somewhere in high school or college that most psychiatrists become psychiatrists to find answers to very deep seated problems that they have.
I always thought it was because Psych classes are easy.
J'ai une petite amie avec des tres, tres grandes tetons.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 59. Re: My own quack theory | | | | by ignoblus | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 8:54am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 40 | | | | | |
Well, I'm skeptical of psychiatrists who elect to go through medical school and residency, learning very little psychology along the way, so that they can become, basically, glorified psychologists. Those with PhDs in psychology though are a different matter. Sure there are some nutcases out there, but by and large they have chosen an adaptive and positive response to their problems. (And it isn't necessarily true that the nutcases, even, are bad therapists.)
Eh, who was it who talked about the "weller than well," patients who came out of psychotherapy healthier than the typical person who never needed it?
It never was that simple, and it still isn't.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 62. Re: My own quack theory | | | | by Adipic Acid | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 10:15am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 59 | | | | | |
At least the psychiatrists are making some pretense of figuring out how the brain works. Most psychologists run screaming from the ideas of "physiology" or "brain chemistry." They'd rather have you pay $150/hour to talk to them.
In Nevada, I can pay someone 150 bucks an hour and get way more than talk for the money, if you know what I mean. The resulting increase in mental well-being would probably be about the same.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Churchill
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 65. Re: My own quack theory | | | | by Adipic Acid | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 11:28am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 64 | | | | | |
Psychiatrists are often the most stuck in the past.
Could you elaborate on this a bit? Seems to me that the folks who are dealing with the physiology of the brain are much closer to the present. They are seeking a mechanism that actually causes the disease. That's where a cure can come from. Psychologists seem obsessed with treating symptoms only.
Furthermore, what is/are the central organizing principle(s) of psychology? In medicine, they have the germ theory of disease and basic physiology, for example.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Churchill
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 67. Re: My own quack theory | | | | by ignoblus | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 11:50am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 65 | | | | | |
First, you have to understand that research specifically on the brain is often done by neuroscientists (biologists) rahter than by psychiatrists. When psychiatrists are involved, it is a team of researchers one of whom is a psychiatrist, who would at least be a co-principle investigator. That doesn't mean it was his idea, though. There is a psychology intern here, for instance, doing his dissertation on sleep and PTSD. The rest would be psychologists, and social workers, and others (like me). Where psychiatrists are truly dominant is in medication trials sponsored by drug companies, but those could be done by a trained monkey.
Psychologists don't reject the gains medication has given us, but often tend to focus on established treatment paradigms such as cognitive behavioral therapy. When psychiatrists turn to talk therapy, though, they are much more likely than psychologists to use outdated and even disproven forms of therapy. They don't have the training to do talk therapies and have greater historical ties to Freud.
It never was that simple, and it still isn't.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | | 45. What Qualifies as Post Traumatic Stress? | | | | by evilhenchdyke | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 11:12pm | score of 3 informative | | | | | | |
Many individuals do suffer trauma after a heart attack. The body has had a tremendous shock. It may, literally have had near death experiences. I'm not sure however, it is the same sort of experience as individuals who have been emotionally, physically or sexually brutalized by your parents; sold into prostitution at the age of seven; raped at thirteen becoming pregnant; being tortured; or participating in war in terms of precipitating a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. I'd be willing to bet it's pretty small potatoes compared to what is experienced by those individuals disabled for years, possibly for life, by Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Some things you just don't "get over", or "move on" from. Some people are permanently damaged.
Let's do look at the American Psychiatric Association's Criteria for a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder:
Diagnostic Criteria:
A. "The person has been exposed to a traumatic event in which both of the following were present:
* the person experience, witnessed, or was confronted with an event or events that involved actual or threatened death or serious injury, or a threat to the physical integrity of self or others
* the person's response involved intense fear, helplessness, or horror. Note: In children, this may be expressed instead by disorganized or agitated behavior.
B. The traumatic event is persistently re-experienced in one (or more) of the following ways:
* recurrent and intrusive distressing recollections of the event, including images, thoughts, or perceptions. Note: In young children, repetitive play may occur in which themes or aspects of the trauma are expressed.
* recurrent distressing dreams of the event. Note: In children, there may be frightening dreams without recognizable content.
* acting or feeling as if the traumatic event were recurring (includes a sense of reliving the experience, illusions, hallucinations, and dissociative flashback episodes, including those that occur on awakening or when intoxicated). Note:In young children, trauma specific reenactment may occur.
* intense psychological distress at exposure to internal or external cues that symbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event.
* physiological reactivity on exposure to internal or external cues that symbolize or resemble an aspect of the traumatic event.
C. Persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma and numbing of general responsiveness (not present before the trauma), as indicated by three (or more) of the following:
* efforts to avoid thoughts, feelings, or converstaions associated with the trauma
* efforts to avoid activities, places, or people that arouse recollections of the trauma
* inability to recall an important aspect of the trauma
* markedly diminished interest or participation in significant activities
* feeling of detachment or estrangement from others
* restricted range of affect (e.g., unable to have loving feelings)
* sense of a foreshortened future (e.g., does not expect to have a career, marriage, children, or a normal life span)
D.Persistent symptoms of increased arousal (not present before the trauma), as indicated by two (or more) of the following:
* irritability or outbursts of anger
* difficulty falling or staying asleep
* difficulty concentrating
* hypervigilance
* exaggerated startle response
Duration of the disturbance (symptoms in Criteria B, C, and D) is more than 1 month.
The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
Source: A.P.A. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, IV
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 48. Flaws | | | | by jasonm1 | | | | at Mon 24 Feb 11:52pm | score of 1.5 interesting | | | | | | |
There are many flaws with the argument that repression is somehow healthier than expression. Here are some that come to mind:
1) Selection bias: the people who repress are not likely candidates for therapy. How can we measure the effectiveness of the approaches when we cannot compare them in a meaningful way? How do we appropriately sample "repressers" or even know who the repressers are? How much does self-selection have to do with it? ie are those who go to therapy just that much worse to begin with? All big questions.
2) The article focuses on specific point traumas, like WTC attack. How does therapy for these specific issues compare to therapy for more general problems, such as depression? While perhaps in acute incidents like 9/11 therapy is not effective, it may still be effective for helping people deal with more general problems, or simply making them better people capable of coping with those acute trauma in the future.
I'm sure there are many more holes in this silly argument.
"Always be willing to speak your mind and a base man will avoid you" -- William Blake
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 50. How my repressive mind works | | | | by TheCyko1 | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 1:29am | score of 1 | | | | | | |
I don't like thinking about the past, in fact i almost never do. On the rare occasion that I do think about it, I think about the details. And, often, all i feel is a mix of depression and rage, mostly rage. Afterwards, I tend to just shrug it all off and forget about even thinking about it. I don't know if anyone else does this, but, other than my occasional paranoid "episodes" (i sometimes think that everyone hates me and my friends will eventually abandon me) I am fairly content in ignoring my past. Besides, only jocks and cheerleaders want to remember thier highschool days, right?
This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 51. Stupid Flaws | | | | by Anonymous Idiot | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 3:12am | score of 1 compelling | | | | | | |
I can't believe anyone hasn't pointed out the basic flaw here; that repression versus traditional counseling are the only options. What a false choice.
Repression means you're refusing to let yourself feel the pain. Talking about it often just means you're talking around the pain, getting all mental about it, verbally acknowledging that you have pain, admitting it, etc.
Neither one of them show a commitment to actually feeling the pain. Feeling as in letting yourself submit to the feelings, committing to them, physically expressing them.
It's a way more complicated subject than it sounds because many "mentally ill" people think that that means a nervous breakdown or that people will take them away, or angry people think it means that they'll lose all control and hurt someone or themselves, or anguished people think it will lead to so much despair that they will just off themselves.
But it's really the refusal to feel it that's most dangerous. From the repression that might not have any immediate external symptoms but can lead to severe depression and a dehumanized existence later on (or an explosion), to an overemphasis on "talk therapy" which can lead to more and more anxiety as the feelings surface but never quite get expressed...
No one seems to accept anymore that a really, really intense cry, or bout of fetal-position shaking, or screaming and punching into one's pillow until exhausted, can be an immensely healing experience. Because when they think of someone suggesting that, they only hear the scoffing and impatience of someone judging against their weakness.
People need to be reminded that being encouraged to physically express their emotions isn't always evidence of intolerance or ignorance of trauma or mental illness. It is the most important part of any emotional healing. And it does not require either repression or talk therapy.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | | 57. Variables and Percent Error | | | | by srbosillos | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 8:39am | score of 1 | | | | | | |
Karni Ginzburg and colleagues followed 116 heart-attack victims to determine whether a repressive coping style was effective. Of those who were more talkative about their experience, 19 percent developed post-traumatic stress disorder, compared with only 7 percent of those who were more 'stiff-lipped.'
Only 117 examples? This is hardly enough cases to qualify as evidence. If you throw 100 pennies in the air, stastics show that 50 should be heads and 50 should be tails, but this is not always the case.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 58. y'know... | | | | by brownianmotion | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 8:40am | score of 1 | | | | | | |
y'know this topic of whether to dwell or repress really causes me a lot of anxiety and stress... but i don't want to talk about it...
i guess homer simpson had it figured out after all:
(Advice to Lisa about how to handle anger) "Just squeeze your rage into a bitter little ball and release it at an appropriate time. Like that day I hit that referee with a whiskey bottle. 'Member that, honey? " (9F18 Whacking Day)
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 69. Good for whom? | | | | by Hiro Agonistes | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 12:40pm | score of 1.5 interesting | | | | | | |
Repression might be better for the sufferer, but not for the people around him or her...nothing like being a six-year-old being screamed at for a minor faux pas and finding out a little later that the S.S. were to blame.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
| | | | | | 75. Re: Good for whom? | | | | by ms_sue_collins | | | | at Tue 25 Feb 4:41pm | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 69 | | | | | |
Repression might be better for the sufferer, but not for the people around him or her...nothing like being a six-year-old being screamed at for a minor faux pas and finding out a little later that the S.S. were to blame.
I grew up in what was affectionately called the Borscht Belt in Los Angeles. The neighborhood was populated with seniors who had either escaped Nazi Germany or survived the camps. I knew many who still bore the numbers on their arms. Most seemed to avoid even the remotest thought or memory of those times; in fact, some of my friends found out only later in life what atrocities their parents actually endured.
But it's very difficult to say whether such repression was harmful, considering the nature of the memory. It may have caused physical and emotional harm to some; perhaps for others it became an essential part of survival, of being able to achieve some semblance of normalcy. Interesting, though, that many of these same people, as they face the end of their lives now, are chronicling their stories for posterity.
I'm not sure anyway that it's the repression of a traumatic experience that necessarily elicits an emotional outburst or overreaction such as you describe. We all have triggers in our relationships that can easily set us off. I recently joked to my husband about how we bought a DVD player for Christmas but have yet to rent a movie. He flew into a rage about how I expect him to do everything and blah-blah-blah. I said one thing; he heard another. No repressed memory, just the occasional natural consequence of knowing someone so well and sharing a long emotional history with that person.
It's a dog's life
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | | | | 80. Good for whom? | | | | by EamPeB | | | | at Wed 26 Feb 3:57am | score of 1 | | in reply to comment 75 | | | | | |
Know thyself:
Probably the hardest thing to do, I know things about myself, I'm not particularly assertive for example, and consequently I tend to let a situation get out of hand until such time as I lose my temper about it (and I have a wild temper), so I would say that I'm too passive, whereas a colleague once described me as the most irritable man she knew. The truth is we were both right, plus I had a huge crush on her which got in the way a bit.
So when we say one thing and someone hears another it's probably the same, we're both right, as far as we are concerned the message is leaving us alright so of course it must arrive in the same condition. The problem is that most of us don't take the time (have the time) to really take each message on it's merits and decipher it independently of what's gone before. Would you really notice whethers a letters from the reader's digest says "you have won" or "you could have won" or would we just throw it away.
There are other 'tic's that we have when we communicate that we don't see and yet have a significant effect on the message. My wife for example doesn't apologise, she tends to say "I'm sorry but..."which is not the same as "I'm sorry". It turns out that her whole family do the same. I tend to start a sentence with "no, but..." which makes me sound like I'm disagreeing with everyone, but it's just a tic
It's not repression as such but it is what I've always called the "Big Red Buttons" and I've always tried to be as honest as I can about what mine are and how I got it, this does not mean that I can just not have them, but it does means that I can give those I care about a chance to avoid them.
It is of course true that we don't really know what things we are repressing and consequently have no idea whether or not it owuld be better for us to have them in the open, my own impression is that if we learn to have a considered look at ourselves and decide that we are OK then we probably are, the difficullty arises from a a series of benchmarks we set ourselves which are unobtainable, you cannot really eat all you like (and enjoy it) and stay slim, neither can you rise ruthlessly up the corporate ladder and still be there every night for meatloaf.
The only thing I'm sure of is if it sounds to good to be true, it probably is.
| | | | [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ] | | |
|
| | |
| | Member Login | | | |
|
