On mental health

Author: Tejretics ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 69
  • Tejretics
    Tejretics avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 322
    1
    3
    8
    Tejretics avatar
    Tejretics
    I don’t think it’s the smartest idea to go around diagnosing people you’ve only interacted with on the Internet with specific mental illnesses. If they do have mental health issues, that’s going to be pretty counterproductive; the same if they don’t. Especially given that none of you (that I know of) are psychiatrists or psychologists with expertise in this sort of thing. 
  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    --> @Tejretics
    If they do have mental health issues, that’s going to be pretty counterproductive; the same if they don’t.
    Does that mean damned if they do and damned if they don't?

    Btw, one does not need to be a psychiatrist to understand someone with mental health disorders.

  • Tejretics
    Tejretics avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 322
    1
    3
    8
    Tejretics avatar
    Tejretics
    Does that mean damned if they do and damned if they don't?
    If they do or don't have a mental health problem, then yes, making an Internet diagnosis of a specific mental illness isn't gonna help.

    One does not need to be a psychiatrist to understand someone with mental health disorders.
    No, but (1) a person not being a psychiatrist/psychologist is a strong indicator that that person doesn't understand the specifics of mental health disorders and (2) that doesn't deal with my basic point, which is that you shouldn't be making your own diagnoses of other people's mental health problems on the Internet from very limited interaction, especially if without their consent. 
  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    --> @Tejretics
    a person not being a psychiatrist/psychologist is a strong indicator that that person doesn't understand the specifics of mental health disorders
    Not true, if a family member has mental health issues, the rest of the family are usually very well versed.

    It seems it's more about consent for you. Shouldn't they get my consent to post a continuous flow of crazy stuff on my threads?

  • Tejretics
    Tejretics avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 322
    1
    3
    8
    Tejretics avatar
    Tejretics
    --> @Goldtop
    Not true, if a family member has mental health issues, the rest of the family are usually very well versed.
    That's why I said it's a strong indicator, not that it's always the case. 
  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    --> @Tejretics
    It's more often not the case simply because there is a lot of information on mental disorders that family members can become familiar and while they may not have the expertise to profile serial killers, they certainly can identify common disorders such as schizophrenia or bipolar behavior.

    Then, there's the capacity to tell whether or not someone is talking crazy, such as telling you they have talked with Overlords on another planet in another galaxy, for example.


  • KingLaddy01
    KingLaddy01 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 411
    0
    1
    2
    KingLaddy01 avatar
    KingLaddy01
    True but some have came clean about their issues, and then it doesn't matter.
  • blamonkey
    blamonkey avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 492
    1
    4
    8
    blamonkey avatar
    blamonkey
    --> @Goldtop
    While often classified as "common," it is important to note that both psychological disorders that you bring up are not as common as one may think. The National Institute for Mental Health estimates that Bipolar Disorder affects nearly 3% of the adult US population (1). Mentalhealth.net, a resource available to aid those seeking help for mental illnesses, estimates that Schizophrenia occurs in 1.2% of the US population (2).

    While both of thee conditions affect millions, the chances are already slim that someone would rightly diagnose someone else based on a few posts in a forum. Absent from a diagnosis would be, among other things:
    a) The person's medical history
    b) Ingestion of drugs that may influence mood
    c) Professional services that deliver psychological exams (i.e. IQ tests, regardless of their validity)
    d) Observations from healthcare professionals that the patient had contact with.
    e) Information about whether traumatic events that may have recently occurred that could have influenced their posts
    ...
    You get the idea. By diagnosing someone online, you end up adding a stigma to someone who really does not need it if they want to get actual help. Perceptions about violent tendencies generally affect the mentally ill population more than other groups, even if the data is not available to support such a conclusion. A 2008 "Psychiatry" journal article detailed an experiment in which doctors:

    "followed several cohorts of recently discharged American psychiatric patients for one year and compared rates of violence with violence rates in a community sample in the same neighborhood. The mean number of violent acts among the discharged psychiatric patients was 1.6 acts per discharged patient per 10-week period; at 50 weeks, the average number of acts per patient was 2.12. The rate of violence among psychiatric patients was higher than the community sample only during the first 10 weeks after discharge (3)."

    Despite evidence suggesting that severe mental illness alone only accounts for 4% of violent crime (per research done by Jeffrey Swanson and company in the Annals of Epidemiology,) prejudice still occurs (4). Perhaps the mixture of substance abuse, other psychological ailments, and a violent history accounts for some violence, but if you believe the constant churning of the press, you would think that mentally ill people are the most dangerous subset of people in the US.

    So, the question that one needs to ask themselves is this:

    Do I really want to suggest that this person is mentally ill despite the fact that I am likely to be wrong, and ignoring the erroneous social stigma affecting mentally ill people?

    The answer would likely be no. Now, if the person in particular, say, PMed you and told you that they had a psychological disorder and need help, then you could direct them to resources to help them. Even if you are sure that someone has a disorder, the likelihood that they would follow your advice is minimal at best anyway though.


  • Tejretics
    Tejretics avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 322
    1
    3
    8
    Tejretics avatar
    Tejretics
    --> @blamonkey @Goldtop
    Blamonkey puts it much better than I ever could have. 
  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    --> @blamonkey
    the chances are already slim that someone would rightly diagnose someone else based on a few posts in a forum
    Except, it's not a few posts, it's hundreds and sometimes thousands of posts filled with crazy talk, over and over and over... We don't need to make accurate diagnoses of these crazy people to understand they are crazy.

  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    --> @blamonkey
    Do I really want to suggest that this person is mentally ill despite the fact that I am likely to be wrong, and ignoring the erroneous social stigma affecting mentally ill people?
    Unless, the person makes it very obvious through hundreds or thousands of posts of crazy talk.

  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    Do I really want to suggest that this person is mentally ill despite the fact that I am likely to be wrong, and ignoring the erroneous social stigma affecting mentally ill people?

    the likelihood that they would follow your advice is minimal at best
    I get that and its a fair point that we should be treating mental illness with more compassion and understanding, but there's also a time and place for that too. And you're probably right, they won't seek help, often saying its the rest of us who are crazy.

  • ResurgetExFavilla
    ResurgetExFavilla avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 556
    2
    2
    7
    ResurgetExFavilla avatar
    ResurgetExFavilla
    --> @Tejretics
    I don’t think it’s the smartest idea to go around diagnosing people you’ve only interacted with on the Internet with specific mental illnesses. If they do have mental health issues, that’s going to be pretty counterproductive; the same if they don’t. Especially given that none of you (that I know of) are psychiatrists or psychologists with expertise in this sort of thing. 

    Only a bipolar person would write something like this.
  • KingLaddy01
    KingLaddy01 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 411
    0
    1
    2
    KingLaddy01 avatar
    KingLaddy01
    --> @ResurgetExFavilla
    Biploar schmipolar; you're too soft. This is a bad case of Borderline Disorder.
  • Analgesic.Spectre
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 474
    1
    1
    5
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Analgesic.Spectre
    --> @Tejretics
    I don’t think it’s the smartest idea to go around diagnosing people you’ve only interacted with on the Internet with specific mental illnesses. If they do have mental health issues, that’s going to be pretty counterproductive; the same if they don’t. Especially given that none of you (that I know of) are psychiatrists or psychologists with expertise in this sort of thing. 
    >taking the internet this seriously.

  • Analgesic.Spectre
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 474
    1
    1
    5
    Analgesic.Spectre avatar
    Analgesic.Spectre
    --> @KingLaddy01
    Borderline Shmorderline; you're too soft. This is a bad case of autistic haram.


  • KingLaddy01
    KingLaddy01 avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 411
    0
    1
    2
    KingLaddy01 avatar
    KingLaddy01
    --> @Analgesic.Spectre
    Hahaha lol
  • Polytheist-Witch
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,932
    2
    2
    3
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Polytheist-Witch
    --> @Tejretics
    Goldtop feels all those who disagree with him are mentally ill.
  • RationalMadman
    RationalMadman avatar
    Debates: 283
    Forum posts: 8,651
    10
    10
    11
    RationalMadman avatar
    RationalMadman
    Actually accurate!
  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    @Witchypoo

    Yet, I don't discuss anything with you and I have disagreements with others who aren't mentally ill.


  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    @RM

    With you, yes, accurate.
  • Polytheist-Witch
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,932
    2
    2
    3
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Polytheist-Witch
    According to him his country is better, life is better, he is smarter and not mentally ill but here he is. On a mentally ill site. It's a sad affair if he was a decent human being. He deserves to be miserable. 
  • Goldtop
    Goldtop avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,713
    2
    1
    1
    Goldtop avatar
    Goldtop
    Are the crazy people here allowed to continue posting their psychotic behavior, their insults and personal attacks because they're crazy and we should just leave them alone with their insanity?

    How does the lack of moderation for these nutters attract sane, reasonable and intelligent people to the forums?


  • Polytheist-Witch
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,932
    2
    2
    3
    Polytheist-Witch avatar
    Polytheist-Witch
    Like I said
  • Castin
    Castin avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,936
    2
    2
    6
    Castin avatar
    Castin
    --> @Goldtop
    I take it you wouldn't be in favor of personal attacks being permitted, then?