On mental health

Author: Tejretics

Posts

Total: 69
Tejretics
Tejretics's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 411
0
1
2
KingLaddy01's avatar
KingLaddy01
0
1
2
True but some have came clean about their issues, and then it doesn't matter.
blamonkey
blamonkey's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 532
3
5
8
blamonkey's avatar
blamonkey
3
5
8
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 501
3
4
8
Tejretics's avatar
Tejretics
3
4
8
-->
@blamonkey
@Goldtop
Blamonkey puts it much better than I ever could have. 
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 411
0
1
2
KingLaddy01's avatar
KingLaddy01
0
1
2
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
Biploar schmipolar; you're too soft. This is a bad case of Borderline Disorder.
Analgesic.Spectre
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@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's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 468
1
1
6
Analgesic.Spectre's avatar
Analgesic.Spectre
1
1
6
-->
@KingLaddy01
Borderline Shmorderline; you're too soft. This is a bad case of autistic haram.


KingLaddy01
KingLaddy01's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 411
0
1
2
KingLaddy01's avatar
KingLaddy01
0
1
2
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Hahaha lol
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Tejretics
Goldtop feels all those who disagree with him are mentally ill.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
~@Polytheist-Witch
Actually accurate!
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
@Witchypoo

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


Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
@RM

With you, yes, accurate.
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
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's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
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's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Like I said
Castin
Castin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,232
3
2
7
Castin's avatar
Castin
3
2
7
-->
@Goldtop
I take it you wouldn't be in favor of personal attacks being permitted, then?

Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@Castin
It depends on whether or not we want to be treated like children or adults. This would allow folks like Poly to go back to her original format of doing nothing more than attacking people, but then if we got rid of the crazy people, that would no longer be a problem and the rest of the adults here could carry on. Any sane people that wanted to join up would see everyone is being treated like adults and the nutters get banned, which will help this forum prosper and grow.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Goldtop
Come let's have a war. Sane bullies vs nutcase eccentrics, you guys will get outplayed to hell and back with brains incapable of keeping up with us.
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
Enter the king of blocking, who abuses the Block function of those who don't agree with him and then cries he's being bullied, notice I have not blocked you, that I am treating you like an adult even though you don't act like one.
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Goldtop
I do not care what you think I act like. I do not care that you blame victims for using the block when you have NO REASON to block me as I'm so respectful to those who treat me with respect and pick my fights wisely.

You know you are a sadistic bully who tears at eccentric users until they crack and I'm the only user you ever met probably on any website who annihilated you and ended up with you the punished as opposed to me. You are a whiny little b**** who can't take it that people like me feel zero stigma or shame for being the freaks we are. 

I rock my weirdness like a king and you envy it to the core of your unimpressive ordinary being.
SamStevens
SamStevens's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 287
0
1
3
SamStevens's avatar
SamStevens
0
1
3
Sane bullies vs nutcase eccentrics, you guys will get outplayed to hell and back with brains incapable of keeping up with us.
Lots of people wouldn't be able to keep up with you as you descend down a rabbit hole of mental illness and delirium.