Comments on: The Moody Blues

By: monica

monica — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 20:24:04 +0000

Ps – not to sound too full of contradictions, I just want to clarify that “willing to help themselves” is not in the sense of “recovery achieved by superhuman willpower as you can read about in my exclusive biography, now selling for only $29.99”. It’s meant in the basic sense of being willing to first of all accept one’s illness, that it’s not one’s fault, that there’s no such thing as perfection, and that life is not a matter of success vs. failure but enjoyment on one’s own terms, and recovery is not a matter of “going back to how things used to be before”… (the catastrophe that one inevitably thinks provoked the depression), but of acceptance, openness to change, and realistic expectations. I think that’s the only effort required of people suffering from depression or similar. It’s the exact opposite of that idea of willpower or control in the “efficiency” sense. So, it does require acceptance and sympathy and support. Otherwise, like the examples in the article, people just won’t even dare talking to anybody about their problems. The main thing that makes therapy work is just that, someone listening without judging. I remember my mother telling me (in one of the frustrated moments) that if I’d had to work 12 hours a day in a factory like my grandma did and then raise 7 kids, I wouldn’t have time to be depressed. That it was a luxury, a thing for the rich and spoilt, and there was this idea beneath it all, that therapy was only a self-indulgent thing. Then I found out my grandma suffered from depression too, and so my mother, and they never “snapped out of it” either, so… there goes the whole working class cure to depression… Just a lot of self-indulgent bollocks ;-)

By: monica

monica — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 19:51:04 +0000

“The ‘snap of out of it’ solution rather assumes that the homunculus is in residence somewhere and can push the buttons and pull the levers to reassert control over the machine run amok.” Heh, exactly what I meant. The homunculus… It all changes one’s perspective of life indeed. I have to add, having also been on the receiving end more often than the giving end of the “snap out of it” classic, I too understand that reaction at a personal level, from friends, family, etc. From people who care, that phrase can also be said with love and sympathy. And frustration too, oh yes. Sometimes you just drive people insane, when you’re screwed up. They don’t get it, cos they can’t. You don’t get it yourself. And you can get very selfish, nasty, and vindictive, when you’re screwed up. When you’re not kind to yourself first of all, you’re not exactly going to get cheers and smiles all round… But no one ever “fakes it”. Faking depression? what the hell for? it’s not like it’s fun. If anyone somehow should feel this odd desire to fake depression, well, it means they’re really just as screwed up as if they had it for real. I remember reading, always in the Guardian, on the debate about self-inflicted cutting among teenagers. The fakers/real sufferers debate there is very interesting. My own idea is, there’s no fakers. There can’t be. If a kid feels that cutting themselves is “cool” and they like to show it off, then it means they do have a problem, and do need some help. It doesn’t matter if they go about it in such offputting ways, doesn’t matter if they make it into a fashion statement, the very fact they’re doing it speaks a lot about their state of mind. No one reasonably happy with themselves would ever “fake” something as complicated as depression or even something as tangible as self-mutilation just to attract attention. There’s simpler, healthier ways to attract attention, like, dye your hair red or wear see-through shirts… On depression as medical condition vs. depression as ordinary, temporary part of everybody’s life. It is different. Ordinary depression and sadness is an emotion like any other. Depression as a condition is entirely different. Has a lot of mental and physical consequences as well. Again, no one can be seriously faking that. I don’t think that the “sympathy” that needs to be given to these illnesses is the total opposite of the “snap out of it” – sympathy is not a pat on the back, that’d be indifference. I think absence of moral judgement would be enough. Separating moralistic assumptions from understanding of psychological problems, that’s what would be really nice. If only people (sufferers first of all) could suspend the need to place the blame at all costs. Also, I think frustration with people who do not seem to be willing to recover at all is totally understandable. Patience can only be stretched so far, and these illnesses take their toll on friendships, relationships, family, etc. Everyone needs some support, but, they got to be inclined to at least help themselves a little as well. It’s a two-way process, obviously. However, I think the issue here is not reactions at a personal level, but at the wider, social level, in general. General attitudes and mentalities about it, not reactions of people directly involved.

By: monica

monica — Sat, 07 Feb 2004 19:15:51 +0000

So very well said, Maria. I’d like to mention another type of illness that gets even more stigma than depression and even more of the typical blaming-the-sufferer reaction. What about food disorders? Anorexia, bulimia, etc. Often, the reaction from people who have no clue is to assume the person was too stupid and brainwashed by some fashion magazine or ad with a thin supermodel in it, and out of the blue decided to start inflicting this torture on themselves. Sadly, some feminists (even if this does not affect women alone) have contributed to this train of thought, by pointing the finger at advertising and models of beauty that rely on being thin. When in reality, anyone who has a friend or family member suffering from such a disorder will tell you a completely different story. It’s got nothing to do with ads or fashion. It’s always about something at the emotional level, and family history, personal experiences, and even predisposition to depression or addiction. Probably even genetic factors. But no. Especially because it’s something more widespread among girls than boys, it’s got to be cos they’re stoopid and superficial. Alternatively, it’s all-the-parents-fault. There’s really a lot of ignorance. And yes, fear. Maria, you really hit the nail on its head there. Mental illness and psychological disorders are just not accepted as easily (relatively so, at least) as purely physical illnesses, because they betray the illusion that we are masters of our destiny all the time, and we can control all of our behaviour all the time, and set things straight, only by sheer willpower. The existence of depression, panic attacks, behavioural disorders is like a stain on this grand myth that we have full control over our own minds, actions, and emotions. And then, the need to explain everything. So often, there is really no single explanation as to why one person develops depression or anorexia or chronic fatigue. It’s scary, to be left without a reason. It’s human to want to know why. And to “place the blame” somewhere. It’s when that tendency is turned into sanctimonious judgement, scorn, or exploited for commercial or sensationalist reasons, that it gets annoying. Paradoxically, I think that the overabundance of self-help books and success stories of “how I overcame my depression” reinforces that myth, rather than increasing sympathy and understanding of the realities of those illnesses. On the plus side, there’s a lot more attention to these problems than just a few decades ago, but outside of the specialist area, at mass media level, it’s not often the kind of attention that’s useful.

By: sagesource

sagesource — Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:07:56 +0000

However I am well aware of what many leftists take pains to deny, that the world is full of bums, malingerers and general social parasites. Now you have to explain why those people choose to be bums, malingerers, and general social parasites. And, if they really are, how to get them out of it. Hint: calling them names, or punishing them, is very little use, except perhaps to your own ego.

By: julia

julia — Sat, 08 Nov 2003 09:02:33 +0000

I don’t think people say “snap out of it” because they expect anyone to snap out of it. I think people say “snap out of it” because it sends a clear signal that they are not going to be drawn one inch closer to whatever that creepy stuff is that’s making this person so damn inconvenient to deal with. I think people are afraid if they get too close to crazy they’ll fall in, and I think that’s how people see you if you can’t “snap out of it”

By: georgem

georgem — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 20:16:06 +0000

http://www.canoe.ca/Health0201/15_warvets-ap.html I fractured my skull over my left eye at age 5 or so when I fell from a moving car. My left eye has very poor vision. I started drinking at age 15, did some drugs, left a military career because of the drinking (not recommended for re-enlistment), was at times a violent drunk… I never felt good unless I drank or smoked. My wife and running kept me straight for a while, but the anger and self-hatred kept boiling over, sometimes onto my kids. I’m 53 and on Zoloft now and am no longer plagued by anger and self-hatred. When I make a mistake, it’s just a mistake, not proof that I am stupid or useless. If I try to cut back on the meds, the feelings return, so there is definitely something broken.

By: laura

laura — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:45:56 +0000

Barry, A gastroenterologist diagnosed me (the second time I was hospitalized and referred to her)—I’ve had the blood tests and endoscopy and all. I’m not in a support group, but I’ve got a number of books, product lists, and cookbooks etc. And I have found more benefits to the diet than I could list.

By: Cobb

Cobb — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 18:11:35 +0000

Because the international human understanding of work is that it is physical, not intellective. Things that give people headaches and disturb their ability to do monk-like white collar bourgie work is nothing compared to things that physically weaken their bodies and disrupt their ability to carry water from the well to their home.

By: Barry

Barry — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 11:44:51 +0000

Laura, gluten can cause a wide variety of problems in those with celiac disease. Have you seen a gastroenterologist about this? How long have you been on a gluten-free diet? Are you with a support group?

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 06:11:53 +0000

>>after years of understanding myself as someone with a tendency to depression — a couple pretty bad episodes and a lingering feeling that I was always on the edge — I was diagnosed with celiac disease, or gluten-sensitivity. Completely unexpectedly, cutting almost all of the gluten from my diet made me no longer anywhere close to depressive. It took me several months to figure out the cause and effect, but nearly a year on, it’s indisputable. Ever unexpectedly read something that causes the lightbulb to go on in such a profound way that it is a potentially life-changing experience? This just happened to me. I would describe myself as very similar to Laura – prone to depression, with not very much needed to send me into very severe episodes of complete alienation and withdrawal. And yes, I got the “snap out of it” response from those around me, also. This past spring, I read an article about a finding that celiac disease/gluten intolerance is very much more common than previously thought. The article mentioned physical discomforts associated with the condition that sounded familiar to me – so I went off gluten in June just to see what would pysically happen. Coincidentally, for that past 2-3 months or so, my overall mood has considerably brightened, but knowing my history, it was always like waiting for the other shoe to drop, so I just assumed that it was a temporary situation while waiting for the inevitable bleakness to return. I never associated mood with gluten, and I never associated the mood change with the lack of gluten. I never even considered that it might be something organic that might be changed with diet – just that being prone to depression and having my life framed by that was a permanent part of me that I was rather helpless to affect without severe medication. WOW! Not that it automatically follows that my experience is necessarily similar to Laura’s, but for the first time in a very long time I have a new perspective and hope about myself just from being here tonight. THANK YOU, Laura, for your post – it opened up a whole new avenue of thought for me to pursue. And THANK YOU, Jim, for mentioning this discussion to me – I’d never been here before – serendipity! And I guess THANK YOU Maria for hosting this forum. I know I’m not, in fact, technically adding to your discussion topic, but … WOW! THANK YOU all so much!

By: zizka

zizka — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 04:30:33 +0000

Far from malingerers, I’ve read stories of intensely depressed people who functioned successfully and productively for years, unbeknownst to friends and family, before their depression incapacitated them. Often they kept up a cheerful front for the benefit of others. Jim Capozzola of Rittenhouse Review has written about his own depression. Dangling participle above. Shoot me now.

By: Keith M Ellis

Keith M Ellis — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 02:29:54 +0000

“the answer is not because they have no experience of it, on the contrary it is because they have ALL had experiences of being unhappy, have, a priori, no reason to believe that the case in question is anything other than that, AND have all had experience with social parasites who exaggerate for sympathy and more.” This strongly reminds me of the rationale for discriminating rape victims from regular crime victims. However, numerous studies and, for example, the FBI’s own estimates, show that rape is not falsely reported any more than other crimes. This view of depression and the social reaction to it is built around the same assumption of a distinctively high-rate of false claims. This assumption is also intuitive, but could be just as false. You may not believe that my depression is a serious physical illness. But no matter. Because if it were or if it weren’t, my example undermines your claim. I almost never claim (and then only to closest friends and family) that I am unable to do something because I was depressed, even though it would quite often be true. Such a claim carries no weight. For it to work as an excuse, it needs to, you know, be accepted as an excuse. Your argument is that people won’t accept it as an excuse because it’s accepted as an excuse. This was a big point of my previous post. I can barely freaking walk. X-rays of my joints look like disaster areas. Yet I can tell you that my bone disease hasn’t and doesn’t disable me as much as depression does. But I rarely make that claim (this is a huge exception) because I don’t expect anyone to either believe or understand that it’s so. And as someone who was formerly in the highest marginal tax bracket (by a wide margin), I don’t think I can be called a “social malingerer”. Your explanation is off-base, the other much more moderate ones are better: depression as a part of the normal human emotional spectrum and depression as an illness are both quite real but not nearly as distinct as we might like. Just as, I might mention, physical pain is both normal and a serious illness. If we lived a hundred years ago and there was no known etiology for what is wrong with my joints, then “it hurts to move” would sufficiently describe my condition. But, you know, for normal people, it sometimes hurts to move as they get older, it hurts to move a day after vigorous excersize, etc. Moving in spite of pain is something that we all must learn to do to some degree. Lots of people have joint pains or mild arthritis. Because of this, if I describe my condition as “arthritis”, they tend to underestimate its severity, particularly because there’s few outward signs of illness. (And because I’m only 39.) This is the effect involved in the discounting of depression, as other people have said.

By: zizka

zizka — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 02:26:39 +0000

Maynard, you said nothing. What I said (Between my two posts) is that some people ARE malingerers and that some people DO pity themselves too much, but that there IS a disease called depression which is much more serious than the normal bad feelings lots of people have. Then I gave a bunch of reasons why people with the disease of depression don’t get the sympathy than people with physical diseases normally get. (I.E., I discussed the question asked). I can’t even tell whether you disagree with me or not. Because you admit that clinical depression is different from all the normal unhappy feelings we all have, which seems to support my point that one the reasons for the common lack of sympathy for people with clinical depression is mistaking it for something else (quite different and much milder) which is ALSO called depression. But to explain why people don’t have sympathy for people with clinical depression, you go off on these tangents about how you really are a leftist and that there are a lot of malingerers in the world. If I were an editor I would send your post back for a rewrite. P.S. If I had read Naeher’s first and second comments together, my response above would have been much less harsh.

By: Kragen Sitaker

Kragen Sitaker — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 02:11:22 +0000

We are discussing two things here: physical illnesses that alter your mental state, and mental states that are described, in what seems to me a kind of metaphor, as “illness”. It’s hard to distinguish between the two externally, but I think it’s important; it’s possible for two people with the same physical illness to have very different mental states as a result, or even the same person at different times. When you treat the mental state itself (rather than physical states that may produce it, such as schizophrenia or gluten intolerance) as an “illness,” the metaphor suggests a host of unhelpful or marginally helpful related concepts: drugs, hospitalization, diagnosis, symptoms, surgery, abnormality, and an opposite state of “health”. Likewise, the metaphor dismisses the mental, emotional, and subjective aspects of the situation as secondary, and often treat the mental states resulting from the illness as being somehow invalid, not “real.” This is perhaps the most destructive aspect of the medicalization of emotional suffering—- the way its believers often dismiss the suffering and mental struggle itself as meaningless. I think most people realize that this conflation of mental states and physical illnesses is misleading, but make the mistake of rejecting the medical aspect of the situation completely.

By: Maynard Handley

Maynard Handley — Thu, 06 Nov 2003 01:43:19 +0000

E. Naeher’s comment was extraordinarily obtuse. What I said was that people who fail to be sympathetic to someone who is genuinely depressed (the mental illness) are mistaking the mental illness from something they have experienced themselves, also called depression by many, which is NOT a mental illness (or is a much milder form of it). Come on. You are the one being obtuse. More generally, I find the very fact that Maria posed the question seriously, and that so many people cannot give her a straight answer, to be emblematic of so many problems of the left and do-gooders in general. First of all, let me make it clear that I am, philosophically, on the side of the left and do-gooders. I want the wretched of the earth to have better lives; I have no problem with taxing the superwealthy very aggressively; and so on. However I am well aware of what many leftists take pains to deny, that the world is full of bums, malingerers and general social parasites. So what does this have to do with the question? Of COURSE there are people who whine and moan about every minor thing, who believe that no-one else in the world has ever suffered the way they are suffering. They are a staple of movies and sitcoms. We laugh at Adrian Mole and Georgia Nicholson, not just because their teenage angst coupled with massive egos and lack of empathy are funny, but because we recognize our own teenage selves in them. So when we see others complaining about how unbearable their lives are, we remember our own unpleasant experiences—- the string of rejections by girls, the unpleasant breakup, the terror of doing badly in college, the difficulty getting a job—- and we ALSO remember that we survived those experiences just fine and did, indeed, snap out of it. Now it is perfectly valid to say that depression as an illness is NOT the same thing. That is something we all agree on, not least because of the experiences like that of Laura. But that’s not the question. The question is: why don’t people take depression seriously, and the answer is not because they have no experience of it, on the contrary it is because they have ALL had experiences of being unhappy, have, a priori, no reason to believe that the case in question is anything other than that, AND have all had experience with social parasites who exaggerate for sympathy and more. If you don’t believe in social parasites, well, email me privately and I’ll let you know about a little deal I have going involving the fortune of the late Saddam Hussein—- all I need is a little seed money you can lend me, and we’ll soon both be rich.