• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

Lady Mar writes to Prof Wessely

Status
Not open for further replies.

alex3619

Senior Member
Messages
13,810
Location
Logan, Queensland, Australia
Angela does not mention Stockholme Syndrome in her book according to the index and what I recall. I think as a syndrome its way overused, and may even be dubious. People like to simplify things. If such simplification comes with a convenient label, so much the better. In particular identifying motivations can be very problematic.

I do however think that in select cases there are ME and CFS patients who have been terrified into submission. There is real fear in many patients around the world. In those cases I am aware of this has not resulted in a change in attitude, only in fearful behaviour. Behind the scenes these patients still say what they always did, they just wont say it to an official. So for the limited cases I am aware of I could not call it Stockholme Syndrome.

I am much more worried about patients who have such faith in the established medical system that they just blindly follow along. I was like that too for some years. At some point though a realization dawned in me that most of what I was hearing was rubbish. At that point a patient will begin examining their information sources carefully.

There are however political agendas that promote cooperation. Sometimes this works and leads to effective resolutions. Sometimes its to sideline opposition into ineffective strategies - on occasion I wonder if that is what CFSAC is. In particular any time the politics of fear is used in an election campaign you can see this in action. Cooperate with us, vote for us, support us, or bad fearful things will happen.

Bye, Alex
 

adreno

PR activist
Messages
4,841
Because of the rise of individualism - managing the "project" of your life - reliance on experts for guidance has become the norm. At the top of the expert hierarchy are the doctors. They are truly the new clergy.
 

biophile

Places I'd rather be.
Messages
8,977
The idea of ME/CFS patients being held "hostage" by medical professionals may sound outlandish, but please spare a thought for the severely affected patients who have been sectioned against their will, the families that have had children forcefully removed from their homes, and adults patients who have in some way or another been subjected to or dependent on the questionable whims and practices of medical professionals in the real world. I am sure others can take the metaphor further when thinking about the stranglehold that certain influential people have in paternalistic UK when it comes to opinion and funding in relation to ME/CFS.

I mostly base this on anecdotes I have read about, and it is difficult to comment on individual cases without all the details, but can you imagine the horrors of being severely affected and then having the police banging at your door or being forced to a place where you will most likely be coerced into dangerous activities or unhelpful environments which may make you even worse? The situation seems even more common and problematic for children, for example:

"Tymes Trust has evidence that the very systems set up by the government to help sick children and young people are being interpreted in ways that either ignore children with ME, or threaten, bully and intimidate them."

"Out of 84% of our families who felt bullied or threatened by professionals, 88% specified doctors as being even more responsible than teachers."

According to some figures presented, Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy affects 0.001% of families, but 4% of questioned ME families were accused of Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy, and 7% of the questioned ME families had been subjected to child protection proceedings which were either threatened or actually carried out.

the forgotten children - a dossier of shame:
http://www.tymestrust.org/pdfs/theforgottenchildren.pdf
 
Messages
646
I mostly base this on anecdotes I have read about, and it is difficult to comment on individual cases without all the details, but can you imagine the horrors of being severely affected and then having the police banging at your door or being forced to a place where you will most likely be coered into dangerous activities which may make you even worse? The situation seems even more common and problematic for children, for example:

"Tymes Trust has evidence that the very systems set up by the government to help sick children and young people are being interpreted in ways that either ignore children with ME, or threaten, bully and intimidate them."

"Out of 84% of our families who felt bullied or threatened by professionals, 88% specified doctors as being even more responsible than teachers."

According to some figures presented, Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy affects 0.001% of families, but 4% of ME families were accused of Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy, and 7% of the ME families had been subjected to child protection proceedings which were either threatened or actually carried out.

the forgotten children - a dossier of shame:
http://www.tymestrust.org/pdfs/theforgottenchildren.pdf

The Tymes Trust surveys came up recently in another thread . There a major limitiations on what can be drawn from the TT material - http://forums.phoenixrising.me/inde...-he-is-misunderstood.20654/page-5#post-315063 . Unfortunately the limitations have not been acknowedged and this material now contributes to the maintenance of numerous memes which support false notions about 'what is known'.

I don't where 'police banging on the door' could possibly come from. The only circumstances of police involvement in detention under the mental health act is where there is reported threat of serious harm to self or others. In the case of chidren there may well be over enthusiastic intervention - but that is inevitable in a society that is profoundy anxious about carer harm to minors. This is certainly not an issue specific to M.E/CFS and authoritarian intervention in carer/child relatonships in health contexts in the UK is set to increase http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20846317

However even with medical and social services staff keyed up for intervention, there are very significant limits on what would trigger removal of childen to 'places of safety' or in patient treatment - quite simply there are not the spaces to achieve this on anything but a minimal scale. The same thing applies to adult mental health detention. That systems 'misfire' on occasion is inevitable - the systems are run by fallible humans, but in the UK at least, the capacity for either child protection of adult mental systems to become extensively invasive is limited, if by nothing else (and there are substantial safeguards), a simple lack of resource. Still I do hope that Frances Farmer Will Have Her Revenge on Seattle .

IVI
 

biophile

Places I'd rather be.
Messages
8,977
In Vitro Infidelium said:
I don't [know] where 'police banging on the door' could possibly come from.

Probably from my memory of the case of Sophia Mirza's sectioning.

As for the Tymes Trust literature, I have not looked at it in depth yet. Obviously self-selection bias is a potential problem for any survey, but I cannot comment on how much this affected the results on child protection proceedings.
 
Messages
646
Probably from my memory of the case of Sophia Mirza's sectioning.
Trouble is we end up with a mythology rather than anything that people can respond to pragmatically. Is it that the Mirza case is representative of a systematic approach to M.E/CFS ? Was it an outlier of rare gross misconduct or something based on administrative confusion ? Or an appropriate action taken in circumstances where an individual was reasonably believed to be of likely harm to themselves ?

There are certain realities that we can't escape from. In the UK a least, there is a strong societal expectation of intervention - basically people don't like the idea of those with mental health challlenges being left alone to t inflict harm upon themselves . Thus doctors, social workers, housing officials and the police have legal requirements to intervene - that includes entering premises by force if necessary. I don't think the police act as though they are coming to arrest somebody, and although the claim in the Mirza case is that "the police broke in" - usual practice would be to employ a lock smith to drill out the lock, in rented premises this would likely involve the landlord. Of course this may be terrifying for the patient, but then the assumption is that they are in danger and action to protect them is necessary.

I don't think we should confuse the fact that M.E/CFS sufferers have contact with psychiatrists because there is a lack of more appropriate services, with a notion that radically interventionist psychiatric approaches to M.E/CFS are routine. Something that has to be bore in mind is that M.E/CFS can be comorbid, or at least depending on definition, sequential to/from serious psychiatric illness - that means in the UK there will be several hunderd patients every year who may have M.E/CFS but who quite separate from any M.E/CFS impairment, will require in patient treatment for a mental health condition. I doubt anyone can say what exactly the situation was in the Mirza case, but to assume that because Sophia Mirza had an M.E/CFS like illness prior to her hospitalisation, that the doctors/social workers/police acted wrongly is misguided.

IVI
 

Roy S

former DC ME/CFS lobbyist
Messages
1,376
Location
Illinois, USA
I wonder who is "misguided". Sophia's family is still continuing their efforts for all of us in memory of their daughter. That I respect.
http://www.sophiaandme.org.uk/
 
Meanwhile, with Wessely getting his knighthood I'm wondering what the Countess of Mar's next move will be (and whether she knew it was coming). After rereading her letter at the beginning of this thread I think she does have more to say.
 

Holmsey

Senior Member
Messages
286
Location
Scotland, UK
I don't think the police act as though they are coming to arrest somebody, and although the claim in the Mirza case is that "the police broke in" - usual practice would be to employ a lock smith to drill out the lock, in rented premises this would likely involve the landlord. Of course this may be terrifying for the patient, but then the assumption is that they are in danger and action to protect them is necessary.
IVI

I have a close friend who walked out of a supermarket job after what he saw as an attempt at bullying by a manager, he went back to his flat packed a bag and took the next train south to spend some time with his mother while deciding what next. In the interim, a co-worker confussed by his quiet nature, and the fact he did not return to work the following day decided he was a potential suicide risk. If you knew him you'd find that laughable but the co-worker didn't, and IMO, given the circumstances, acted with best intentions. No locksmith, no landlord, real information so no messing, when the Police didn't get an answer the door was kicked in.
I'm wholey with IVI on this, you have to understand the full circumstances around such an entry, and where there's doubt you have to accept that the Police will act as is seen to be appropriate and without delay, doors can always be fixed, people can't.
 

Bob

Senior Member
Messages
16,455
Location
England (south coast)
There can be no doubt that the medical profession sometimes (and maybe often) doesn't know how to best deal with complex and severe cases of ME. There's no doubt that the authorities often don't know how to deal with children with ME. They don't even know how to deal with mild or moderate ME. The best my doctor can do is to admit, sensitively, that there's nothing she can do to help me, beyond helping secondary symptoms, such as depression, pain, and sleep patterns, etc. There's also no doubt that many in the medical profession, esp in the South East of England, consider CFS/ME to be a psychological or psychiatric illness.

So it seems very obvious that it must be easy for the authorities to get it wrong with complex cases, when someone is severely ill. I can't see that there is any debate there. Considering all of these issues, then of course they are going to get it wrong sometimes, or often. If the medical profession feel powerless to help severe or complex cases, because they are ignorance about the issues, and there is a belief that the illness has psychological origins, then they are sometimes going to get it massively wrong.

So we need to minimise the situations where things go wrong for CFS/ME patients, in terms of encounters with the authorities and medical profession.

If honest and helpful information about CFS/ME is propagated, then the medical profession, and other authorities, are less likely to get it wrong. If misleading or deceitful information is propagated then this increases the chances of the medical profession, and other authorities, getting it wrong.
 
Messages
10,157
Please note, a few posts have recently been removed from this thread. This thread is about Lady Mar's communication with Simon Wessely. However, it turned into making negative off-topic comments.

It's fine to disagree with another member, it's not okay to post negative comments about a member just because they have a different opinion.

Respond to the content of a post without making negative personal comments about the person who posted them. After all, it's really the ideas being presented that you may find problematic. You may feel very passionately about a particular issue, and to make a persuasive case, you should focus on the facts. Simply posting negative comments does nothing to add information and these comments will be removed as per our forum rules.

Disagreeing with comments made in another member's post does not constitute a personal attack. Members are allowed to refute the comments of other members and provide reasons why they don't agree. A member may also choose to contradict a comment and provide very little evidence to support their comments, and this does not count as a personal attack either. When a member chooses to attack the author of a post rather than the content of the post, that is a personal attack. Please keep your focus on the facts of the topic under discussion - not on the person with whom you disagree.


Thank you.

Kina :)
 

taniaaust1

Senior Member
Messages
13,054
Location
Sth Australia
taniaaust1, I think Beard actually dates back to 1869. I have a copy of his early paper lying around somewhere. By 1880 or so the psychs had taken his neurological theory and were running with it though. So this quote would be referring to a later paper, one which I have not seen. Do you have a reference for it? Do you recall in which of Wessely's papers he cites Beard?

Bye, Alex

IHi alex,
Ive no idea if he's cited Beard in any of his papers but he certainly has a thing for him in his (Wessley's) book http://simonwessely.com/Downloads/BookChapters/Viruses_Fatigue.pdf
 

taniaaust1

Senior Member
Messages
13,054
Location
Sth Australia
]
In all these years - half a century or more - nobody has produced a viable aetiology for ME that is of a 'physical' nature. Nobody has come up with proof of significant and distinct 'inflammation'. And yet look at all the money now being raised to fund 'biomedical' research. Look at how much over the past e.g. decade that has gone into this hunt. And yet those fundamental questions (for some) remain to be answered. Why?

Why is it so damned hard to prove e.g. inflammation?

IiME for example and their supporters appear adamant that encephalomyelitis is the 'right name' and that inflammation is there. Why then are their efforts not being used to identify and publish what is apparently so evident? If it is so apparent that ME is a (primarily) neurological condition - why is it so damned hard to prove? Why does all the money that gets raised (for IiME and for the RRF and MERUK etc. etc.) get spent elsewhere i.e. NOT on proving inflammation?

Those they have died from this disease and they have altopsied.. dorsal root inflammation has often been found in those cases. Many of us DO actually have markers of inflammation in test results. It is luck of funding and lack of studies into good biological research and the fact that this illness isnt being well defined which is causing the issue.... the past 25 years have been focused on psychological studies which has gotten most of us nowhere.

I personally think the whole issue is that there is many different things currently put under the illness banner and the further one goes back in time.. the more things probably was lumped under whatever banner they were choosing to call patients who had the symptoms complexes we do. Going back 50 years ago.. maybe we then would of even have been being confused with MS patients. We nowdays have the science to be doing better (science they have not have had 20-30 years ago) and more studies but just dont have the funding (most of the funding has gone into psych studies) and till they start subgrouping.. that too screws things up.

No money/funding to do all the follow up studies we need. There are probably too more important studies to do then "proving" their is inflammation in ME. (im more interested in them finding out the what is causing this inflammation being found in some)

These things are the "whys", on why there is so much confusion and why nothing has been clearly proven thou things like dorsal root inflammation being found in some ME altopies, certainly cant be disputed.

If you are going to review Wessely's opinions then why not also review all the wealth of opinion that has been said over the last 50 years about the 'physical' nature of this condition. Opinions that have never gained traction and have never been proved.

Most of us who have had this illness long term.. have done just that. I know Ive read every single ME/CFS study I could get my hands on over the years and used them to form my opinions along with my own experiences too.

Some people are placing a hell of a lot of hope (and personal wealth) in the aspirations being expressed by those seeking 'physical' explanations and treatments. But how long have we been doing this now? How many of these projects have ever resulted in a treatment?

Would it be at all wise to put hope not on the "physical" explainations and treatments if one CLEARLY has a physical illness which has been shown via having many test abnormalities? Many of us including myself, have many different test abnormalities due to the ME. Things like having no normal reflexes, unequal pupils during ME flares, abnormal blood test results (i have a whole folder full of abnormal test results Ive had), other abnormal neurological signs etc etc put one in a situation in which one needs to be looking for physical causes.. psych issues cant cause these kinds of things. Hence why many of us are lookign for a physical cause. Many who do have ME, do have abnormalities which cant be explained by a psych model of the illness at all. And to many of us who do have abnormalities.. Wessely's views have been quite harmful.
 

taniaaust1

Senior Member
Messages
13,054
Location
Sth Australia
Why is it that we hold Wessely accountable for his statements made at least a decade and a half ago, yet, many patients until lately, believed that XMRV was responsible for our illnesses? Should they be held accountable for having a false belief in something that was never proven as a cause of our illness. Think about it. Anyone's views can change throughout life for many different reasons. It comes down to a double standard.

If he's changed his views he should make a public retraction over his past views as after all his past thoughts are affecting the medical field today.

As far as Lady Mar, I thought Wessely was very generous even answering her letter. It seems like people are expecting him to state his complete philosophy/perspective in one letter to one person.

All people wanted was a simple clear answer to her question.

In some cases past behavior is relevant, if used in an historical sense. I don't like that his behavior either. But we need to move beyond that instead of looking for any way to blame him for something we can't change now.

maybe Hilter should be excused too then even if he'd still been alive today as after all its historical and all something which cant be changed.
Yes WE ourselves cant change that past but Wessley still can.. He could call a media conference, the media loves him and Im sure if he wanted to make a very important retraction announcement he could get heard. If he dont nowdays agree with previous things he's said, which are still quoted by people who believe it still.. he should do a public retraction.

People are being turned down when they deserve disability. In the states 90% of all applicants for SSDI, Social Security Disability Insurance, are turned down. Ninety percent!! Automatically, pretty much regardless of the condition. That's inexcusable. If people are being turned down for disability because they have me/cfs, that's also inexcusable. But how much does this have to do specifically with me/cfs? I can't speak for the British system or systems from other countries but in the US it's not specific to me/cfs but a pragmatic yet inhumane policy by the government to save money. :rolleyes:

Barb C.:>)

I can say in my case I WAS turned down twice for disability due to that I had ME/CFS and it wasnt a turn down due to gov trying to save money. The ones I had for assessors didnt believe in ME/CFS and believed I was even faking needing to lay on the floor as I couldnt sit in a chair while being interviewed on my capabilities. I meet all the disability requirements and should of been instantly approved but instead.. due to the name of the illness, I kept being not approved (one cant say that someone who cant even sit up..is fit for work).. they didnt look at all at my lack of capabilities but rather focused on the name. I even got one of the rejections I think over not doing GET, one of the rejection grounds came on the grounds that I hadnt taken up ME/CFS treatment. That was even after I'd gone to a physio and been injured due to what was supposed to be a specially tailored phyiso exercise program for ME/CFS suitable for a severe patient. I was injured on the very first exercise I did.

I even got told "You will never get disability for that" (meaning CFS) by one of the gov people there working with my case.

When my case ended up being heard out of state which I think is quite unusual..most who are far abled then I was, get disability 2nd attempt, so their cases dont end up going to another state..mine ended up having to go to head australia place for centrelink as there was no way I could give up getting disability so could only just keep on appealing over and over), the guy making the decision was horrified that I hadnt been instantly approved and said I should of been due to the severity of my symptoms (he actually said that). Discrimination and wrongful biased in my case would of been able to be proven in my case if I'd been well enough to have put in a complaint. What is usually a 3mth disability process for most had taken 8-9mths due to all this.

My states gov (Sth Aust) is STILL discriminating against ME patients.. they recently decided offically that those who have ME/CFS dont quality at all for the heating and cooling rebate which is given to illnesses in which heat or cold is an issue (I think even FM qualifies for it). I go actually unconscious in heat at times and got the knock on the ground on having ME/cfs (the gov letter sent to me actually states that). Ive now got my local ME/CFS society trying to deal with the gov on their ruling against ME/CFS patients.

Its very easy for some to say we should be all moving on from the Wessely stuff from the past, but some of us such as myself are clearly still being very affected evidenced due to the biased, due to the views he's got out there and the impacts he's made by them on governments.. ones who arent even in his own country.
 

taniaaust1

Senior Member
Messages
13,054
Location
Sth Australia
But I happen to think that if more clinicians and not less felt more confident about their ability to diagnose CFS/ME (based on what we know/don't know today) then more people would get the 'correct' diagnosis and not less.

Try not to be put off by those involved won't you? :)


This would then hopefully lead to more appropriate treatments - for those alternately diagnosed at least ;) It is not very popular even to be seen 'associating' oneself with the notion that a psychiatrist/liaison psychiatrist should perhaps be involved at the point of diagnosis - is it?

Until such time as some "holy grail" of 'biomarkers' is found and can be turned into a suitable objective test; then excluding all possible alternate diagnoses appears sensible.

Before receiving a ME/CFS diagnoses, things like depression and mental health issues being the cause of "all the symptoms" are supposed to be ruled out. I dont think many of us would disagree with that being done and if there needs to be a psych to do that.. so be it. A doctor himself shouldnt be making judgements or guesses if he isnt sure and none of us like the amount of people who recieve a false diagnoses of ME/CFS.

A ME/CFS diagnoses should only happen if one has ME/CFS symptoms which can not be explained by another illness.

Im not in agreeance thou that more confident doctors necessarily mean more correct diagnoses. Overly confident doctors who dont know much about an illness are more likely to misdiagnose whereas an unsure doctor may be more likely to send someone to a specialist for a diagnoses opinion. Correct diagnoses is more about doctors having good knowledge.
 

taniaaust1

Senior Member
Messages
13,054
Location
Sth Australia
Are you taking the piss?

I thought he was being serious about the Stockholm Syndrome thing myself as I cant understand the rationity of a few people here and that would explain things.

anyway. I'll continue to wonder.

* Note, this isnt the put down of anyone. All I know is this illness and dealing with it and dealing with others due to it.. can have mental health affects on people. I myself believe I had PTSD for a while due to this illness and experiences around it. If its serious enough to give some of us PTSD.. maybe some are actually getting something like Stockholm Syndrome and no matter what they are told or learn... may want to still be defending some who have done some terrible things.
 
Messages
15,786
I think Beard actually dates back to 1869. I have a copy of his early paper lying around somewhere. By 1880 or so the psychs had taken his neurological theory and were running with it though. So this quote would be referring to a later paper, one which I have not seen. Do you have a reference for it? Do you recall in which of Wessely's papers he cites Beard?

I think he cites Beard in most, if not all, of his CFS history/neurasthenia papers. Maybe throws in a comparison in some of the other papers too. I'll be rereading his work soon to compile a list of flaws that I can spot, and will add Beard to the list of things to look for :p

Example: in one study they explicitly only select patients believed to be "suited to CBT" :confused:
 

barbc56

Senior Member
Messages
3,657
If he's changed his views he should make a public retraction over his past views as after all his past thoughts are affecting the medical field today.

That would be nice wouldn't it? However misguided, Wessely is, he truly believes he is right as much as we think he is wrong. If you go by that logic, does that mean we owe him an apology for any beliefs we held in the that held in the past that have changed today? Absolutely not. People don't apologize if they think they have nothing to apologize for, That's not how life works and we need to work around this by persistence, presenting facts, advocating for studies that focus on the physical side of me/cfs. Attacking him is just spinning wheels and will get us nowhere. Valid criticism is much more effective.

I know, it's not quite as simplistic as that as well as easier said than done.

maybe Hilter should be excused too then even if he'd still been alive today as after all its historical and all something which cant be changed.
Yes WE ourselves cant change that past but Wessley still can.. He could call a media conference, the media loves him and Im sure if he wanted to make a very important retraction announcement he could get heard. If he dont nowdays agree with previous things he's said, which are still quoted by people who believe it still.. he should do a public retraction.

I feel uncomfortable when people start to compare other's who have different beliefs to Hitler. You can't compare the two situations, This does not mean what has happen isn't distressing as it is. Maybe his opinions were evolving just as many of ours have over the years.. As I said at the beginning of this post, he won't apologize if he thinks he is not wrong and no matter how much we scream and shout that he should, it.s just the reality of human behavior.

Barb C.:>)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.