Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Woolie, Apr 20, 2015.
Some excerpts below. for more, go to: http://www.madinamerica.com/2015/04/turning-patients-numbers/
I was surprised how much this reminded me of the lightning process. I hadn't thought of the lightning process in these terms before. i.e. that it's designed specifically along the lines of false illness beliefs - that the self can't be trusted - and therefore its foundation is one of psychosomatic psychiatry.
I believe that Jen Brea was originally diagnosed with conversion disorder.
Joining a cult and accepting a psychosomatic diagnosis seem to have a few things in common.
I think this is a core issue in a psychosomatic diagnosis, Bridget Mildon's wording is particularly powerfull. You can't rely on your thoughts, you can't believe your body, your whole self is untrustworthy. This whole process is a denial of your existence, it's completely destructive.
Reminds me of a video I posted some time ago. It was made by the coalition again paediatric pain featuring psychiatrist Richard barnum about the diagnosis of conversion disorder or somatoform disorder in children experiencing "unexplained" pain. http://forums.phoenixrising.me/index.php?threads/another-medical-kidnapping.26797/page-3#post-433086
Except if you are reporting any 'recovery', then it is hard evidence.
Which, to conversion disorder loving doctors, is just a problem with the sales pitch, not with the diagnosis itself nor the way they use and impose it.
Dangerous diagnoses in which many psychs will give someone and once there you probably will never get it off of your medical records, each new doctor will look at you with suspicion. I've got some crap on my medical records at the hospital due to a bad psych who didn't believe in ME and got given a wrong psych diagnoses in the past by disbelieving in ME/CFS psych.
Last time while I was at the hospital after a collapse in which they had to give me an IV, Im sure I heard some discussion going on over removing the false stuff the bad psych had written about me the time before when I was there but another person there felt uncomfortable removing what another doctor said, ...so the crap remains.. polluting views on me to any one who doesn't know me and my health issues well. Causing me at times to have to fight hard to get the treatment I need and causing me hence much anxiety which then can also play into the views of "mental health issue".
If you have never checked out somatization disorder and its symptoms, you should do so http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatization_disorder .
I feel sorry for anyone who doesn't fit the new SEID mold as they are nearly bound to be now end up being given a somatization disorder diagnoses rather then a "we don't know what is wrong with you" diagnoses.
and then what every you do don't get upset and become suicidal at times over the terrible way you are being treated while trying to deal with severe symptoms or you may well then just find a borderline personality disorder label slapped on you to at which point you will then be accused of lying about your symptoms and will be thrown out of hospital even when you are feeling suicidal and told "you are not depressed"
The bad hospital psych told me that when I was suicidal and there after an attempt and obviously having issues with depression.. as all your symptoms even the depression then may be ignored. I still cant believe that I had a psych tell me after a suicide attempt that I wasn't depressed when I feeling very depressed and still having issues with this feeling and then started bullying me over my ME symptoms cause he didn't believe in this illness.
I think from the moment he say ME/CFS on my hospital notes, he had made up his mind about me and that being FAKE.
How many people with ME/CFS are being falsely diagnosed with mental health issues? cause testing in this disorder of ME/CFS abnormalities aren't being encouraged and even when one has many of those abnormalities showing on tests, they are often ignored that the person has them. (Even with me having to have a drip at the hospital quite often and many other health issues being shown on my hospital issues, the psych wouldn't believe I was sick "90% of your health issues are in your head" .
No wonder I hate psychriastrists so very much.
Yes, absolutely, @Sean, I've been reviewing the literature, and there's loads of articles on how to "present" the diagnosis to patients in the "right way".
Generally, the people writing in this area seem perplexed as to why patients are so negative about a psychogenic diagnosis. Usually, they conclude its because people have negative attitudes to psychiatry in general and don't want to see themselves as mentally unwell.
Thanks for reposting this, Cheshire, I must have missed it. Really useful.
The profession will come around to reality – after a round of science advancing retirements.
Soon would be nice.
Good comment under the article:
Woolie, do you have access to this ?
"Doing things with illness: the micropolitics of the CFS clinic"
"clinical consultations can often take on the form of a political contest between physician and patient to define the true and real nature of the patient's disorder--a micro political struggle in which neurological symptoms can be re-framed as psychiatric symptoms, and psychiatric symptoms as neurological."
I can only see the abstract but would be interested in any further quotes from the article itself if you or anyone can see it.
Here's your man, @alex3619. He even drops an F-bomb for effect!
I'll be honest? If there was an actual real and true cure? I'd love to get diagnosed with a mental disorder that I could get a treatment for and recover. BUT, the issue is that the only way their treatments cure you is because if you stop reporting symptoms - you must be cured. But, it doesn't cause the symptoms to stop happening... and I'm sorry - convincing me to just ignore my symptoms isn't a cure in anyone's book... except the delusional.
I thought this was a very good article.
I don't know this woman but don't like wording like "functional overlay" and not sure it is of much benefit.
I recall reading a story of somebody who had initially got a functional diagnosis but who eventually got a hard neurological diagnosis (something very serious, possibly CJD - can't remember) and the psychiatrists then tried to claim she had this neurological diagnosis and a functional disorder.
I agree, @Dolphin, the idea of "functional overlay" is even more dodgy than the functional diagnosis itself. It means that even once a medical diagnosis is given, any symptoms the person shows that are not considered to be typical of that diagnosis can still be attributed to psychiatric problems. So you are not safe from a psychogenic diagnosis even if you have a medical diagnosis.
The idea that a person can have one set of symptoms caused by two separate sets of casual factors - one organic and the other psychogenic - just seems to be highly improbable.
He does talk about risks of diagnosis, and uncertainty, and advocates saying "I don't know" which is the appropriate response for many of these conditions. I am not sure he has fully considered the range of possibilities of harm from psychogenic labels, or fully appreciated just how little evidence there is for their existence, though he does imply things or indirectly address these issues. What I find interesting is he notes the distress caused from these labels, the loss of trust, the failure of treatments for them, and even post traumatic stress disorder from these labels.
In any patient cohort there will be a range of symptoms. Arbitrarily or subjectively selecting a subset with psychogenic overlay is extremely problematic. If you are at the wrong end of a statistical bell curve on symptoms you might get inappropriately labelled. I suspect this could happen to both severe and moderate ME patients, and probably many mild patients.
Some other quotes from the talk by Richard Barnum that @Cheshire posted above (thanks, Cheshire):
@eafw, here are some links to articles that talk about how to "present" a psychogenic diagnosis. Most of the literature focuses on psychogenic seizures (one type of psychogenic diagnosis that's scarily prevalent). But I dug out a few other examples.
There's also a lot of work exmaining what words to use to best conceal the true nature of the diagnosis (functional, psychogenic, etc.) - I've included an example in the third link.
http://www.neurology.org/content/79/3/282.short main article and commentaries
(sorry, the last three links are to abstracts only - let me know if important, I might be able to interloan)
Here is a link to the other article you mentioned:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/r7cfz1vubw1o5x1/Banks and Prior 2001.pdf?dl=0
You can also try a Google Site Search
Separate names with a comma.