Posted by Lorraine on June 17, 2001, at 19:04:26
In reply to Re: Hoopla about Elizabeth, posted by Dr. Bob on June 17, 2001, at 18:21:49
> > 3. I think that there are some people on the board that are anti-drug. I don't think that is a useful approach to a board that I think is drug-approach oriented.
>
> > 4. As someone who is medically ill, I don't need to hear about how drugs are wrong. To say that drugs are wrong reflects a moral judgment about the validity of mental illness. It is the whole stigma thing that we get in the real world. Why do we find this behavior acceptable here? ... I think we are way too tolerant of an insidious form of prejudice against the mentally ill under the guise of allowing a diversity of viewpoints.
>
> On the one hand, I agree, it's not very supportive in a community like this to be anti-drug -- for whatever reason. OTOH, I do like a diversity of viewpoints. Maybe if it includes anti-drug ones, it helps people who are still kind of "on the fence" to think it through?Bob: I don't think it helps people who are on the fence think it through. I think it scares them to death. I remember when I first confronted the fact that I needed to be medicated and then confronted the fact that I needed to tell important people in my life about that. I needed a lot of "support" to make my first step onto medication. As for communicating to important people in my life, it has taken years to one-by-one take them on for the amount of prejudice and bias that they hold onto when they say "so when will you be off of the medication?" I am a very strong person. If I had been exposed to the anti-drug bashing early in my process, I think I just would have shut down completely. As it was, I had to bring my husband into therapy with me for him to understand that this was a medical condition. Bob, the people I am close to are bright, educated people who wouldn't dream of making derogatory comments to other groups of people that are discriminated against (like blacks or gays etc). These comments are just mean-spirited. Also, the pro-medication/anti-drug comments are not open minded discussions. This topic is as polarized as the abortion/pro-choice issue is. Look at it this way, suppose this was a support group for women who have abortions. Would you invite comments from the pro-life contingency into that arena? Would you see them as extending the field of discussion or as pouring salt on raw wounds? Don't you think that we all have good friends and relatives who are happy to share their anti-drug views with us? As for diversity of opinion, I think that you will get it within the group of people who are not anti-drug. After all, I am now trying neurofeedback--a highly experimental approach that seeks to minimize the amount of drugs necessary in treatment.
> > I also think that some of the anti-drug stuff is intentionally beligerant as though people were trying to start a war. I mean you don't ordinarily go into a gay bar and bash gays, do you? I respond to this by ignoring those posts.
>
> I agree that some people seem to want to provoke, and that ignoring them should probably be the standard response. I think the catch is, in a group like this, that it's hard to get everyone to do that.I know. That is the hard part. Which is why we need to have people be able to say the strategy of not responding in their messages. We get lots of new members that need to be told what to do. There are other strategies. I have been way-laid by the course of my depression recently, but it brings me back to the issue of charging a price of admission to be on this board. Although a lot of people have strong views on it, even a small price of admission would tend to keep out people who are just interested in stirring up controversy.
> > 6. ... I'm not sure why the penalty being exacted here--a one week ban from posting--is so strict.
>
> Strictness is relative, it's kind of new, making it time-limited at all. :-)I know you have an impossible job monitoring this board. I have a lot of respect for you for trying to do it at all. I think it might be useful for us all to think about what is appropriate and what is not. Take the topic name-calling. Is it ok to say someone is a drug addict or drug user but not ok to use the word "trolls". Maybe it's just not ok to name call period. Maybe that is where the line is drawn. If that is the rule, then let's all be clear about it. It's not ok to call someone a drug addict and it's not ok to call someone (by inference) a troll. (Although truth be known, I'd rather be known as a troll than a drug addict. It's a lot less hurtful in my book.
As to length of time of punishments, as a parent I have found that a 5 minute time out works for a 13 year old very effectively. Here, maybe you start with a warning, then a day, then a weekend, then a week, then??? Whatever, it's just to say lots of approaches work.
Your the guy at the top. It's a lonely job. I know this is true from experience, and I hope that my comments are a help rather than a hinderance. By the way, I wouldn't dream of critcizing you. I don't think anyone could do a better job, although I think we can all spot areas for improvement. That's the easy part.
>
> Bob
poster:Lorraine
thread:1192
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20010315/msgs/1440.html