![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 101 to 125 of 157. Go back in thread:
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 11:10:12
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 10:50:01
What about people who are so down and isolated that they can't muster up the ability to go elsewhere for help? Perhaps they might be able to find some encouragement here to do so.
Posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 11:29:11
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts » cassie17, posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 11:09:12
Yes you make good points wishingstar, and yes, the support of bulletin boards can be helpful, but I'm talking about what happens if someone has decided to kill themselves and posts about it. I would consider being seriously suicidal being seriously mentally ill. If someone takes their own life, that has to be mental illness, in my opinion. Suicidal Ideation is different, I think. Suicidal action has got to be mental illness.
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 11:57:25
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 11:29:11
Seems like there's a lot of stigma about "mental illness" even on a mental health board.
Posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 12:04:31
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 11:57:25
I don't think there's stigma attached to the idea that someone who is about to commit suicide is mentally ill. If there's anything that would count as a sign of mental illness, getting ready to kill yourself HAS to be one.
Don't mean to take the topic off admin topic. I still think if a person has serious suicidal thoughts, they are much better calling a hotline and talking to a real person than posting a final goodbye on a bulletin board. Surely that isn't an uncommon opinion?
Posted by madeline on December 28, 2006, at 12:13:46
In reply to Re: Lou aspects of El's post, and others, etc, posted by SLS on December 28, 2006, at 10:30:49
I totally agree with what you said, but my issue is when posters imply/threaten/indicate that they feel/are suicidal in reponse to something another poster said or did - especially in an attempt to coerce that poster into an action.
We all have triggers and it may be entirely possible that a poster could trigger suicidal ideation in another. However, I think it is more appropriate and much more civil to discuss the trigger rather than to discuss the other poster.
It is THAT issue that on which I would like to see some clarification and accountability.
Posted by madeline on December 28, 2006, at 12:18:49
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 10:50:01
There have been times when I posted that I was suicidal on babble. I mean I was SERIOUSLY down.
THe posters on babble definately helped me to hang on. I would read their posts over and over again.
I CAN say that babble was a very very important facet of keeping me alive at that time.
Now, I'm not saying that babble should be the only place to run to when the ideation is overwhelming, but for some it is all there is.
Being allowed to freely say "you know, I just don't think I can do this anymore" is so valuable.
Suicide should not be taken lightly, nor should it be used as a tool.
But I think that babble is a good place to run.
Posted by gardenergirl on December 28, 2006, at 12:42:12
In reply to Re: Lou aspects of El's post, and others, etc, posted by SLS on December 28, 2006, at 10:30:49
> I imagine there are many different motivations and scenarios for which people pronounce suicidality. For whatever reasons we find some of these pronouncements to be "illegitimate", I wouldn't want to cut off the potential connections that a truly suicidal person might profit from by creating a policy against posts dealing with suicide. Even people whose declarations of suicide are repetitive and not acted upon probably need help. It is difficult to say to what degree PB influences them to avoid successfully committing suicide.>
> For now, I see the discussion of and pleas for help in avoiding suicide to be integral to this community. It is the pinnacle of rescue. Are we to allow rescue from all conditions other than suicide. What sense does that make?I think these are very good points (as were Scott's other points in his post). Making statements about feeling suicidal might very well be a way for someone to cope with whatever feelings or thoughts they are struggling with. Sure, some coping mechanisms are more effective and adaptive than others. I "cope" with feelings of hurt, upset, depression, among others often by withdrawing and isolating myself. I know that's not the best approach, because then I feel more depressed.
Now there might be posters here who view my withdrawing as me ignoring them or not caring about them. I realize that the likelihood and potential magnitude of that feeling is low compared to feelings related to someone's suicidal ideation. But my point is that if someone feels I was ignoring them when I'm really isolating myself from depression, that's them injecting themselves into my inner world and my motivations for behavior. I can't prevent that, and I also can't take responsibility for that. Similarly, if someone feels they or their actions (or inactions) are responsible for someone else's safety, that's them injecting themselves into the formula. Even if someone else tries to "pull" someone else into the formula, none of us has to be pulled in. Of course it's likely we could feel manipulated or blackmailed if we felt responsible for acting a certain way "or else". But we are not responsible for anyone else's behavior. If we can keep separate what's "ours" and what's "theirs", we can avoid getting caught up in something that's not really about us.
I know this is easier said than done. But once we realize that we're caught up in a dynamic that is not healthy for us nor appropriate for us, we can then extricate ourselves, or as my T says, "Pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and get back to your own business of life."
So, long story short, I think there are many different behaviors manifested here on the boards that can be upsetting to others, but I also think that they are quite likely manifestations of illness. That doesn't mean it's not upsetting. But how do we determine which behaviors related to mental illness are tolerable and which are not? If we set intention as a criteria, we're bound to fail because we can't leap inside someone else's psyche to see what's going on.
gg
Posted by gardenergirl on December 28, 2006, at 12:44:53
In reply to Re: Lou aspects of El's post, and others, etc, posted by madeline on December 28, 2006, at 12:13:46
> However, I think it is more appropriate and much more civil to discuss the trigger rather than to discuss the other poster.
I agree. Well said.
gg
Posted by Dinah on December 28, 2006, at 12:57:47
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 12:04:31
Well, what I see here for the most part is posters encouraging other posters to seek help IRL. Babble is no substitute for real life help for those who need it, but it can be a place where people can hear that there are those who care whether they live or die, and be urged and encouraged to get real life help.
And then other posters have to realize that that *is* all they can do. That there is no responsibility to "save" anyone else, because that isn't possible anyway. Thank heavens. If it were possible, the responsibility would be too great for me to bear.
The advantage of the board, as opposed to approaching a single other person, is that those who feel up to responding can respond, and those who feel too triggered can avoid responding.
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 13:08:51
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 12:04:31
But is there not a bit of a stigma associated with judging another person to be "mentally ill"? Ie, "they are only doing that because they are mentally ill". "Only a mentally ill person would do that". "This isn't a place for the mentally ill". Of course it's better to talk to someone in person if one is feeling suicidal, but sometimes that doesn't feel possible for people-it can be part of feeling suicidal. They might also fear being judged, and perhaps there is something more remote or anonymous about an internet forum. Or, perhaps they might feel more comfortable communicating with people they know online, rather than with a stranger. Social phobia, phone phobia, wanting to avoid a hospital drama might come into play. People sometimes have friction with their doctors and therapists, too. Real life friends and family might not understand, might also be judgemental. It's good to have another option available.
> I don't think there's stigma attached to the idea that someone who is about to commit suicide is mentally ill. If there's anything that would count as a sign of mental illness, getting ready to kill yourself HAS to be one.
>
> Don't mean to take the topic off admin topic. I still think if a person has serious suicidal thoughts, they are much better calling a hotline and talking to a real person than posting a final goodbye on a bulletin board. Surely that isn't an uncommon opinion?
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 13:29:04
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by Dinah on December 28, 2006, at 12:57:47
Dinah, I like your viewpoint- very sensible and still compassionate.I do imagine, hope that if someone posts about suicidal ideas, the urgings of those respondents who felt up to responding might nudge and give confidence to the person in need of real life help to seek it. I think it would be very helpful to hear, "you can get help, you can do this, this, and this and here's what happened when I did it, and I'm glad I did it" rather than "snap out of it", "you're such a downer", "stop being so dramatic", or "be more responsable for yourself". Unfortuneately, such sentiments are fairly common with a lot of people who don't know what it is like to feel very depressed, and getting loads of such "advice" can be very discouraging. As for me, most of my non-depressed friends are convinced that I wouldn't ever be depressed if I would just get off all prescription medications and start to think sensibly, and as for family- well- we don't have "mentally ill" people in our family. There was a time when I seriously questioned what made life worth it, and was advised to get some hot chocolate by a well meaning friend who had zero comprehension of what I was attempting to discuss. I never felt so isolated as then. In any case, the boards here are a good place to realize that one isn't isolated, that others struggle with such feelings, too.
> Well, what I see here for the most part is posters encouraging other posters to seek help IRL. Babble is no substitute for real life help for those who need it, but it can be a place where people can hear that there are those who care whether they live or die, and be urged and encouraged to get real life help.
>
> And then other posters have to realize that that *is* all they can do. That there is no responsibility to "save" anyone else, because that isn't possible anyway. Thank heavens. If it were possible, the responsibility would be too great for me to bear.
>
> The advantage of the board, as opposed to approaching a single other person, is that those who feel up to responding can respond, and those who feel too triggered can avoid responding.
Posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 13:32:43
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by cassie17 on December 28, 2006, at 11:29:11
I agree with you that being seriously suicidal signals some sort of mental illness, most likely depression or bipolar disorder, but also possibly a host of other things. I didnt mean to say otherwise. I guess I just have different feelings when I hear depression/bipolar and "serious mental illness". That's probably my own issue though.
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 13:43:43
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts » cassie17, posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 13:32:43
I guess what troubles me isn't "mental illness" so much as the possibility of dividing people up into castes of "mentally ill" and "normal", in which the sentiments and concerns of the "normal" people are valid, and those of the "mentally ill" are dismissed as invalid. There's enough of that going on in "the real world".
Posted by karen_kay on December 28, 2006, at 14:07:59
In reply to Re: Do I have to take y'all outside? » Happyflower, posted by AuntieMel on December 26, 2006, at 16:07:19
do i have to bend you over my knee??? (that's always been my favorite one)
hope you're doing well. (and let me know about my question, seriously!!!)
Posted by karen_kay on December 28, 2006, at 14:36:44
In reply to (((((auntie mel))))) » AuntieMel, posted by karen_kay on December 28, 2006, at 14:07:59
but i don't really care.
is it entirely impossible to not interact with posters that one finds are unnerving? for example, hypothetically, if karen_kay (hey! that's me and only me, no one else, not accussing, putting down, or anything else) is upsetting me by posting that she's going to kill herself if i don't stop ignoring her, and i find it bothersome (that kk, she really does get on my nerves and EVERYONE knows that she wants to be the center of attention always. but gosh, she sure is cute and really does deserve to be the center of attention. gosh, it's so hard to ignore her!) then i don't open kk's posts. not until i'm ready to find kk's posts amusing or be of help. now, i'm not going to instigate kk, but i'm not going to read her posts (and god! does that make me... oops, her mad!)
so, i don't allow myself to be manipulated by kk (and she sure does like to manipulate people). and if i'm really not feeling like gettign involved in those kind of things, i have posters that i ONLY read their posts, knowing they don't usually upset me (not like kk does. she really can be upsetting) anyway. so, is it so much kk manipulating people or people allowing themselves to be manipulated by kk?
(i'm also a bit concerned about other people who need help, support, ect. but don't reach out because they don't want to be 'another kk.') see, there i go again, making it all about me :)
footnote: i am not saying that anyone here threatens sxuicide for attention, other than kk. i'm not (repeat not) substituting one name for another. and i'm not trying to make light of this subject. i just don't want anyone coming back on me saying, 'are you talking about me' becuase i believe i've made it clear i am only talking about kk.
Posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 18:16:45
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts, posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 13:43:43
I absolutely agree with you laima. 100%. After I posted my last message I thought more and realized I'd probably worded my thoughts incorrectly. It may have sounded like I meant that people with depression/bipolar dont (in my opinion) suffer from 'severe' mental illness, and are therefore better/more "sane"/more important/etc etc etc or somehow in a different category than those with more severe diagnoses or no diagnoses at all. I absolutely do not believe that. I just wanted to make that clear. We all have our problems, and whether or not a person has a diagnosis does not change their worth or importance.
Posted by fayeroe on December 28, 2006, at 19:13:03
In reply to Lou's request for clarification to fayeroe » fayeroe, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2006, at 10:03:50
this is a mental health forum. i'm not very interested in nascar forums/sky diving forums/deep sea fishing forums and i doubt that very many others are..........that's what i meant when i said there are too many "what ifs"........we could "what if" it til the cows come home. ......it's counterproductive to go off in seventy different directions.........
i merely pointed out that we we discussing a very specific issue.
and the explanation for "til the cows come home" is that it could be very late.........
Posted by fayeroe on December 28, 2006, at 19:15:58
In reply to Re: Lou aspects of El's post, and others, etc, posted by madeline on December 28, 2006, at 12:13:46
> I totally agree with what you said, but my issue is when posters imply/threaten/indicate that they feel/are suicidal in reponse to something another poster said or did - especially in an attempt to coerce that poster into an action.
>
> We all have triggers and it may be entirely possible that a poster could trigger suicidal ideation in another. However, I think it is more appropriate and much more civil to discuss the trigger rather than to discuss the other poster.
>
> It is THAT issue that on which I would like to see some clarification and accountability.that is the issue that i've been trying to talk about.........thanks, maddie......pat
>
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:20:17
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts » laima, posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 18:16:45
Wishingstar, I hope I didn't sound as if I was accusing anyone of anything! That would be ME with the wrong tone or words... Not sure how to explain. I think what I was expressing concern about hasn't exactly manifested on babble, (as far as I can tell), but it is quite common out and about.> I absolutely agree with you laima. 100%. After I posted my last message I thought more and realized I'd probably worded my thoughts incorrectly. It may have sounded like I meant that people with depression/bipolar dont (in my opinion) suffer from 'severe' mental illness, and are therefore better/more "sane"/more important/etc etc etc or somehow in a different category than those with more severe diagnoses or no diagnoses at all. I absolutely do not believe that. I just wanted to make that clear. We all have our problems, and whether or not a person has a diagnosis does not change their worth or importance.
Posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:32:45
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to fayeroe » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on December 28, 2006, at 19:13:03
I think Lou was just trying to explain that a website which welcomes and attracts suicidal posters will have a higher mortality rate than one which bans suicidal posters...BECAUSE it attracts more of them in the first place. And if that doesn't make sense, an anology might be that a website for amateur skydivers will have a higher mortality rate than one for quilting bee enthusiasts. (Or watchers of adventure tv shows.) Whether or not the anology is a good one is uncertain, but that's the gist of it.
(Please do correct me if I'm wrong, Lou. But I think this is what you're saying, because I read and understood Dr. Bob's statement the same way you did.)
Posted by wishingstar on December 28, 2006, at 19:47:50
In reply to Re: Good Bye Posts » wishingstar, posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:20:17
Oh dont worry, your post did not seem accusatory or anything else negative. I had just thought about what I'd posted before reading your post, and wanted to make you it was clear to you and to everyone else that we were in agreement. I didnt want to come off in any way other than what I intended.
Posted by Fallen4MyT on December 28, 2006, at 20:32:39
In reply to Please don't pressure others » Deneb, posted by Dinah on December 26, 2006, at 16:29:13
Isn't it against the **civility** rules to harrass another member? Would pressure to some not feel like harassment? Don't you still PBC and THEN block people when they do not follow DNP's and other board policies??? If I recall correctly if one had a few PBC's then a block would be in order when they failed to obey the rules as Dinah understands them below. I have never heard of a do not pressure. I would ask you to take stronger action then DN=PRESSURE in this case.
Thank you for even considering my post.
> It's against Babble policy to pressure others, or to post to those who have requested that you not post to them.
>
> It is *not* against the rules, as I understand them, for either party to mention the other party, or to discuss the contents of their posts.
>
> I'm going to have to ask you to please not pressure Happyflower to respond to you, per the civility guidelines as I understand them. If I am misapplying them, I'm sure Dr. Bob will feel free to correct me.
>
> Follow-ups regarding these issues, as well as replies to the above posts, should of course themselves be civil.
>
> Dr. Bob is always free to override deputy decisions. His email is on the bottom of each page. Please feel free to email him if you believe this decision was made in error.
>
> Dinah, acting as deputy to Dr. Bob
Posted by Fallen4MyT on December 28, 2006, at 20:36:42
In reply to Re: Do I have to take y'all outside?, posted by fayeroe on December 27, 2006, at 15:41:28
> > I will calm down when this matter is taken seriously and not made light of by asking us if you should take us all outside. Geeze my mother did do that, and beat the sh*t out of me until I couldn't stand anymore or sit for that matter for days.
> > Rules have been broken, and nothing is done except threatening to take us outside. If that abusive comment was meant to be funny, well it isn't to anyone who has been "taken outside" and was abused afterwards.
> >
> > I guess I expected more from a deputy.
>
>
> it's too bad when something like this is said, even if the deputy thought she was making a joke. as much hurt as there was in the thread, i don't see how making a joke would have helped anything anyway.
>
> there are numerous abuse victims here and everyone has heard that one many more times that they should have had to hear it.
>
> Happyflower, i am appalled, but not surprised, that you got blocked. it is the one size fits all remedy.
>
> i am proud of you for taking the stand that you took and support you, as i've said before, and will see you if you come back......xoxoxo pat
>((HF)) I am with Pat on this one. I would feel PUT DOWN by that ....ahem...joke post above apology or not. I am sorry for you hurt.
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2006, at 20:51:40
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to fayeroe » fayeroe, posted by laima on December 28, 2006, at 19:32:45
>
> I think Lou was just trying to explain that a website which welcomes and attracts suicidal posters will have a higher mortality rate than one which bans suicidal posters...BECAUSE it attracts more of them in the first place. And if that doesn't make sense, an anology might be that a website for amateur skydivers will have a higher mortality rate than one for quilting bee enthusiasts. (Or watchers of adventure tv shows.) Whether or not the anology is a good one is uncertain, but that's the gist of it.
>
>
> (Please do correct me if I'm wrong, Lou. But I think this is what you're saying, because I read and understood Dr. Bob's statement the same way you did.)laima,
You wrote,[...because it attracts {>more< of them } in the first place...and if that doesn't make sense, an analogy..skydivers vs quilting bee enthusiasts...I..understand (Dr. Hsiung's)statement >the same way you did<,Lou...].
Thank you for letting me know that you see Dr. Hsiung's statement the same way that I do. And you are correct in thinking that that is what I meant, that if there is a forum that attracts those of that nature,then...
Another way of looking at he grammatical structure of Dr. Hsiung's statement could be in relation to any accusation made to the forum that it causes in any way suicides, and then the maker of the argument points to the fact that there have been members here that have committed suicide.
But looking again at the grammatical structure of Dr. Hsiung's statement;
[..attract suicidal posters(and thereby increase the incidence of suicide {in the group}...].
>First< there is an increase in the {number} of posters of that nature because the word {attract} is there. The grammatical meaning of {attract} is that others come to {the attraction},which {increases the number of , in this case, suicidal posters. Because there is an increase in the {number} of posters of that nature, then it could follow statistically, that the number of actual suicides could increase here, which is written in Dr. Hsiung's statement,{increase the number of suicides >{in the group}<.
My analogy, you saw, was one of IMO simplicity. I could give a much more comprehensive statistical analogy with correlation coefficiants and such. But is this the place for advanced statisitcs or epidemiology?
Then again, if bottomfeeder's interpretation is validated by Dr. Hsiung, that could reverse this entire matter.
Lou's twelth smilely>>[:-)
Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2006, at 21:19:57
In reply to Re: Lou's request for clarification to fayeroe » Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on December 28, 2006, at 19:13:03
> this is a mental health forum. i'm not very interested in nascar forums/sky diving forums/deep sea fishing forums and i doubt that very many others are..........that's what i meant when i said there are too many "what ifs"........we could "what if" it til the cows come home. ......it's counterproductive to go off in seventy different directions.........
>
> i merely pointed out that we we discussing a very specific issue.
>
> and the explanation for "til the cows come home" is that it could be very late.........fayeroe,
You wrote,[...I'm not..interested..and I doubt that very many others are...it's counterproductive to go off in seventy different directions...cows...]
Well, one cannot always have interest in things that others do, but there could be the potential IMO for some others here to have an interest in NASCAR racing,skydiving,deep sea fishing,in as much that they could have some knowlege as to the hazardous nature of such, rather than to be an actual participant in those hobbies.
In my analogy here, the direction that I was intending to go was to answer the question directed to me concerning the possible interpretations to Dr. Hsiung's statement in question here. I directed my understanding of his statement in one direction. Bottomfeeder gave another direction. Liama agreed with the direction that I pointed to. Could you elaborate as to what you mean by 70 directions?
Lou
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.