Psycho-Babble Medication Thread 1113033

Shown: posts 4 to 28 of 44. Go back in thread:

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by Lamdage22 on December 22, 2020, at 1:21:54

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by undopaminergic on December 22, 2020, at 0:59:10

Oh wow. Psychotherapy ever tried? What kind of therapy? (Both of you?) These issues are maybe too complex to be fixed by meds alone?

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by undopaminergic on December 22, 2020, at 4:40:02

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by Lamdage22 on December 22, 2020, at 1:21:54

> Oh wow. Psychotherapy ever tried? What kind of therapy? (Both of you?) These issues are maybe too complex to be fixed by meds alone?
>

I haven't had the kind of in-depth therapy required for DID (dissociative identity disorder). From what I understand, they typically use hypnosis.

Of course, medications cannot cure it. They can, however, raise or lower the threshold for switching (to another personality). Alcohol and benzodiazepines lower it, and I believe anti-manic (including antipsychotics) agents raise it, but I'm not sure, because how can I know how many switches I would have had without these medications?

-undopaminergic

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by Lamdage22 on December 22, 2020, at 5:50:42

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by undopaminergic on December 22, 2020, at 4:40:02

Im sorry you have to go through that. It sounds like you got insight though, so thats good. I have never met anyone like that, not that I know of. I guess not every Therapist is ready to deal with multiple personalities?

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by Lamdage22 on December 22, 2020, at 5:58:53

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by undopaminergic on December 22, 2020, at 4:40:02

Yeah when im paranoid for a few hours I feel alienated from the world. But more depersonalization (alienated from myself). I fit some criteria for many diagnoses. I am just messed up in many ways. Nowadays most of them are milder than they were 3 or more years ago.

The potpourri of symptoms from all kinds of diagnoses makes it difficult. Most of them are mild(er) than others and each alone wouldn't be as much of an issue. Together they keep me from enjoying life as much as I could without them.

My Psychiatrist doesn't even bother to carry all the diagnoses.

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by undopaminergic on December 22, 2020, at 8:31:06

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by Lamdage22 on December 22, 2020, at 5:50:42

> Im sorry you have to go through that.

The depersonalisation/derealisation is really a nuisance. It worsens my attention (because everything is dulled down and doesn't feel real), which is already bad due to ADD. The worst thing about that is that I have trouble memorising things, and so I have a learning impairment.

The multi-personality is not a problem really.

> It sounds like you got insight though, so thats good. I have never met anyone like that, not that I know of. I guess not every Therapist is ready to deal with multiple personalities?
>

No, there are even those who believe DID doesn't exist.

> Together they keep me from enjoying life as much as I could without them.

Yes, it's like that.

> My Psychiatrist doesn't even bother to carry all the diagnoses.

Same thing with mine. Then again, I'm not sure having a multitude of diagnoses would be a good thing. I wish, however, that the few diagnoses that *are* on the official list would reflect the most serious issues I have. Eg. schizophrenia is not one of my problems. My psychotic problems are so mild it's misleading to even call them schizophrenia.

-undopaminergic

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by jay2112 on December 22, 2020, at 12:29:26

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by Lamdage22 on December 22, 2020, at 1:21:54

> Oh wow. Psychotherapy ever tried? What kind of therapy? (Both of you?) These issues are maybe too complex to be fixed by meds alone?

Yes, I think I am at the point where I am going to try some small, very small, doses of amino acids. I have had some positive experience on them, without meds. But, I do need a small dose of Latuda, as it seems to be the central "organizer", if you may..lol.

I think, partly because of meds, I have "learned helplessness"..zero confidence...and that is going back to my childhood, when I had movement/co-ordination, a lisp, and problems with mathematics and reading comprehension. That is going to require some psycho-therapeutic dialog. I am looking for a good counsellor, but one I can afford. I know a bit about social work, so I know what to look for. But I have no insurance to cover that, so I really have to search through our social services. Thanks to our Conservative provincial government, they are forcing pdocs to abandon ANY type of talk therapy. It's like "Get them medicated to the gills, and shove them off!"...Ugghhhh. Here is the article, and we should be *fighting* this:

>In Ontario, a battle for the soul of psychiatry<

The province is moving to a U.S.-style model for psychiatrists that will eventually get them out of the business of ongoing care. What will that mean for patients?
Norman Doidge
Contributed to The Globe and Mail
Published April 6, 2019
Updated April 11, 2019
Published April 6, 2019

Norman Doidge, MD, is a psychiatrist, psychoanalyst and author of The Brain That Changes Itself and The Brains Way of Healing. He is on the research faculty at Columbia Universitys Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research and on the faculty at the University of Torontos department of psychiatry.

-When we met, Mr. A. had recently turned 30 years old. He was thoughtful, courteous and uncommonly articulate. He had also just spent the past seven months in hospital.

Hed hit a patch of black ice while driving a rented SUV later determined to be defectively designed. It flipped, rolled and the roof caved in. In an instant, he became what is called a C7, complete motor, a term that denotes a severe spinal-cord injury starting at the bottom of the neck. He became quadriplegic.

He no longer had control of the movement of his hands, or muscles from his chest down to his feet, and the barest sensation in those areas. He would never stand, walk, bathe or dress himself again. He would develop bedsores and urinary tract infections. A young man, in his prime, his sexual function became severely compromised.

In the few seconds the SUV flipped, Mr. A.s life expectancy shortened 15 years. More immediately, each individual day was shortened by at least four hours, because thats the time it takes an attendant to help get him out of bed, bathed, dressed, change his catheter and help evacuate his bowels. Then theres the incalculable time lost throughout the day trying to navigate a world of cellphones, computers and elevator buttons without the use of his hands or fingers.

He was referred to me after he was discharged from the rehab hospital to deal with depression. Although he hadnt been diagnosed with PTSD from the accident (probably because he suffers from amnesia), the aftermath was another matter. He faced the death of every dream hed ever had he discovered, for instance, hed never work in the fast-paced industry hed trained in. He was a fiercely independent personality, and the injury deprived him of that, too. And, of course, he was, above all, dealing with how this affected his prospects to marry and have children, which he had dearly hoped for. His grief was immense.

2019 Gairdner Awards: Winners hailed for discoveries on DNA replication and power of stem cells to fight cancer

Opinion: We must not politicize psychiatry, no matter what Trump tweets

Pacemaker for the brain: An inside look at an experimental PTSD treatment

Antidepressants only partly helped. It helped a lot that I was a physician, with an appreciation of his injury. The therapy we started intensive psychoanalytic psychotherapy is not what is called short-term psychotherapy. Short-term psychotherapies have an important role, but most are designed for a person who has had a setback or crisis, leading to a single, mild to moderate mental disorder, such as an anxiety disorder, or a depressive episode. It involves a limited number of sessions, spread over several months, to return the person to his or her baseline. It is usually focused on treating the symptoms of one mental disorder, in patients who are not chronic.

But we are doing longer-term therapy, working on rebuilding a life under dire circumstances, and also dealing with Mr. As past childhood traumas, depression and an untreated attention-deficit disorder.

For me, it was crucial to deal with the pre-accident mental-health issues, even if less severe than being a quad, because I no longer had the psychic and emotional means to manage them any longer, he told me. Because of the burden of my disability, the situation was totally unmanageable. I needed to deal with these emotional and personality problems if I was going to survive. I know I presented to others as successful, but there was a deep, underlying anxiety, and insecurity and inadequacy, and a sense of worthlessness that I had before the accident. My sense is that the problems I had before the accident were serious and severe enough that if my accident hadnt happened, I still would have had to deal with them.

If the Ontario Ministry of Health has its way, the type of intensive psychotherapy Mr. A. has been receiving will end. A proposal the ministry made in January would radically limit psychotherapy provided by psychiatrists and family physicians. The ministrys proposed new approach, modelled on U.S.-style, managed care, is designed to limit the type and amount of treatment individual patients will receive, regardless of their presenting symptoms. The Ontario Medical Association (OMA) opposes it, and both groups are meeting about it now.

Story continues below advertisement

The plan, which is described by its advocates as radical, is designed to eventually get psychiatrists out of providing continuing care to patients altogether. If it goes through, it will be the biggest change in psychiatry in the history of the discipline in Canada, and turn psychiatrists from treaters into consultants who will diagnose patients in a single session, and make recommendations for others to follow, then wave goodbye.

Diagnose, and adios.

These proposed cuts, their advocates claim, will improve access to psychiatrists, but it is easy to show it will immediately worsen access. They argue we can no longer afford intensive psychotherapy, and promise to save $13.2-million (out of an overall health budget of $61.3-billion). In fact, critics of the new proposal say, these cuts will boost health-care costs immediately, and much more over the medium and long term, and that this is easy to show, and the math is simple.

In any case, these cuts are so deep they will only support several months of short-term psychotherapy. It is a one-size-fits-all plan, and a quick-fix mentality. No serious person, with a modicum of empathy or life experience, could possibly believe that I, or anyone, would be able to help an individual such as Mr. A. snap out of it with a handful of sessions and some pills.

A person such as Mr. A who quite humanely in Ontario could get the better part of a year of help for the physical part of the injury, would, under the new proposal, get the equivalent of three-quarters of a days worth in hours of psychotherapy after which radical disincentives kick in, designed to discourage any more treatment of the mental part of his suffering. So much for parity for mental health.

In doing so, the Ministry of Health shifts into an impersonal bureaucratic mode of thinking. It views Mr. A as a cost driver, a drain on the system, an expense that is taking away something. But the people proposing to limit his treatment have not met him, dont know him and dont understand the power of intensive psychotherapy, or of his ability to make use of it. I can already see that Mr. A is someone who, despite his personal catastrophe, is actually going to add to life. To his, and to the lives of those around him. But right now, hes not at his strongest. He needs our help for a while.

Open this photo in gallery

In 2009, a message of affirmation is written on a white board in one of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health's Toronto facilities.

Charla Jones/The Globe and Mail

LETS NOT TALK

The Health Ministrys proposal to cut funding for intensive talk therapy became public on Jan. 11, 2019,. It comes despite the fact that Canadians, according to Statistics Canada, say their single most unmet mental health need is psychotherapeutic counselling. Should these cuts go through in Ontario without scrutiny, other jurisdictions across Canada could be tempted to follow suit.

Some history: The first time intensive psychotherapy cuts were proposed was under Bob Raes NDP government in 1992. The Health Ministry argued that intensive psychotherapy was for the worried well, that it didnt work and contemptuously put it on a list of borderline cosmetic services to be cut that included tattoo and hair removal, and breast reductions and enlargements. They targeted psychodynamic therapies and psychoanalysis, and any other treatment that required a significant number of sessions. (Psychoanalytic psychotherapy also called psychodynamic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis, on which it is based, are treatments for chronic disabling problems usually based on childhood trauma, or blockages that occurred in psychological development.)

A public firestorm erupted. Patients came forward and shared their stories in the media. Studies showed that patients in intensive psychoanalytic therapy in Ontario (and elsewhere) had multiple psychiatric diagnoses, and sky-high rates of childhood trauma such as early parent death, traumatic separations and sexual, physical and mental abuse and neglect. In Ontario, 82 per cent had tried less intensive forms of treatment and medication before their physicians recommended intensive psychotherapy. Researchers showed scientific evidence demonstrated intensive psychotherapy (including psychoanalysis) was effective, and that it saved the government money by keeping people out of hospital.
Open this photo in gallery

Toronto, 1995: Then-premier Bob Rae gets a hug from Frances Lankin, his former health minister, as he arrives at a party caucus meeting.

Frank Gunn/The Canadian Press

For a period in the 1990s, before I turned my attention to the neuroscience of brain plasticity, I was considered an expert on what kinds of patients were in intensive psychotherapy, did research studies on their diagnoses and studied what works for these patients. I was chosen by American psychiatrists to present this research at the White House, during the Clinton administration.

As head of the diagnostic assessment clinic at the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry (which became part of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, or CAMH), and also the psychotherapy centre there, I saw it wasnt just waiting lists that delayed people getting treatment. The stigmatizing castigation that people who get intensive psychotherapy are self-involved slackers, and the worried well, played a role. People with mental illness often feel profound shame and if authorities endorse the idea they dont have real problems, they avoid treatment.

The OMA and the Ontario Psychiatric Association (OPA) opposed the cuts. In the legislature, the Progressive Conservatives supported keeping therapy. Ultimately, the Rae government reversed itself, and these treatments continued to be available in Ontario.

Story continues below advertisement
Open this photo in gallery

Ontario Premier Doug Ford stands alongside Christine Elliott, then newly sworn in as his Health Minister, on June 29, 2018.

Mark Blinch/The Canadian Press

Now, once again, advocates are calling intensive psychotherapy cosmetic. And again, they claim the treatments dont work.

The means of the cuts are different this time. The Ministry of Health is proposing to introduce powerful incentives on physicians that transparently pit the physicians financial interest against the patients need for treatment, by actively rewarding physicians for not seeing sicker patients. Thus, they will pay a doctor twice as much for seeing less-ill patients, who dont need intensive therapy, than they will pay them to treat the sicker ones who do.

You read that correctly. It is an incentive that cruelly disfigures, debases and guts the doctor-patient relationship.

Patients currently in treatment, or those who fear they will be unable to access what they have been waiting for, should know that the psychiatrists who have actually been elected to represent the profession for instance those in the psychiatric section of the OMA, and in the OPA and the family physicians who provide psychotherapy are against these proposed cuts, which will exact a human toll on patients and their families.

The claim that the cuts will improve access to psychiatrists makes no sense. When people are depressed, and say to their family doctor, I think I need to see a psychiatrist, it is for a specific reason: to get treatment. That is what patients mean by access, not just a single visit and a label. Ending a core treatment doesnt improve access. Thats sophistry.

Furthermore, though instituted in the name of lowering mental-health-care costs, these changes will immediately raise them. OHIP already pays a physician less for doing psychotherapy than doing consultations. If psychiatrists stop doing psychotherapy, and do more consultations as the changes intend OHIP billings go up, immediately.

Publicly funded psychotherapy programs that include intensive psychotherapy have significant savings, or cost offsets. In Germany, where intensive long-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy and psychoanalysis are publicly funded, one study showed patients who had these two therapies had a two-thirds decline in hospitalizations, but also a one-third decrease in medical visits of all kinds, a two-fifths decline in lost work days and a one-third decrease in the use of all medications. These declines were sustained 2.5 years after the completion of psychotherapy.

Such savings have been replicated in Ontario. Our average psychiatric inpatient stay costs $11,000. Ruth Lanius and Isolda Tuhan of the University of Western Ontario recently showed that long-term intensive therapy for traumatized patients with personality problems reduces inpatient stays by 65 per cent, reduces emergency visits by 45 per cent and increases school and work functioning by approximately 700 per cent. Intensive psychotherapy is effective preventive medicine.

In 2004, another German study found patients getting psychoanalysis showed, evidence of a lasting and remarkable stable reduction in work absenteeism and a low level of inpatient treatments. In short: These therapies save money in hospital costs, and also bring in new funds for government, because people who work are not on welfare, and pay taxes.

The Ministry of Health has its facts wrong. They claim there is no evidence that more than short-term works. This is shockingly inaccurate.

There are now so many randomized control trials of these more intensive treatments that we have meta-analyses summing up what they show cumulatively. Three recent summations, in the last several years, show that long term psychotherapy is an evidence-based treatment.

Studies show that for complex patients, such as Mr. A., who have traumas that affect their personality development, long-term intensive psychoanalytic psychotherapies have significantly better outcomes than short-term treatments. And for young children, who cant take drugs, intensive psychotherapy is our primary intervention.

This is why these intensive therapies became part of the evidence-based Standards and Guidelines of the Psychotherapies put together by the OMA and the OPA.

These proposed changes make me wonder: Will Canadian psychiatry become a shallow technocratic discipline, focused on checklist diagnoses and recommending drugs (which is all there is time for in a brief managed-care style consultation), or will it be a discipline that admits human complexity? This can only be appreciated over time, with the physician getting continuing feedback. Because of the shame attached to mental illness, a key component of treatment is the physician having time to earn the patients trust, and demonstrate a continued personal caring for the patient. There is a healing power in that kind of doctor-patient relationship.

These changes threaten the very soul of psychiatry. I know, I know: To speak of mind or soul with regards psychiatry may seem unscientific, and be caricatured as a mystical departure from the practice of medicine. But there is nothing un-medical, or un-psychiatric, about it.

The word psychiatry comes from the Greek: psyche which means soul, mind or spirit, and iatreia, which means healing, or care. Psychiatry was set up as the discipline, within medicine, to heal and care for the tormented psyche of the mentally ill person, and not only to diagnose disorders in less than an hour in which a person, being asked a torrent of questions, often barely gets a chance to reveal themselves. Creating psychiatrists who are no longer allowed to care for patients is like creating a generation of surgeons who are trained not to operate.

There is a final problem, which relates to the future of psychiatry. Ending OHIP funding for intensive psychotherapy will also end existing funding to teach it. But this training is where psychiatrists learn how to empathize and relate better with others, how listen to and talk with and not to patients.

I honestly cant think of a better and more efficient way to kill our discipline, never mind the terrible impact on our patients," said Misha Hartfeil, who is not primarily a psychotherapist but rather a newly graduated forensic psychiatrist at CAMH.

Taking psychotherapy out of psychiatric education is taking the psyche out of psychiatry. Prohibiting psychiatrists from treating patients is taking the iatrist out of psychiatrist. Psychiatry will exist in name only, and cease to attract the people we need in the field: people who actually see their calling as caring for others.

Open this photo in gallery

THE STUDY BEHIND THE PROPOSALS

One way the Health Ministry has tried to justify these cuts is to quote a study by Paul Kurdyak (who consults for the MOH) that shows some psychiatrists treat fewer patients than others. Along with his co-authors, David Goldbloom and Benoit Mulsant all three work for CAMH Dr. Kurdyak argues that these psychiatrists must be the ones who do more intensive psychotherapy, and this is why wait lists to see psychiatrists are long. In what must have been music to the ministrys ears, they insist we have more than enough psychiatrists. The problem is that psychiatrists are permitted to do intensive psychotherapy. So, best to just cut it.

Their own statistics show that the average number of visits by a psychiatric patient to a Toronto or Ottawa psychiatrist was seven a year, compared with four in the under-serviced areas. They presume, although never explain why, that average of seven is too many sessions. What if the problem is four sessions is too few? After all, under-serviced means under serviced. By what clinical standard are they decreeing that a sick person seeing a psychiatrist four times a year is most certainly way too little, but seven is most certainly way too much? That is a quality of care issue. But the term quality of care never appears in their study.

Interestingly, the authors claim physicians who use talk therapy elect to provide care to a number of patients whose care is relatively easy to manage and who reliably show up for their appointments, since this is easier than providing consultations or acute care to seriously ill, unstable patients with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or severe depression. In an op-ed that appeared in The Globe and Mail in 2014, Dr. Kurdyak and Dr. Goldbloom claimed these psychiatrists tailor their practices in a way that suits their preferences, but does not necessarily align with greatest public need.
Open this photo in gallery

Paul Kurdyak, the author of a study being used by the Ontario Health Ministry in its rationale for changing policy on psychotherapy funding.

The Canadian Press

The studys methods were criticized. First, their estimate of how many patients psychiatrists saw was based on OHIP billings. As Douglas Weir, past president of the OMA pointed out, OHIP is just one of 19 ways in which psychiatrists are remunerated in Ontario. A significant number earn their income through a combination of OHIP fee-for-service for individual patients, but also by helping to care for a variety of patients outside of OHIP, through one of the 18 other schemes such as by supporting family doctors. These non-OHIP patients werent captured in the study.

Next, their definition of seriously ill and high need patients (which they suggest is the qualifier for receiving treatment) summarily and arbitrarily excludes from treatment people with illnesses that are obviously severe, and hard to manage. Their definition excludes those with eating disorders, autism, borderline personality, alcoholism, brain injuries, opioid addiction, learning disorders, complex developmental trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder. And then there are the relatives of the seriously mentally ill: their children, parents, siblings often suffer greatly, too.

How did these authors know that low-volume psychiatrists treat patients who have such low needs"? They just assumed it. In fact, they didnt interview or assess a single patient of these psychiatrists. Rather they had, by their own admission, only a crude proxy for service need the regional rates of hospital admissions for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or major depression. They simply presumed that patients seen by physicians in low-volume practices were low need if the patients hadnt had a psychiatric admission for one of only three illnesses in the past two years. They also concluded, mistakenly, that any physician who saw a patient frequently was providing psychotherapy, but provided no evidence for that assumption. A significant number of those billings were for a more general service psychiatric care which may not involve psychotherapy. Psychiatrists use that service to see bipolar or schizophrenic patients regularly, to keep them out of hospital.

Its after speculating that intensive psychotherapy is the reason people cant get enough access to psychiatrists that Dr. Kurdyak and company describe their remedy.

In the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States, the role of a psychiatrist has been modified, they write approvingly, and most psychiatrists in managed care have a consultant-based clinical role. Consultants in medicine, by definition, dont take over continuing care. They give expert advice after a meeting with a patient.

The authors propose that in Canada, we need a system in which psychiatrists provide diagnostic assessments and treatment recommendations. That statement is notable for what it leaves out: treatment, including psychotherapy and any continuing psychiatric care by the psychiatrist. In The Globe and Mail, Dr. Kurdyak and Dr. Goldbloom admit that in the U.S. system, this role shift makes psychiatrists limited to rapid, high-volume psychiatric drug consultations. Diagnose, overdose, adios.

Leave aside that authors are incorrect about Australia: that country publicly funds continuing care, and long-term intensive psychotherapy, up to and including psychoanalysis.
Open this photo in gallery

A colloquium of psychiatric residents meets in Topeka, Kansas, in 1949.

NYT/The New York Times

There was something very odd about the authors recommendation that Canada move to a U.S.-style managed-care-inspired model to improve access. At the beginning of their study, they wrote that in the United States, 66 per cent of primary-care physicians have trouble finding a psychiatrist for people with mental-health problems, whereas in Canada, 35 per cent of family doctors have that problem. So why is their solution to increasing access that Canada should move to a U.S.-style system?

Story continues below advertisement

Moving to a U.S. managed-care model will double our problem of accessing psychiatrists. Access worsens when the medical specialists who are trained to treat mental illness cease to provide continuing care. And access will be worse than that in Ontario if the proposal goes through, because it will also disincentive psychotherapy by family physicians and psychiatrists both.

So, what will happen to the patients?

The authors say they can be referred to psychologists and social workers. It is true that many in these professions do excellent psychotherapy, as do other non-medical psychotherapists. But these professions are not covered by OHIP, only rarely insured for full treatments, and their members dont practice medical psychotherapy. As well, psychologists bill substantially more than physicians who are paid by OHIP for psychotherapy. Obviously, the government will not fund a service it has just eliminated. And psychologists would be unlikely take a steep pay cut to do it.

A new pilot program, of non-medical therapists, is being funded in Ontario. It is welcome, but it is only for a few kinds of short-term psychotherapies. It wont begin to make up for all the psychiatrists and family doctors who would no longer practise psychotherapy under the Health Ministry proposals. And the fact that this would put an end to publicly funded intensive psychotherapy doesnt bother Dr. Kurdyak and his co-authors, who elsewhere compared it to non-essential cosmetic surgery, resurrecting the stigmatizing idea that the patients who get it are the worried well, and vain to boot.

In other words, those patients people such as Mr. A. will be on their own.

Open this photo in gallery

'It excites me to think that some of the best days of our lives haven't happened yet!!!', reads one message on a white board for patients at CAMH's Queen Street facility.

JENNIFER ROBERTS/The Globe and Mail

THE COVENANT

People will die if these changes go through. Patients with eating disorders (the highest mortality among all mental health disorders), those with suicidal tendencies, past trauma, mood disorders, addictions and psychosis, among others, all need ongoing care. Dr. Ronald Ruskin, who currently directs a partial hospitalization program at Mount Sinai Hospital for such people as they transfer from inpatient psychiatric admissions to outpatient work, has grave concerns. We save countless lives by carefully monitoring patients and enhancing their coping ability, and this arbitrary limit robs us of the psychotherapeutic tools we need to do our work. Patients will deteriorate because of this new MOH policy. I fear many will succumb to illness and die.

The covenant the government made with the people of Canada, and its physicians, when it moved into nationalized health care, was not that the government would play doctor, but that it would become an insurance agency that would cover medical care for the entire population. This meant that some people, because they are sicker, would use more resources than those who were blessed with better health. Provincial plans work by spreading risk through the entire population, because a large population is required to pay for them from their taxes. As such, we assure all that should they get sick, they will get coverage and we wont deny treatment if you break your arm just because thats not as serious as cancer. We dont play patients off against each other.

We also didnt choose to only treat those who are sickest today. That is because, without preventative care, people who may not be the sickest today could become sicker tomorrow. Its imprudent to wait until a person is a full-blown diabetic to treat him or her; intervening early with dietary changes, for instance is far more humane and leads to huge savings.

Just as physical illnesses can evolve and get worse, so can mental diseases.

Mr. A, my patient with the spinal-cord injury, obviously needed care postinjury. But he also said the childhood trauma he had from before the injury would have ruined his life, if untreated. A wise and humane system would not have withheld treatment from him even if he had a functioning spinal cord.

It is laudable that the Ministry of Health wants treatment for those with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and depression, who are unquestionably ill, and to help those people get the resources needed. So do most physicians. And we also need to be able to treat other people who are also unquestionably ill, who require a different mode of intervention, even if it involves not only medication, but psychotherapy. It is not remotely overused. This years OHIP numbers show that, at most, 1 per cent of psychiatrists patients currently get intensive long-term psychotherapy, as the ministry defines it. It is being prescribed very selectively, for those in need.

It makes no sense to assume that because one has a condition that responds to intensive psychotherapeutic treatment that it somehow isnt medical, or medically appropriate. It makes sense to use mental techniques as part of treating mental illness, and patients want it. It is intellectually reckless to ignore the science that shows these treatments work. And it is cavalier to say such suffering patients needs dont align with some arbitrary conception of public need. Stigmatizing one group of patients to get resources for another group is counterproductive and wrong.

Story continues below advertisement

Above all, the idea that there is only one kind of therapy that works short-term is misinformed. My advice for Christine Elliott, Ontarios Minister of Health: You did not develop this travesty of a proposal. You inherited it when you took office. Imagine what it would be like to meet such patients as mine, and look them in the eye, and explain why your ministry is taking away their treatment.

William Osler, the great Canadian physician, said, The good physician treats the disease; the great physician treats the patient who has the disease. That distinction makes all the difference in mental illness, because when we are mentally ill, our whole person is affected. And because each patient, each whole, such as Mr. A, is unique, the kind of treatment and its length cant be determined by a decree from someone on high who has never encountered his complexity. The ideas that everyone gets the same treatment carelessly disregards the breakthrough insight that we need personalized medicine, the kind that is proving to be so helpful now in cancer treatment.

Its like saying every bridge in Ontario will be 24 metres, regardless of the body of water it is over. Neither I (nor anyone else) can tell in advance exactly how many sessions Mr. A will need, and this isnt because Im inexperienced or unscientific but because I have 30 years of experience, and value a scientific approach, which means: I dont make stuff up.

The Ministry of Health should withdraw the destructive proposal that will end up costing our system a fortune, and prolong untold pain. They should become better informed and advised.

As for Mr. A., he tells me, his psychotherapy is working. In a way, Ive had the loss of everything, but because of the psychotherapy, I have a solidity and groundedness I never imagined possible for me.

That is why he drives himself to my office, through snow and sleet in his motorized wheelchair. No roof overhead.
Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

Health care

Ontario

View more suggestions in Following
Read more about following topics and authors
Follow us on Twitter @globedebate Opens in a new window
Report an error
118 Comments

You can view the article here: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-in-ontario-a-battle-for-the-soul-of-psychiatry/

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by sigismund on December 22, 2020, at 12:37:26

In reply to Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by jay2112 on December 21, 2020, at 22:02:06

>Plus, I tried Suboxone and Methadone (a powerful NMDA antagonist) which just made me feel more dissociation..bad. Lower doses seemed ok, but they always want to crank up my dose!! Should I just tell them, "..please leave me on a lower dose..I feel better"?

Yes.

They don't listen because of the assumption that you want a lower dose so you can enjoy street opiates.

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » sigismund

Posted by jay2112 on December 22, 2020, at 12:43:41

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by sigismund on December 22, 2020, at 12:37:26

> >Plus, I tried Suboxone and Methadone (a powerful NMDA antagonist) which just made me feel more dissociation..bad. Lower doses seemed ok, but they always want to crank up my dose!! Should I just tell them, "..please leave me on a lower dose..I feel better"?
>
> Yes.
>
> They don't listen because of the assumption that you want a lower dose so you can enjoy street opiates.

There, that is so true! But, they get a urine test everytime one goes to the clinic. I have tried 5 times, and they are alway's like.."..what's YOUR problem??". I want to go again, today or tomorrow, before Xmas and our Covid lockdown...I am scared to even ask.

Jay

 

They told me they are 'closed till next year'!!!

Posted by jay2112 on December 22, 2020, at 13:00:00

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » sigismund, posted by jay2112 on December 22, 2020, at 12:43:41

Just tried to call the rehab clinic, and was told "..We are closed until next year. Sorry." F*** sakes!!! They told me "Go to emerg department at hospital." DAMN! Today is my birthday....and no one gives a f***. Merry ****ing Xmas... :(

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » undopaminergic

Posted by jay2112 on December 22, 2020, at 16:13:37

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by undopaminergic on December 22, 2020, at 0:59:10

> > Hey guys..
> >
> > Do you have problems with dissociation? I have been searching high and low for problems with this. I feel like I am lost in a world, and on some type of anesthetic.
> >
>
> Yes, I have depersonalisation, derealisation, and multiple personalities. I don't know what to do about it, but I'm used to it.
>
> -undopaminergic
>

Now, you are not on any meds, right? Well, like Dr Peter Kramer explained well, there are side effects of meds, and of not taking them. Have you been able to get any talk therapy/Psychotherapy?
How is your support system?

How are you living with DID? Does it cause any stress or discomfort? I have a friend who is learning specifically about how to, not "treat"...I think it is only a "disorder" if it causes stress or challenges in your life...but work with people who have DID. There are so many silly, and hurtful, myths about it.

I have, at times, found serotogenic meds, at high doses, helps produce a bit more endogenous serotonin, which activates a bit of cholinergic activity...which, in small doses, can have antidepressant properties.

Jay

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » jay2112

Posted by sigismund on December 22, 2020, at 19:47:51

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » sigismund, posted by jay2112 on December 22, 2020, at 12:43:41

And if you are on a higher dose they can always threaten you with a harsh reduction, or restrict takeaways, so you can't function or travel normally.

I ended up thinking I would rather sleep under a bridge than be treated like that.

So, you are saying they want to raise your dose?

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by sigismund on December 22, 2020, at 19:50:37

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » jay2112, posted by sigismund on December 22, 2020, at 19:47:51

Still, not so bad as Russia. I heard about an admiral with cancer who needed a narcotic. For which 3 doctors' signatures are needed. It took so long to organise the third that he shot himself in the head.

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by rjlockhart37 on December 22, 2020, at 20:02:57

In reply to Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by jay2112 on December 21, 2020, at 22:02:06

the best thing i recommend for dissociation is a benzo, perferable one that is not as potent. Bromazepam can make dissociation a bit worse. It depends on benzo.

I had disscoiation about 16 years ago in high school, it was even posted here on babble, i was in a dream everywhere i went...it was a dream reality stopped being sharp and stable. It was because of severe stress with school and adderall.

You could look into a beta blocker to stop noradrenaline activty

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by rjlockhart37 on December 22, 2020, at 20:08:32

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by rjlockhart37 on December 22, 2020, at 20:02:57

we'll im reading mixed reviews of using benzos for PTSD, i googed it researched a bit....said its not the best for PTSD. I'm really tired right now, someting happened at home ill have to get into later....

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by rjlockhart37 on December 22, 2020, at 23:15:16

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by rjlockhart37 on December 22, 2020, at 20:08:32

yeah benzos excaserbate dissociation, only thing i researched was antidepressants and antipsychotics, thats the most general term there is....they didnt have any certain meds

only thing i can say enducated guess to help bring back to reality, like provigil or something.

yes prozac at 80mg makes me sleep soothing because of the serotonin feeling. It's the least selective SSRI, which means it is more broader in reptake sites, unlike paxil and celexa which are very selective on serotonin sites

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by undopaminergic on December 23, 2020, at 2:25:10

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » undopaminergic, posted by jay2112 on December 22, 2020, at 16:13:37

>
> Now, you are not on any meds, right? Well,
>

Yes I am.

> like Dr Peter Kramer explained well, there are side effects of meds, and of not taking them. Have you been able to get any talk therapy/Psychotherapy?
>

Not much.

> How is your support system?
>

My parents are alive, and I have a brother. They're not usually involved with anything to do with my disorders.

> How are you living with DID? Does it cause any stress or discomfort?
>

No, unless you consider the depersonalisation-derealisation to be part of DID.

> I have a friend who is learning specifically about how to, not "treat"...I think it is only a "disorder" if it causes stress or challenges in your life...but work with people who have DID. There are so many silly, and hurtful, myths about it.
>

Yes, like the myth that it doesn't exist.

> I have, at times, found serotogenic meds, at high doses, helps produce a bit more endogenous serotonin, which activates a bit of cholinergic activity...which, in small doses, can have antidepressant properties.
>

I don't know about that. Maybe. But not if you're already hypercholinergic. I think I am.

-undopaminergic

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by Lamdage22 on December 23, 2020, at 3:51:13

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by undopaminergic on December 23, 2020, at 2:25:10

Yeah I can't really contribute anything useful here. When I am under great distress, I usually pray. God is a great listener.

Somehow this board has gone from Antidepressants to controlled substances

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by Lamdage22 on December 23, 2020, at 3:53:22

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by Lamdage22 on December 23, 2020, at 3:51:13

Can't help you with those. I avoid them.

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by undopaminergic on December 23, 2020, at 7:20:51

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by Lamdage22 on December 23, 2020, at 3:51:13

> Yeah I can't really contribute anything useful here. When I am under great distress, I usually pray. God is a great listener.
>

In my experience, yes, I do feel God is always listening, but he seems to be roused into action in my life only when I'm feeling good already, and not when I am down and really *need* his help. It seems to me that he's a fun-loving sort of a guy.

One prank he pulled on me was to make me lose my iPod, and then give it back -- I dropped it outdoors and couldn't find it, but later it was in a cabinet indoors as if it had never been gone at all. I'm sure skeptics would say I dreamt or hallucinated the loss. I guess that is a possibility I can't dismiss, but does that matter? In either case, I experienced it all the same, and it seemed every bit as real as sitting here now writing this. If it wasn't an example of God's work, it was an example of the immense, god-like, powers of the mind, to be able to play such as trick on me!

-undopaminergic

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by Lamdage22 on December 23, 2020, at 13:47:01

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by undopaminergic on December 23, 2020, at 7:20:51

Hmm, I pray in bad times and later when my life is fine again I realize, that this "guy" doesn't let me down at least not in the long haul. So then I feel the praying helped. Sometimes we need to learn tough lessons. I trust that "he" will make the right choices for everyone involved.

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » jay2112

Posted by Hugh on December 24, 2020, at 15:34:45

In reply to Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by jay2112 on December 21, 2020, at 22:02:06

The beta-blocker pindolol is showing promise as a treatment for alcohol addiction, and for depression and anxiety. It hasn't been tested as a treatment for other addictions, but it might be worth a try. The dose usually used is 7.5 mg once per day.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2019-12-blood-pressure-drug-problem-drinkers.html

A thread about pindolol:

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20191019/msgs/1107190.html

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by rjlockhart37 on December 24, 2020, at 22:30:45

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » jay2112, posted by Hugh on December 24, 2020, at 15:34:45

Jay

Naltrexone is a good med for keeping you sober. They used it alot with addiction cases. You probaly may of heard of it. May just ask about it. Use disapline and resist and block urges to take oxy's.

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation

Posted by rjlockhart37 on December 26, 2020, at 13:01:57

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation, posted by rjlockhart37 on December 24, 2020, at 22:30:45

i didnt mean that in insulting way, it sounded like it. Just look up naltrexone, just read on it ... that's all. I didnt mean that to be insulting

 

Re: Dissociation..ALL..really weird trick!!!

Posted by Jay2112 on December 30, 2020, at 0:55:49

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » jay2112, posted by sigismund on December 22, 2020, at 19:47:51

Well, once I was on a high dose of Cymbalta (major norepinephrine agonist) and Wellbutrin (nor-dopamine agonist) both first thing in the morning (I need VERY high doses..I was on 120mg of Cymbalta!!) and it would push me through the day...but like a maniac!!..lol)...THEN at about 9pm, I would pop 35mg of the most potent SRI, Lexapro/Cipralex. 35 f'in mg's!!! It made me bathe in such a calm, relaxing high.....I would put on Madonna's Ray of Light disc, and cry for a bit....feel like I was in a beautiful trance...resolve some of my past trauma issues.

So, I am currently trying a high dose of Anafranil, a medium dose of Effexor, to get to that Serotonin high...where it starts to affect Oxytocin, the Love chemical. It worked in the past with high dose Prozac (120mg) and Nortriptyline (75 mg). I use(d) low dose Risperdal to kill the SRI 5-ht agonism..which is the 'irritable' serotonin receptor.

I figure, if I am going to try all this stuff, I am going to (safely) max the hell out of these drugs! Anyhow, just IMHO...YMMV, etc...

Jay

 

Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » Hugh

Posted by Jay2112 on December 30, 2020, at 0:59:02

In reply to Re: Lamdage + Rj.. et al Dissociation » jay2112, posted by Hugh on December 24, 2020, at 15:34:45

> The beta-blocker pindolol is showing promise as a treatment for alcohol addiction, and for depression and anxiety. It hasn't been tested as a treatment for other addictions, but it might be worth a try. The dose usually used is 7.5 mg once per day.
>
> https://medicalxpress.com/news/2019-12-blood-pressure-drug-problem-drinkers.html
>
> A thread about pindolol:
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20191019/msgs/1107190.html

Hugh....thanks so kindly for that!! I am going to look into Pindolol...as well as Trandate.....another beta-blocker.

Jau


Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] 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.