• Welcome! SanctionedSuicide is a forum for the discussion of mental illness and suicide. Please read our rules and our Principles.
    If you are in need of immediate support, please call the Samaritans hotline at (877) 870-4673, or check our recovery resources.

NOISYMIND

NOISYMIND

Everyday I wake up I wanna die again.
Sep 11, 2018
164
I can certainly say I have severe mental illnesses, but I’ve never been to a doctor and been clinically diagnosed. I’m not sure what I need it for and how it would possibly affect my personal life, but is it better to have a mental health checkup?
 
T

Taylored

I've figured it out
Sep 20, 2018
321
I mean when I got my diagnosis i got quickly deprived of many liberties by my Family. Depending on what Illness sometimes It's better to not go and get it diagnosed if you want to avoid medication or other activities usually forced on you. Changes to social life wouldn't be really apparent unless you have friends or a community that discriminates. Getting a health checkup Isn't always necessary but if you feel something is wrong and want it corrected It's a good idea to go if you keep everything in mind.
 
NOISYMIND

NOISYMIND

Everyday I wake up I wanna die again.
Sep 11, 2018
164
I mean when I got my diagnosis i got quickly deprived of many liberties by my Family. Depending on what Illness sometimes It's better to not go and get it diagnosed if you want to avoid medication or other activities usually forced on you. Changes to social life wouldn't be really apparent unless you have friends or a community that discriminates. Getting a health checkup Isn't always necessary but if you feel something is wrong and want it corrected It's a good idea to go if you keep everything in mind.

Thanks for the advice Tay. I want to prove to my family that I’m not making things up but am also scared of being deprived of liberty. That’s why I’ve been unsure about it.
 
B

Ben

-
Sep 12, 2018
785
I can certainly say I have severe mental illnesses, but I’ve never been to a doctor and been clinically diagnosed. I’m not sure what I need it for and how it would possibly affect my personal life, but is it better to have a mental health checkup?

Depends how curious you are. Sure a doctor will be able to prove to your family you have a chemical imbalance..but that will lead to pressure of recovery. If you don’t want to entertain the thought of recovery, then it may not be best idea. Being proven right will cause more barriers in your goal to KTB.

But if you think maybe, they can help you, I encourage you to at least get a professional opinion. It’s a road that has failed many, but it might not fail you if you have never tried.
 
Roehannta

Roehannta

Member
Sep 22, 2018
55
Depends how curious you are. Sure a doctor will be able to prove to your family you have a chemical imbalance..but that will lead to pressure of recovery. If you don’t want to entertain the thought of recovery, then it may not be best idea. Being proven right will cause more barriers in your goal to KTB.

But if you think maybe, they can help you, I encourage you to at least get a professional opinion. It’s a road that has failed many, but it might not fail you if you have never tried.

It’s not too often that I see very good advice on here. Not everybody wants to hear good advice. But it’s always good for them to see it at least .
 
B

Ben

-
Sep 12, 2018
785
It’s not too often that I see very good advice on here. Not everybody wants to hear good advice. But it’s always good for them to see it at least .

I try to be careful when giving advice. I only want to support, not debate. It’s not my place to tell somebody what they should and shouldn’t do, so I cover both sides to make it clear I’m not pushing an agenda.
 
Roehannta

Roehannta

Member
Sep 22, 2018
55
I try to be careful when giving advice. I only want to support, not debate. It’s not my place to tell somebody what they should and shouldn’t do, so I cover both sides to make it clear I’m not pushing an agenda.


Either way it was a good to see.
 
NOISYMIND

NOISYMIND

Everyday I wake up I wanna die again.
Sep 11, 2018
164
Depends how curious you are. Sure a doctor will be able to prove to your family you have a chemical imbalance..but that will lead to pressure of recovery. If you don’t want to entertain the thought of recovery, then it may not be best idea. Being proven right will cause more barriers in your goal to KTB.

But if you think maybe, they can help you, I encourage you to at least get a professional opinion. It’s a road that has failed many, but it might not fail you if you have never tried.

Thank you Ben. That’s a good point to consider. My family doesn’t seem to know that I’m still suicidal. Maybe I should keep it unproven in case I want to CTB anytime...
 
IfHeDiesHeDies

IfHeDiesHeDies

-
Sep 12, 2018
383
Sayo

Sayo

Not 2B
Aug 22, 2018
520
I can't judge how your family would treat you if you were diagnosed, or how receptive to a diagnosis they would be - that they dismiss you is already a bit concerning.

I do encourage you if you are interested in exploring treatment to do so though. Just always research anything you're prescribed and/or diagnosed with thoroughly, try to keep track of how you feel as you go through treatment so you can measure its impact over time (whether it's side effects or an uptick in mood), and be prepared to bring up concerns you have with your doctors / see a different one if you're worried. Plenty of them will give you dismissive answers but not at all, and the only person who can advocate for yourself in the healthcare system is you unfortunately.

I think it's very sad that so many people in awful situations reacting rationally to the world around them now believe just have a chemical imbalance. It is like convincing people with gunshot wounds that their low blood volume is just a weird and inextricable idiosyncrasy of their body. I am not saying present circumstances are all to blame, as someone with an inherited mental illness - just that it's increasingly used to mystify mental illness as intrinsic brain dysfunction.
 
satou

satou

not yet
Sep 3, 2018
225
I can certainly say I have severe mental illnesses, but I’ve never been to a doctor and been clinically diagnosed. I’m not sure what I need it for and how it would possibly affect my personal life, but is it better to have a mental health checkup?

Some advice. I don't know how much of it is true elsewhere as there are probably differences between countries:
  • Diagnosis generally tends to be step one in a process of therapy. Requesting only a diagnosis might be troublesome, expect them to push you towards therapy. Of course you can always quit after getting diagnosed.
  • If you go to a mental health institution specialized in anxiety disorders, expect to be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder. If they specialize in personality disorders, you will be diagnosed with a personality disorder. If they primarily treat mood disorders, that is the label you will get.
  • If you do go for therapy, remember that there are good and bad therapists out there. If you don't feel comfortable with a therapist, request a new one instead of sticking with your current one. Warning signs are when therapists tell you all your problems can be fixed (if only you start having the right thoughts), those that will not let you disagree with them (usually by telling you that you don't understand) or when a therapist often refers to your unconscious mind (which by definition is inaccessible to you, it's just a lazy way to get you to believe them).
  • Find a therapist that will help you as a person, not one that wants to treat your diagnosis. A diagnosis is there to more easily get started and to facilitate communication between mental health professionals. It shouldn't define you as a person.
 
NOISYMIND

NOISYMIND

Everyday I wake up I wanna die again.
Sep 11, 2018
164
Some advice. I don't know how much of it is true elsewhere as there are probably differences between countries:
  • Diagnosis generally tends to be step one in a process of therapy. Requesting only a diagnosis might be troublesome, expect them to push you towards therapy. Of course you can always quit after getting diagnosed.
  • If you go to a mental health institution specialized in anxiety disorders, expect to be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder. If they specialize in personality disorders, you will be diagnosed with a personality disorder. If they primarily treat mood disorders, that is the label you will get.
  • If you do go for therapy, remember that there are good and bad therapists out there. If you don't feel comfortable with a therapist, request a new one instead of sticking with your current one. Warning signs are when therapists tell you all your problems can be fixed (if only you start having the right thoughts), those that will not let you disagree with them (usually by telling you that you don't understand) or when a therapist often refers to your unconscious mind (which by definition is inaccessible to you, it's just a lazy way to get you to believe them).
  • Find a therapist that will help you as a person, not one that wants to treat your diagnosis. A diagnosis is there to more easily get started and to facilitate communication between mental health professionals. It shouldn't define you as a person.

Thanks for guiding me. This indeed helps a lot!

Finding a right therapist can be quite challenging as it requires a lot of time and money (it isn’t covered by our national insurance). Thus I think I’m good for now but I’ll keep your words in mind. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Angel Goddess
RM5998

RM5998

Sack of Meat
Sep 3, 2018
2,206
I think it's very sad that so many people in awful situations reacting rationally to the world around them now believe just have a chemical imbalance. It is like convincing people with gunshot wounds that their low blood volume is just a weird and inextricable idiosyncrasy of their body. I am not saying present circumstances are all to blame, as someone with an inherited mental illness - just that it's increasingly used to mystify mental illness as intrinsic brain dysfunction.

Probably the closest analogy possible is computer repair - due to the close interaction of hardware and software, troubleshooting for problems is often difficult. And software being a somewhat emergent property of the machine, tracing the hardware interactions that cause software to err are difficult to work through. Not to mention that the brain's properties are to a large extent emergent from its structure, which we hardly understand well enough. I'd say that the correct analogy would be to convince people that their computer's GPU has gone bust due to some untraceable power problems, and to live with that till the computer gets junked. Still a shitty situation, but the lack of options and clarity on the repairman's part is more clear.
 
Sayo

Sayo

Not 2B
Aug 22, 2018
520
Probably the closest analogy possible is computer repair - due to the close interaction of hardware and software, troubleshooting for problems is often difficult. And software being a somewhat emergent property of the machine, tracing the hardware interactions that cause software to err are difficult to work through. Not to mention that the brain's properties are to a large extent emergent from its structure, which we hardly understand well enough. I'd say that the correct analogy would be to convince people that their computer's GPU has gone bust due to some untraceable power problems, and to live with that till the computer gets junked. Still a shitty situation, but the lack of options and clarity on the repairman's part is more clear.
Nah, while I would love to adopt this analogy in part due to my desire to be a cybernetic life form, I disagree that it's a reflection of lack of knowledge but rather an ignorance of knowledge (and consensus) that varies from individual to individual due to heuristic issues in the field. That's why I used another medical analogy, because there is not a real political incentive influencing the model adopted for - and the science done for - most basic computer problems. When we talk about low blood pressure and volume in the context of massive haemorrhage, it's not the same thing as talking about it in the context of other ailments, even though the physiological mechanisms can be similar. 'Chemical imbalance' almost becomes a layer of abstraction because it ignores what we do understand about developmental impact on children and about the brain's responses to external stimuli, as well as serious social problems that contribute to alterations in psychology, and focuses on the effect in a way that essentially obfuscates the issues.

If you overheat your computer, it has protective mechanisms on multiple levels designed to shut itself down before it's irreversibly damaged. Now if your laptop isn't properly ventilated and it shuts down, to many end users it's just crashing, and a nuisance. But it's different to recurrent crashing due to corrupting memory, of course. Depression is extremely well-studied and we can say heuristically as not end users that we understand there are many issues with attributing it to even one physiological cause, let alone one cause at all. What's semi mystical is some of the details and the sheer variety of mechanisms, which then resist treatment.

Additionally, much of the evidence for the different biochemical models of depression comes from studying how treatment of it works, which has very little to do with the cause of depression and only to do with the pathophysiology of it. There are other physiological issues where treating, say, serotonin dysregulation may not make sense, and many people show no response or only get worse. And thinking more broadly, someone who is in an exploitative social situation but has no other issues may develop depression, and these problems may get worse from depressed behaviour: self-isolation, ideational kindling, addictions, anhedonia. All these factors have been well-studied, too. And then of course it is absurd to act like that person is not on some level developing predictably and to attribute it simply to the imbalance that arises is to obfuscate the links to the treatable maladaptations and the causes. And there is real incentive to ignore what these typical causes are and the populations that are at risk or predisposed (which again makes it sound like something that arises from the patient as an individual rather than a manifestation of the experiences of a social condition - dangerous when dealing with psychological illnesses and destigmatisation).

We understand the developmental or lifestyle role on some level for most diseases; the brain is a very complex organ and consciousness itself is not greatly-understood but this is actually a form of mind-body duality in itself, to focus on it separately from the systems above it. And while most people will agree that there is a social or environmental component to depression - in fact they will often batter people with the idea that mental illness isn't a real thing that happens in the brain because you can't see it - they downplay it or misunderstand that it's not necessarily an individualistic component. And people end up thinking it's their brains that are majorly predisposed to being 'imbalanced' as opposed to it being imbalanced by the complex trauma and stress of their situation, especially since we see results (functioning, clinical outcomes, etc.) as so important.

And that is why therapy is usually recommended along with drugs, only many of the dominant frameworks in therapy take similarly obfuscating approaches. For many situations they can only help you cope in order to try to solve your own problems or deal with the symptoms of your mental illness precisely because therapy is typically individual-centred. And the failings of this model become really evident to me because I can see where it has succeeded for me and also where it will just never be able to do anything because I am, for example, dealing with economic, social, and colonial subjugation. Is it correct to teach people self-blame in order to cope with being alienated from their labour (not a rhetorical question)? etc.*

And that is why my analogy is sound imo. If we could just replace brains or otherwise have a more comprehensive way of treating depression it might be different, although it might have different ethical issues, like the fact that being able to treat an issue almost certainly doesn't justify inflicting it.

* in writing this I have to mention that I spent years attempting to get DBT, and while my therapist inexplicably stopped giving me DBT in exchange for random talk therapy so I need to sort that out, it's got a better basis

Sorry for the long post lol
 
RM5998

RM5998

Sack of Meat
Sep 3, 2018
2,206
Nah, while I would love to adopt this analogy in part due to my desire to be a cybernetic life form, I disagree that it's a reflection of lack of knowledge but rather an ignorance of knowledge (and consensus) that varies from individual to individual due to heuristic issues in the field. That's why I used another medical analogy, because there is not a real political incentive influencing the model adopted for - and the science done for - most basic computer problems. When we talk about low blood pressure and volume in the context of massive haemorrhage, it's not the same thing as talking about it in the context of other ailments, even though the physiological mechanisms can be similar. 'Chemical imbalance' almost becomes a layer of abstraction because it ignores what we do understand about developmental impact on children and about the brain's responses to external stimuli, as well as serious social problems that contribute to alterations in psychology, and focuses on the effect in a way that essentially obfuscates the issues.

If you overheat your computer, it has protective mechanisms on multiple levels designed to shut itself down before it's irreversibly damaged. Now if your laptop isn't properly ventilated and it shuts down, to many end users it's just crashing, and a nuisance. But it's different to recurrent crashing due to corrupting memory, of course. Depression is extremely well-studied and we can say heuristically as not end users that we understand there are many issues with attributing it to even one physiological cause, let alone one cause at all. What's semi mystical is some of the details and the sheer variety of mechanisms, which then resist treatment.

Additionally, much of the evidence for the different biochemical models of depression comes from studying how treatment of it works, which has very little to do with the cause of depression and only to do with the pathophysiology of it. There are other physiological issues where treating, say, serotonin dysregulation may not make sense, and many people show no response or only get worse. And thinking more broadly, someone who is in an exploitative social situation but has no other issues may develop depression, and these problems may get worse from depressed behaviour: self-isolation, ideational kindling, addictions, anhedonia. All these factors have been well-studied, too. And then of course it is absurd to act like that person is not on some level developing predictably and to attribute it simply to the imbalance that arises is to obfuscate the links to the treatable maladaptations and the causes. And there is real incentive to ignore what these typical causes are and the populations that are at risk or predisposed (which again makes it sound like something that arises from the patient as an individual rather than a manifestation of the experiences of a social condition - dangerous when dealing with psychological illnesses and destigmatisation).

We understand the developmental or lifestyle role on some level for most diseases; the brain is a very complex organ and consciousness itself is not greatly-understood but this is actually a form of mind-body duality in itself, to focus on it separately from the systems above it. And while most people will agree that there is a social or environmental component to depression - in fact they will often batter people with the idea that mental illness isn't a real thing that happens in the brain because you can't see it - they downplay it or misunderstand that it's not necessarily an individualistic component. And people end up thinking it's their brains that are majorly predisposed to being 'imbalanced' as opposed to it being imbalanced by the complex trauma and stress of their situation, especially since we see results (functioning, clinical outcomes, etc.) as so important.

And that is why therapy is usually recommended along with drugs, only many of the dominant frameworks in therapy take similarly obfuscating approaches. For many situations they can only help you cope in order to try to solve your own problems or deal with the symptoms of your mental illness precisely because therapy is typically individual-centred. And the failings of this model become really evident to me because I can see where it has succeeded for me and also where it will just never be able to do anything because I am, for example, dealing with economic, social, and colonial subjugation. Is it correct to teach people self-blame in order to cope with being alienated from their labour (not a rhetorical question)? etc.*

And that is why my analogy is sound imo. If we could just replace brains or otherwise have a more comprehensive way of treating depression it might be different, although it might have different ethical issues, like the fact that being able to treat an issue almost certainly doesn't justify inflicting it.

* in writing this I have to mention that I spent years attempting to get DBT, and while my therapist inexplicably stopped giving me DBT in exchange for random talk therapy so I need to sort that out, it's got a better basis

Sorry for the long post lol

It seems we went off on two different tracks... welp.

What I was trying to say is that the way the causes behind a computer crash would be measurable in the same way as the causes behind a human being crashing (mentally). A laptop might overheat because of dust clogging the fans, absurdly high ambient temperature, blocking of the exhaust ports, bad power supply regulation, and a combination of those - in the same way that multiple factors contribute to depression. The main difference there is the few orders of magnitude difference between the complexity of a person and a laptop, making detailed analysis difficult. The comprehensive treatment we need would require an objective analysis of people in a way that most people would find uncomfortable. It's easy to objectively analyze a damaged laptop - not so easy to objectively analyse a damaged human. To actually understand depression, we need to have people who would study this subject without trying to abstract these details. And the fundamental problem lies in this being impossible - is it even possible to have a controlled study on these ideas for patients when doctors are subject to having to save people? And how many subjects would it need to be able to have a comprehensive outlook on how all these factors work and interact?

I don't even know if we're talking about the same thing anymore.
 
Z

zadig777

naive fool
Sep 18, 2018
180
tell me ur symptoms detaily so i can try to help
i have been on lots psy meds..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Angel Goddess
Sayo

Sayo

Not 2B
Aug 22, 2018
520
It seems we went off on two different tracks... welp.

What I was trying to say is that the way the causes behind a computer crash would be measurable in the same way as the causes behind a human being crashing (mentally). A laptop might overheat because of dust clogging the fans, absurdly high ambient temperature, blocking of the exhaust ports, bad power supply regulation, and a combination of those - in the same way that multiple factors contribute to depression. The main difference there is the few orders of magnitude difference between the complexity of a person and a laptop, making detailed analysis difficult. The comprehensive treatment we need would require an objective analysis of people in a way that most people would find uncomfortable. It's easy to objectively analyze a damaged laptop - not so easy to objectively analyse a damaged human. To actually understand depression, we need to have people who would study this subject without trying to abstract these details. And the fundamental problem lies in this being impossible - is it even possible to have a controlled study on these ideas for patients when doctors are subject to having to save people? And how many subjects would it need to be able to have a comprehensive outlook on how all these factors work and interact?

I don't even know if we're talking about the same thing anymore.
Hm, no, I don't think we were talking about different things, although I definitely started going on a tangent. I do think I misunderstood your perspective on purely biomedical treatment, though, and the intent behind your analogy. Obviously you are right - and furthermore, these factors are being selectively analysed in the human context because of the conditions which influence what science is funded, what mental health policy is enacted (and then what can be studied, etc. As I mentioned, even if it were physically possible to find a 'perfect' multifocal treatment on a pathophysiological level, I don't find it a neutral proposition, as a lot of resistance to preventative treatment arises from resistance to societal change. This is why I challenged what I perceived to be a perception of good faith ignorance. You may have understood that anyway, I just felt uneasy not clarifying myself since it wasn't directly responded to.

Sorry for the necro, just didn't want to leave this unacknowledged!
 
NOISYMIND

NOISYMIND

Everyday I wake up I wanna die again.
Sep 11, 2018
164
Psychiatric doctors can take info and use it against the patient, like the police do.
Be very careful what you say.

Not sure if it’s the same case in my country but I will be careful if I go to one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Angel Goddess
FullFat

FullFat

^best order at Micky-D's ever
Apr 27, 2018
375
Okay, I have decided to stick to my old plan - Not getting any medical help or checkup. It seems like they will 100% prescribe you meds and more mental problems would be made. I don’t want to risk it :(

Actually, a lot of the therapists I've seen are too anti-medication for my tastes. I am in the southeastern US though. Not sure if it makes a difference, but Christianity is definitely a bigger factor here, and many religious Christians are very anti-med. If you see a therapist, odds are they aren't a psychiatrist as well. I have only encountered one psychiatrist who also did therapy. A therapist (or your general practitioner) would need to refer you to a psychiatrist for you to be put on meds. Only MDs can prescribe them.
 
Last edited:
FullFat

FullFat

^best order at Micky-D's ever
Apr 27, 2018
375
I can certainly say I have severe mental illnesses, but I’ve never been to a doctor and been clinically diagnosed. I’m not sure what I need it for and how it would possibly affect my personal life, but is it better to have a mental health checkup?

A visit with a good therapist may help you better understand the nature of your problems. They can even reveal symptoms you never noticed before. However, there is a surprising amount of variability between therapists, so if their diagnosis does not make sense, it might be a good idea to get a second opinion. Keep in mind though that a lot of therapy will end up being similar regardless of the specific diagnosis - assuming, that is, that you do not have problems with psychosis, mania, or borderline personality disorder. You should also be aware of the fact that comorbidity is the rule, not the exception, in mental disorders. Depression and anxiety are the classic examples. Many people are diagnosed with both and/or they may switch back and forth between them over time.

What I mean to say by all this is that a diagnosis can be worthwhile, but it may not define your mental illness with the clarity and precision that one would like. I would also like to add that, assuming your diagnosis isn't wildly off the mark, rapport with your therapist matters much more than your specific diagnosis and even the particular methods they use to treat you (which, like I said, end up being remarkably similar across disorders anyway). For what it's worth, I do not even know my formal diagnosis. From what my therapists have talked to me about and the problems I have brought up with them, my guess is major depressive disorder (MDD), general anxiety disorder (GAD), and alcohol use disorder (AUD).

Overall, even though I have given you a mixed bag of positives and negatives, I would recommend seeing at least one therapist before you throw in the towel. As you are a minor though, I'm aware that this will not be as private and under your control as it should be ideally. You know your parents better than I do, and their likely response to a diagnosis is something to consider.