|
In Reply to: Re: Peter's state of mind posted by Carol on May 25, 2004 at 09:18:14:
There's also the possibility of comorbidity of malignant narcicism, IF the ENTIRE psychopathy is medically related.
Perhaps willful EVIL is a better diagnosis? Please don't discount it, especially in the case of a cult leader.
One thing about a purely medical (and therefore insufficient) model: part of the psychopathy may be moral, as well.
The purely medical model (I.E.: "It's a disease, it came out of nowhere and GOT me, and whatever I do that's MORALLY WRONG is someone else's fault!") DOES GET FUNDED. "Follow the money".
Some psychopathies BEGIN with a poor moral choice, and lead to truly medical conditions, and certain recoveries and/or coping mechanisms must take a daily moral decision into account.
Hobart Mowrer, the Dean of American Psychology in the '70's (BEFORE the popularization of his student William Glasser, of REALITY THERAPY fame), used this approach with great success; he required a "secularized repentance", and relational restitution and monetary remuneration by his patients thought previously to be "hopeless", even some who were previously catatonic.
Some psychopathies are sudden and emergent phenomena, and may either go into remission,or remain, and even worsen. They may be either autogenic (beginning with the patient's own body chemistry imbalance), iatrogenic (caused by events leading to psychopathy; emergent or chronic), or both.
Most medical "powers that be" sadly follow the current misapplication of the Constitutional separation clause, which actually forbids the restriction of free exercise of religion, along with forbidding the creation of an official religion.
Excluding the moral aspect can be part of embracing poorly-defined science,as a replacement of sub-Christian doctrine like TF's.
I have been in complete remission from Major Depressive Disorder/Severe/Recurrent since last December. I've worked professionally as a Psych Tech for indigent and multiply-addicted psychopaths. I'm a Masters candidate in Healthcare Admin.
What I'm saying is in the literature, it's just not very popular.
A clinician may NOT "diagnose by prescription"--that's not recommended. Patients who are NOT non compos mentis are usually interviewed and/or observed in interaction with healthteam members, as well as other patients, to rule out certain things.
Also, meds like lithium carbonate positively affect bipolar depression, and have no effect on unipolar depression, but, again, experimenting witht the effects of various meds is usually done only as a last resort, and the effects of various meds vary by the individual, quite often.
And, ethanol totally wipes out the beneficial effects of lithium; druge interactions, comorbidity of Attention Deficit Disorder, and other things can throw of the "diagnose by prescription" approach--again, it's usually ill-advised.
Another variation is MDD with psychotic features, and the list goes on, so you're right about the occasional "crapshoot" approach. The psychotherapeutic "science" is far less hard and fast than the public usually assumes. Thank you for your valid public service!
The REAL Jesus (vs. TF's "other Jesus"--demonic)
DOES heal "the lunatic and the sore vexed" (physiologically and/or demonically afflicted).
Those insistent on the explanatory belief paradigm of rationalist/materialist/atheism tend to describe miracles in the therapeutic community as "unexplainable spontaneous remission".
There's a whole lot more "out there" than can be explained by the often too "soft" science of psychotherapy and psychology.
I know psychiatrists with decades of experience who'll tell you the same thing, like Hamlet ot Horatio, saying, in efffect, that "There are more things in Heaven and earth, than are dreamed of in your philosophy".
Thank you for your very interesting post, Peanut Gallery. You are right on the money regarding the value of familial support, comfort and encouragement. One of my three sisters is gravely bipolar, and multiply addicted; our family knows what you're talking about.
