![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 34 to 58 of 129. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on January 4, 2006, at 23:10:57
In reply to Re: Too afraid to get help » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 4, 2006, at 22:51:28
> It's rather to me like watching an alcoholic or a drug addict make several attempts.. and going back.
Yes. And it can be hard to watch. Well... It isn't so hard to watch when you don't care about the person... But it can be hard to watch when you do care about the person.
But you are right... Judgement isn't helpful.
I don't think Larry was being judgemental...
But I do think he was feeling frustrated.
And it can be hard (or next to impossible) to post helpful responses when one is feeling frustrated.At least... I know that it is really very hard for me.
And so in those times... It is better for me to walk away from the situation. Yes. Which isn't to say that I can't return later... But it is to say that sometimes I need to walk away for my own mental health yes.
> Regardless. It's the not taking the medication that is the issue here.
Possibly...
Though I think a combination of medication and therapy would be the most likely to have the best result...> Lot's of people don't do it. What the result is, or how it manifests itself is simply a roll of the dice. The intent, and the reason for not taking it is no more deserving of negative judgement because of the result.
I agree with you.
But I also think that people are most likely to feel frustrated when there is a course of action that has been demonstrated to help considerably in that person in the recent past...
They are less likely to feel frustrated when there is a course of action that nobody really knows whether it will help or not...> if you can't risk that it might not end up the way you wish, without becoming very upset, then don't get involved.
I had a therapist once... When I had very intense and recurrent suicidal urges... She told me one day... That the thing that she was most afraid of was that one of her clients would kill themself. She said that she understood that I was at high risk... And she said that she understood that she was likely to encounter clients who were at high risk. She said that she had a lot of supervision / therapy around that when she was training to become a therapist. She said that she did agonise for a while about whether she should be a therapist given her fear. She agonised about whether she should pass on clients who were at high risk because of her fear...
But she didn't walk away from me.
Well... Not for a long while. Not until DBT became a viable option for me.
She helped me.
But it was hard going...
Hard going for the both of us...I don't know.
Posted by Racer on January 4, 2006, at 23:29:24
In reply to Re: Too afraid to get help » LegWarmers, posted by Deneb on January 4, 2006, at 11:39:48
> > >
> > I don't see the logic? People go to a pdoc to prevent things like that from happening. An OD might make you look like yyou are manipulating and not be taken seriously. Just tell him you need his help, and why don't you go back to pdoc 1?
>
> I hadn't thought of it that way...that it might be seen as manipulation. I guess in order for it not to be seen as manipulation I would need to take a more serious OD. But that runs the risk of being put in the hospital.
>
>
Deneb? You know how people are trying to help you learn *why* they become so upset at some of your posts? I think I've put this out to you before, but here's a secret that the world has apparently been keeping from you: You don't have to be "the very worst in the world" in order to be in distress. It's perfectly OK -- ENCOURAGED, even -- to walk in there and say, "You know, I stopped the medications because I didn't think they were helping me -- and maybe that was a mistake," rather than "I'm going to have to OD now, so Rescue Me."I realize this is devastating to a lot of people, myself included, but ain't no one gonna rescue any of us, really. Sure, we can pull you out of the water today, but if you jump back in tomorrow, you'll be wet again. The idea is that once you get rescued, let's continue the water metaphor here, once your feet are on solid ground again, it's YOUR responsibility to avoid falling back in.
On the other hand, if next week you fall into quicksand, that's different. It's just that it does seem manipulative if you jump back into that lake one more time, after being rescued.
Deneb, I can't do anything for you. The best I can offer is this: you don't have to be standing on the bridge before you ask for help. You don't have to be ready to hurt yourself in order to "deserve" treatment. In fact, you'll get a whole lot more support if you show that *you* are supporting yourself, too.
Go forth, and support yourself, with out help. Good luck.
Posted by James K on January 5, 2006, at 1:46:02
In reply to Re: Too afraid to get help » LegWarmers, posted by Deneb on January 4, 2006, at 11:39:48
> If I'm ever going to OD again, I'd better do it AFTER my semester is over, perhaps in April or the beginning of May. Must remember to not breakdown before my semester is over.
> Deneb
Quotes from James' past -
"don't worry I won't do anything while my wife is out of town. That would be too hard on her."
So a couple of weeks later .32 blood alcohol, ambien, vicodin, uncounted stitches, and a near potassium coma. That was much easier on her. I wasn't even around to clean the blood.
"they won't take me seriously unless I show them I really need help."
now I have the words f**k the world carved into my chest with a razor blade. and safety pin holes all over my body. And hammer bruises all over my body. they knew I was serious they kept me in PICU involuntarily. I have a court record of an involuntary commitment.
I'm sharing my examples not because I think you'll end up in the same boats, but because it doesn't have to be necessary to end up in any boats. If I had taken care of business along the way, chances are I wouldn't have randomly woken up on two days about a year apart and begun dismantling myself.
My meds have kicked in, good night
keep safe,
James
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 5, 2006, at 6:08:52
In reply to Re: Too afraid to get help » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 4, 2006, at 23:10:57
> > It's rather to me like watching an alcoholic or a drug addict make several attempts.. and going back.
>
> Yes. And it can be hard to watch. Well... It isn't so hard to watch when you don't care about the person... But it can be hard to watch when you do care about the person.
>I don't think the level of caring is an issue I was addressing, I can'measure that, and I suppose if you don't care it wouldn't be so hard, but not getting frustrated, can also be an aspect of experience and education, and have nothing to do with caring less.
In the past work I've done I had to learn to be able to love and care without expecation, or I would not have been able to stay in the field as long as I did.> But you are right... Judgement isn't helpful.
> I don't think Larry was being judgemental...
> But I do think he was feeling frustrated.
> And it can be hard (or next to impossible) to post helpful responses when one is feeling frustrated.
>
I did not say he was being judgemental.> At least... I know that it is really very hard for me.
>
> And so in those times... It is better for me to walk away from the situation. Yes. Which isn't to say that I can't return later... But it is to say that sometimes I need to walk away for my own mental health yes.
>
> > Regardless. It's the not taking the medication that is the issue here.
>
> Possibly...
> Though I think a combination of medication and therapy would be the most likely to have the best result...
>
It was the not taking of the medication that caused the biggest stir. The rest of what may help is another topic, one to be discussed with Deneb.> > Lot's of people don't do it. What the result is, or how it manifests itself is simply a roll of the dice. The intent, and the reason for not taking it is no more deserving of negative judgement because of the result.
>
> I agree with you.
> But I also think that people are most likely to feel frustrated when there is a course of action that has been demonstrated to help considerably in that person in the recent past...
> They are less likely to feel frustrated when there is a course of action that nobody really knows whether it will help or not...
>
I don't think I was questioning why people feel frustrated.> > if you can't risk that it might not end up the way you wish, without becoming very upset, then don't get involved.
>
> I had a therapist once... When I had very intense and recurrent suicidal urges... She told me one day... That the thing that she was most afraid of was that one of her clients would kill themself. She said that she understood that I was at high risk... And she said that she understood that she was likely to encounter clients who were at high risk. She said that she had a lot of supervision / therapy around that when she was training to become a therapist. She said that she did agonise for a while about whether she should be a therapist given her fear. She agonised about whether she should pass on clients who were at high risk because of her fear...
>
> But she didn't walk away from me.
>
> Well... Not for a long while. Not until DBT became a viable option for me.
>
> She helped me.
>
> But it was hard going...
> Hard going for the both of us...
>
> I don't know.
>
>
I've had that as well, not with therapists, but I needed people who didn't have there own time frame for me, and it was crucial to me that they didn't express their anger or frustration, that would set me right back.There were some angels, and they did care, although they didn't get angry, or remind me how much work I was, and that's what got me through.
I'm not quite sure how this got to be a discussion on frustration, and caring.
I was saying how I felt, that's all.
And I don't think the level of frustration is always equal to the level of caring, there are many things which factor into that.
Posted by James K on January 5, 2006, at 15:31:10
In reply to Some people are in real danger *triggers* » Deneb, posted by James K on January 5, 2006, at 1:46:02
I should have been asleep. I don't feel I was appropriate in that post and I apologize.
sorry,
James K
Posted by Dr. Bob on January 5, 2006, at 16:11:05
In reply to Re: Too afraid to get help » Deneb, posted by Larry Hoover on January 4, 2006, at 16:44:53
> You manipulate them (in other words, you lie to them). You ... overdose on non-prescribed medication as a game.
I'm sorry you don't feel well, but please don't jump to conclusions about others or post anything that could lead them to feel accused or put down. Even using their own words. I'm going to block you from posting for another 6 weeks because I think a civil atmosphere is good for the community. But I realize this is also likely to upset you and others. I'm sorry, and I hope we can get through this together.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
One possibility is to ask another poster to be your "civility buddy" and preview posts before you submit them.
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:47:31
In reply to Re: Too afraid to get help » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on January 5, 2006, at 6:08:52
> > Yes. And it can be hard to watch. Well... It isn't so hard to watch when you don't care about the person... But it can be hard to watch when you do care about the person.
> I don't think the level of caring is an issue I was addressing, I can'measure that, and I suppose if you don't care it wouldn't be so hard, but not getting frustrated, can also be an aspect of experience and education, and have nothing to do with caring less.Yeah, you weren't talking about 'level of caring' I guess I was just talking about how sometimes people do feel frustrated because they care. That wasn't in response to anything you said so much as me making a more general comment. And of course some people don't feel frustrated in response and that does not entail that they care any less. Sometimes... That latter person is in a better place in themselves. Sometimes that latter person has a higher threshold for frustration etc etc there are many factors...
> I did not say he was being judgemental.
I know you didn't say that or imply that at all. I guess I just wanted to clarify that to make sure Larry knew that we weren't accusing him of being judgemental (or thinking that he was being judgemental).
> It was the not taking of the medication that caused the biggest stir.
Maybe... Or maybe it was the repeated pattern of not taking it then taking too much of it...
> The rest of what may help is another topic, one to be discussed with Deneb.
Been there done that. I guess I'll have to see...
> I've had that as well, not with therapists, but I needed people who didn't have there own time frame for me, and it was crucial to me that they didn't express their anger or frustration, that would set me right back.Hmm. Sometimes... Yeah, I hear you. But also... Sometimes there is a lesson in that too that if someone feels a little angry or frustrated then that is not the end of the world. They can feel a little angry or frustrated in response to your behaviour while AT THE VERY SAME TIME caring about you really very much.
I think I hear what you are saying. Disgust... I guess thats my fear... That other people will express or be unable to conceal their disgust in response to me.
I'm not sure about that therapist I saw... In a way... Probably she should have passed me on. Probably she shouldn't have told me what she did. Did it impact on my telling her about my suicidal urges etc? Yes. It did. I'd still tell her I had urges, but I refrained from the graphic details. I learned something there... I learned that my telling her all that... Had an effect on her. It affected her very much. And... Did it benefit me to tell her all the graphic details? Not really. I could convey the same information by saying 'yeah, the thoughts / urges were pretty bad this week' and leaving it at that.
I don't know.
> There were some angels, and they did care, although they didn't get angry, or remind me how much work I was, and that's what got me through.
Yes. I hear you.
But...
I still want to come back to the flotation device analogy...
Sure it helps to know there are people on the sidelines cheering you on...
It helps one not be overcome with despair...
But long term...
It is a 'maintenence' strategy...
It needs to be fairly constant
If there is a break...
Things can fall apart
And...
Why?
Why why why
When one can learn the skills to swim?
And when there is a flotation device right there to help one while one takes the steps one needs to take in order to learn the skills?Maybe...
It is time for me to walk away too.
Not necessarily forever...
But I do keep coming back to the point that...
It takes considerable energy / effort to help / support someone through hard times.
It does.
And I really don't mind doing that...
I really don't mind.
Especially when I can see that my responses are well recieved and that the person benefits from them.
But...
When it seems that the energy / effort is coming from me...
And the person isn't expending energy / effort in taking the steps that would enable them to support themself and learn how to help themself
Well...Then I do believe it is time for me to walk away...
Maybe it is seeing it like that that shows me that...But there it is.
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:48:18
In reply to please ignore my previous post » James K, posted by James K on January 5, 2006, at 15:31:10
((((((James K))))))
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:48:58
In reply to Re: To Gabbi and alexandra, posted by Larry Hoover on January 4, 2006, at 22:31:57
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:49:23
In reply to Re: (((((Larry)))))) (nm), posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:48:58
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:49:42
In reply to Re: (((((Deneb)))))) (nm), posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:49:23
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:50:09
In reply to Re: (((((Gabbi)))))) (nm), posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:49:42
Posted by Emily Elizabeth on January 5, 2006, at 17:12:28
In reply to please ignore my previous post » James K, posted by James K on January 5, 2006, at 15:31:10
But I do think you made some good points and it came from a good place--you wanted Deneb to help herself so that she doesn't have to experience the pain that you (and your loved ones) have. Take care and please keep contributing...but get some sleep too.
Best,
EE> I should have been asleep. I don't feel I was appropriate in that post and I apologize.
>
> sorry,
>
> James K
Posted by Racer on January 5, 2006, at 17:22:40
In reply to Re: blocked for 6 weeks » Larry Hoover, posted by Dr. Bob on January 5, 2006, at 16:11:05
> > You manipulate them (in other words, you lie to them). You ... overdose on non-prescribed medication as a game.
>
> I'm sorry you don't feel well, but please don't jump to conclusions about others or post anything that could lead them to feel accused or put down. Even using their own words.This isn't to protest in any way, only to show you the perspective I had on that post: it looked like a Tough Love sort of thing, where Larry was showing Deneb another perspective on her own words, rather than using them to accuse her. Does that make sense? My brain hurts, and I'm not sure I am communicating well right now.
I read Larry's post as saying something kinda like "Deneb, when you say you're manipulating your pdoc, that's pretty much saying you're being dishonest with them -- lying to them."
Nope. Brain just don't want to start them communication centers today... Hope that made some sort of sense...
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 18:42:06
In reply to I read it differently » Dr. Bob, posted by Racer on January 5, 2006, at 17:22:40
Hey. I do understand what you mean (at least I think I do..)
But I think problems with the 'tough love' approach have come up before (Chemist springs to mind...)
I think...
The trouble comes because...
A lot of the academic writing is not civil.
Academic papers write about people with BPD displaying...
Manipulative intent
Attention seeking behaviour
etc etc
And the trouble with those...
Is that they ARE judgements.
They attribute malevolent motivation / intent to the person.
They say that the person has that conscious intention and that it is that conscious intention that leads to their behaviour.But intent must be assessed... And not assumed...
And the trouble with assessing intent...
Is that oftentimes the person comes to see their own intentions in the way that others do.
They internalise their judgements.
They judge themself.
And ultimately... That is unhelpful.
Ultimately... That tends to lead to INCREASED distress and no reduction in the unhelpful behaviours.Deneb only started talking about 'manipulative intent' AFTER reading about BPD online...
I noticed that...
And while I appreciate that Larry was simply adopting Deneb's chosen words (and was not intending to judge her) the point is that Deneb was being uncivil to herself because she has started to internalise the uncivil judgements that exist in the psychological / psychiatric literature.
Those judgements...
Hurt me a great deal.
How can one internalise those and like oneself?
How can one internalise those and have any self respect?I struggled with those judgements... I struggled with my self image... I struggled with how I should view myself (in a way that was both true and helpful to me) for a number of years... And the thing that helped me the most with that... Was Linehan.
Those judgements come from counter-transference (in a clinical context).
When a clinician says 'that is a manipulative thing to do'...
That is the point where the little bell is rung in peer supervision to indicate that the clinician is viewing the client in a way that is doubly unhelpful.
Firstly, it is unhelpful because the client will only internalise that...
Secondly, it is unhelpful because the clinician is likely to feel very frustrated indeed if they view the clients behaviour in that way... And that typically results in... Lashing out at the client...Linehan counters this unhelpful dialectic by maintaining that people with BPD aren't more manipulative than people without BPD. In fact... If anything people with BPD need to learn to get BETTER at learning to manipulate other people. They need to learn behaviour that they can display that is more likely to facilitate helpful responses / helping behaviours from others.
Sorry... But this issue is a personal bug bear of mine...
I also think that one can post a 'tough love' kind of post that is within civility guidelines...I think...
I am getting fairly good at doing that?
(Just as one example...)
?
Linehan says that instead of saying 'that is a manipulative thing to do' what one really should say is 'I feel manipulated when you do that'. What that does... Is it distinguishes between the behaviour, and the clincians emotional response to that behaviour. It brings it to the clinicians attention that the manipulative bit is their own emotional response rather than anything intrinsic to the persons behaviour.
And that... Allows them to explore their own emotional response and come to see that other interpretations are possible...
Sometimes other interpretations can be tricky...
That is when one needs to walk away.
And hopefully...
SOmeone else is able to hit apon a non-judgemental one...
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 5, 2006, at 19:40:02
In reply to Re: Too afraid to get help » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 16:47:31
>
> > I did not say he was being judgemental.
>
> I know you didn't say that or imply that at all. I guess I just wanted to clarify that to make sure Larry knew that we weren't accusing him of being judgemental (or thinking that he was being judgemental).
>
>I'm sorry, I thought afterwards that you were probably making a general comment.
> Hmm. Sometimes... Yeah, I hear you. But also... Sometimes there is a lesson in that too that if someone feels a little angry or frustrated then that is not the end of the world. They can feel a little angry or frustrated in response to your behaviour while AT THE VERY SAME TIME caring about you really very much.
>I honestly don't think one is better than the other. I know of some people who say they had their wake up call when someone basically said finally said "Look I've done what I can you're on your own"
I just know for me that was the worst thing anyone could have done.
> I think I hear what you are saying. Disgust... I guess thats my fear... That other people will express or be unable to conceal their disgust in response to me.
>Yeah.. definitely.
> I still want to come back to the flotation device analogy...
> Sure it helps to know there are people on the sidelines cheering you on...
> It helps one not be overcome with despair...
> But long term...
> It is a 'maintenence' strategy...
> It needs to be fairly constant
> If there is a break...
> Things can fall apart
> And...
> Why?
> Why why why
> When one can learn the skills to swim?
> And when there is a flotation device right there to help one while one takes the steps one needs to take in order to learn the skills?
>
> Maybe...
>True.. but maybe the last time grabbing the life preserver ended up dragging them further out..
Or maybe they could grab it but they've never had this much attention paid to them before.
That sounds so terrible, there is so much judgement surrounding "needing attention" even though we all do.
It's kind of like some girls only know how to get attention by being precociously sexual, and end up getting hurt, and repeating the behaviour.
In that case.. sometimes the person needs affirmation of other good qualities not to be shut out, or punished.It's not necessarily consciously manipulative.
(That I know you know.. I'm speaking in general terms)That's why I have real trouble with the hard line approach when there are so many things we are unaware of, even when at the outset it looks cut and dried.
However I think realizing that you can't do it anymore, for yourself, is quite different than taking the hardline approach, I'm not equating the two at all.I think were in agreement here, just expressing different sides of the whole issue.
>
Posted by Gabbix2 on January 5, 2006, at 19:42:19
In reply to Re: I read it differently » Racer, posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 18:42:06
Amen to that!
I went through virtually the same experience.
And it still is a real sore spot with me.
Posted by JenStar on January 5, 2006, at 19:55:23
In reply to I read it differently » Dr. Bob, posted by Racer on January 5, 2006, at 17:22:40
I agree, and I don't think Larry deserves a block for this. Deneb has called herself manipulative in multiple posts over many months, and I think Larry was trying to point out how she needs to keep that in mind as she decides how to proceed. I really wish Dr. Bob would reconsider this block.
JenStar
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 19:58:18
In reply to Re: I read it differently » Racer, posted by JenStar on January 5, 2006, at 19:55:23
> Deneb has called herself manipulative in multiple posts over many months...
Lets suppose I call myself a useless sack of sh*t in multiple posts over many months...
Does that mean that someone else gets a break for calling me a 'useless sack of sh*t'?
People typically aren't warned / blocked for being uncivil to themself...
Though... I think you will get PBC'd / blocked if you call yourself a swearword unasterisked ;-)
Posted by JenStar on January 5, 2006, at 20:09:04
In reply to Re: I read it differently » JenStar, posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 19:58:18
Well, it's an interesting question!
But I believe there's a difference between a descriptor like "manipulative" and one like "sack of ****." It's a slippery slope issue to assume that ALL self-descriptions are incorrect if they are not positive ones.
"Manipulative" is a word that can be used clinically to describe certain behaviors, while "sack of ****" is a phrase that would mostly be used to denigrade or demean, without giving a clear idea of any behaviors.
From the way Deneb describes her behavior to us, I have to agree that she is correct in the way she labels some of her behaviors, assuming that she is being truthful.
I think Larry was only using her own examples to help point out a cycle of behavior that he saw.
That's my opinion!
thanks,
JenStar
Posted by Phillipa on January 5, 2006, at 20:21:39
In reply to Re: I read it differently » alexandra_k, posted by JenStar on January 5, 2006, at 20:09:04
I think Lar was just tired of the same thing over and over. Just my opinion. Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by zeugma on January 5, 2006, at 20:59:15
In reply to Re: I read it differently » Racer, posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 18:42:06
But I think problems with the 'tough love' approach have come up before (Chemist springs to mind...)>>
chemist used the tough love approach??
no, don't answer.
yes, now i remember what you're alluding to, and it is still a sore spot with me. i did not agree with the terms of the block. in fact it grieved me greatly.
(that block really saddened me.)i can't think through the analogies with the present situation. except.
-z
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 21:01:55
In reply to Re: I read it differently » alexandra_k, posted by JenStar on January 5, 2006, at 20:09:04
> Well, it's an interesting question!
:-)
Thanks for posting :-)
> I believe there's a difference between a descriptor like "manipulative" and one like "sack of ****."yes. you will find the first description in the clinical literature wheras you will not find the second... ;-)
> It's a slippery slope issue to assume that ALL self-descriptions are incorrect if they are not positive ones.
I never said or meant to imply that all negative self (or other) descrtiptions are incorrect. I think... That is where the point comes in that some truths... Can be uncivil.
I'm less worried about 'objective' truth regarding ascriptions of intention (which is an interesting topic though something of a can of worms) than I am interested in the utility or pragmatic value of negative descriptions of intention, however...
> "Manipulative" is a word that can be used clinically to describe certain behaviors, while "sack of ****" is a phrase that would mostly be used to denigrade or demean, without giving a clear idea of any behaviors.
What behaviours are described as manipulative?
Do these behaviours OBJECTIVELY have something in common...
Or is all that these behaviours have in common the point that other people typically respond to those behaviours BY FEELING MANIPULATED?You might worry about my considering 'manipulated' to be a feeling...
Lets suppose you say 'someone is doing that in order to manipulate another person'
How are you likely to feel in response to that description of their behaviour?
Indignant
Frustrated
Annoyed
Etc.
If someone tells you 'that person is a little manipulative' then do you respond by being warmly disposed to that person or by being cautious of them?Description...
May seem like a anal semantic technical point...
But when YOU are the person being described...
When it is YOUR BEHAVIOUR that is being described...The difference between negative and positive descriptions surely seems to be more than a mere technical point.
And...
When you consider whether you are likely to feel well disposed or ill disposed to someone in virtue of the descriptions you adopt then the descriptions you adopt has consequences for your emotional responses and your behaviours that are further reaching than a mere technical point.
> From the way Deneb describes her behavior to us, I have to agree that she is correct in the way she labels some of her behaviors, assuming that she is being truthful.
So either she is manipulative or she is a liar?
Truth only comes into it if you assume that people have direct and infallible access to their own intentions. Current consensus in psychodynamic theorising and cognitive psychology (and even behaviourist psychology so much as one is allowed to talk about intentions) is that mental states (including intentions) may be different from the way the person reports them to be.
That is true for you
True for me
True for DenebThat does not make us into liars...
Interpreting ones own intentions (and the intentions of others) is a matter of INTERPRETATION and multiple interpretations are possible. And the principle of charity (which I choose to adopt as much as I possibly can) dictates that one should always assume good intent (or at least the absence of malevolent intent) insofar as possible.
Why?
Because the consequences of that... The world is seen through a positive rather than negative lens and the world seems like a fairly nice place rather than a fairly horrid place... And the consequence of that is I am likely to feel happier and well disposed to others whereas if I am too ready to adopt negative interpretations I am more likely to feel sad and bitter and resentful and ill disposed to others.
Posted by sleepygirl on January 5, 2006, at 21:03:45
In reply to Re: I read it differently » Racer, posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 18:42:06
the term "manipulative" does indeed sound insulting, yet it is in sooooo much literature
How else can we say it? - the connotation is too negative and doesn't quite fit, but the whole BPD thing tends to have a negative connotation
Maybe we just keep changing the words as they get too many associations to them, but isn't every diagnosis an assumption - this one particularly problematic because it assumes intent?
Posted by alexandra_k on January 5, 2006, at 21:25:19
In reply to Re: I read it differently » alexandra_k, posted by sleepygirl on January 5, 2006, at 21:03:45
> the term "manipulative" does indeed sound insulting, yet it is in sooooo much literature
yes. and that is why... i feel fairly insulted when i read that literature. at least... i do now. before... i read it... and felt sad... and would cut myself to try and feel better because i thought i must be a really horrible manipulative attention seeking person and must be punished :-(
and...
so that description wasn't so helpful.
it was counter-productive as a matter of fact.
it increased my distress and increased the very behaviours that were problematic.> How else can we say it?
how else can we say what?
we can describe this is a cycle we see (just describe don't judge or try and get at motivation or intent). we can say that it seems unhelpful to us (we can list consequences or likely consequences)
sometimes the best strategy is just to focus on those things...
> the whole BPD thing tends to have a negative connotation
thats where i'd say read linehan.
and don't bother with the rest.
or perhaps thats a little unfair...
if you read stuff that sounds judgemental
(and / or that leaves you feeling bad about yourself)
then STOP
because...
mostly...
that is the writers own sh*t
their own issue
and there is a lot of that out there...and the people who are supposed to help...
sometimes they can be the people who harm the most...and thats really very sad :-(
but as consumers part of us taking the power back is for us to
NOT INTERNALISE THEIR B*LLSHIT
not see ourself in that way...
and not see others in that way either...> Maybe we just keep changing the words as they get too many associations to them,
that tends to happen in practice yes.
but that is where linehan talks about some of this stuff. i think it applies to her stuff on judgement... and i think it also applies to the civility rules on these boards...
it might seem to be a mere verbal point...
a matter of 'what we should call it'
a matter of 'what words we should use'
but for anyone who really understands...
who understands something of the theory...
the rationale behind the theory...to grasp it is more than just getting ones head around what words to use...
to grasp it is to grasp a whole way of thinking...
a world view.
interpretation
the freedom we have with interpretation (to appreciate that multiple interpretations are possible)
and to be charitable.
> but isn't every diagnosis an assumption - this one particularly problematic because it assumes intent?
this dx is typically considered to be most problematic... typically because it is considered that clients with BPD tend to elicit the most intensive counter-transference responses / reactions from others...
linehan considers that the behaviours that are exhibited are rendered understandable in light of what the person has inherited in conjunction with their experiences in the world... the person is typically in a lot of pain... but to negatively judge the person for their behaviours (that are the result of pain) amounts to... blaming the victim.
and that seems to be so...though that doesn't mean that people shouldn't own their own responses...
(just like if someone is uncivil to us that doesn't mean we can be uncivil back)
DSM is supposed to be fairly much purely descriptive...
but...
it is not.
(which is to say that some of the desctiptions assume negative motivation / intention)
that is why...
i posted a post to muffled a little while ago over on psychology with linehans dx criteria (which may be viewed as a non-judgemental alternative to dsm though it captures all the main points)
i think...
she is a master on positive / neutral interpretations...
she has helped me immensely...
but i have much to learn...
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | 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.