Aspects of Depression

Sometimes depression has a proximate cause (bereavement, job loss, house fire, abusive relationship, etc.) and will fix itself in time or if the problem is removed. Other times it has a proximate cause but gets stuck and won't revert to normal on its own. Sometimes there is no outside cause, the biochemistry is just off, and looking for an outside cause just wastes time. So those different instances are likely to respond to different approaches to improve matters.

It's not about treating people dismissively. It's about treating people appropriately. Some kinds of depression do respond to kick-in-the-butt therapy, where a person will get better if they are persistently urged to get out and do stuff, and they drag themselves out and do stuff, until it goes away; whereas endless pills or talk therapy don't make it go away. Other kinds are a response to a crappy situation, and the situation needs to change -- you don't want to turn off the fire alarm before putting out the fire. Think of that lady in the article who said, "I'm still married to the same alcoholic son-of-a-bitch. It's just that now he's tolerable." Some things are intolerable because they shouldn't be tolerated. Some kinds of depression -- particularly the inherited ones -- are caused by the body's chemistry going haywire. Those tend to respond well to pills, whereas they are unlikely to respond to dragging through activities or talking in search of a life-situation cause. Some even have non-emotional causes that must be addressed (such as light levels or food allergies) in order to improve.

If you want to solve a problem, then you need to understand what the possible causes are, and try to figure out which one(s) of them may be active in this particular instance. What works for one type of depression may be ineffective or counterproductive for another. Then too, some people find that the treatment(s) makes them feel worse than the original depression did, so that they ultimately decide to stop and just live with the depression.

No one solution is perfect or universal. Just because something works or is true for you, or does not work or is false for you, doesn't necessarily mean that everyone else's situation is the same way. So research is a good thing, because it explores possibilities and encourages people to think about things in a new way.

>> I do experience sadness and loss, and I have various coping mechanisms for these that seem to work for me, but to tell someone else to do the same things I do is just a bit presumptious. <<

It's presumptuous if: 1) you offer unsolicited, unwelcome advice, or 2) you assume that what works for you must necessarily work for that person too.

Some people don't have coping mechanisms, or aren't satisfied with what they have (frex, drinking) currently. Then it can be very helpful to seek alternatives, by asking friends or reading books or consulting a professional. Every once in a while, there actually is a straightforward solution to a problem, and all you have to do is find that thing and do it to remove the problem or reduce it to tolerable level.

Like the "listening to each other" function you mentioned above, sharing useful coping mechanisms (or warnings about how certain solutions can backfire) is another thing that people use LJ for.

That's true too, and often useful.

>>Just like many in psychiatry get into the profession because they're trying to deal with their own problems, many who go into comedy do so because joking is their defense mechanism or coping mechanism for dealing with life's problems.<<

Good idea!

>>It's pretty hard to take myself and my problems too seriously when I can listen, say, to the songs of a genius like Tom Smith, who confronts most every sort of emotion in his songs - comedy, loss, all of it, and puts them in a kind of perspective.<<

Yea, verily, he is a genius. Another great example is "Smash the Frickin' Fairies" (whose relevance to this conversation I can't explain without blowing the punchline, but if you've heard it, should be clear).

>>I think our society teaches people to bottle up their emotions and that's very unhealthy and leads to all kinds of problems. Did you ever consider that when a comedian makes you laugh, or a sad movie makes you cry, you might really be laughing or crying about something entirely different that happened in a situation where you weren't supposed to display those feelings?<<

Agreed!

There are a few books I keep around for the purpose of reminding me that life could suck a whole lot worse than it does. Plus, of course, "Thank the gods that I don't live in a universe scripted by Joss Whedon."

>>Most modern medicine is focused on a biological-based solution system, which is very important, but ignores the elements of a person's life.<<

Precisely. Some things can be fixed with pills or surgery or other conventional medical methods. Some things cannot, and trying to fix them that way is useless or worse than useless. It's as bad as prescribing antibiotics for a virus.

>>A lot of doctors and nurses, if their patient doesn't seem to cooperate, will just label them as 'non-cooperative' and decide they can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped.<<

This is massively damaging. Health care providers are hired help, with expert knowledge, supplies, and other resources not available to most people. They give recommendations. They do not give orders. They have no right to make decisions for clients unless the client says, "I don't know what to do, use your best judgement" (which is fairly popular). They should never harangue someone for making a decision that isn't what they recommend, because it's the client and not the health care provider who has to live with the results. They don't know what all goes into that decision; it's none of their business. They can say, "Based on our knowledge, these are your options, and this is what we recommend." The client makes the decision. The health care providers can then say, "Well, here's what will probably happen, and here's what we can do next."

Because if they are not meeting a person's needs, that person is probably going to leave, and may not get any health care at all. It's often better to have none than to accept something that will harm you just because someone else (who doesn't have to live with the results) thinks it's a good idea. That's becoming more and more of a problem. What sensible adult wants to be treated like a disobedient child just for making their own decisions? That's a horrible way to treat people.

>>The thing is, the same symptom doesn't mean it's the same problem. Even if it is the same problem, that doesn't mean it has the same cause and the same solution. That's why it's so vitally important that choice is retained, and that nursing is encouraged and grown as the go-between to deal with the family and living side of health recovery.<<

Yes, exactly! If someone's depression has a proximate cause (say, a spouse who beats them) then taking drugs is unlikely to make the depression go away, but might encourage the person to stay longer ... and they might get seriously injured or killed. (This happens; along with suicide, it pops up as an occasional warning with antidepressants.) If someone's depression does NOT have a proximate cause but is biochemical chaos, then hunting for for a proximate cause while doing nothing else is also unlikely to make the depression go away, and sometimes depressed people are a danger to themselves.

Of course, actually listening to people is hard, and working out a solution is hard. Giving orders is easy, and washing your hands of people who won't meet your demands is easy. But it's not helping.