on reading through this site it seems to me that that different things work for drug induced dp and non drug induced dp. it seems that therapy works for nondrug dp and meds for drug dp. is this right?
drug induced vs non drug dp
on reading through this site it seems to me that that different things work for drug induced dp and non drug induced dp. it seems that therapy works for nondrug dp and meds for drug dp. is this right?
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
G
Actually, no. But your question is excellent and give us a chance to see how "Truths" in the mental symptom world can be very misleading.
It's probably true that most rec drug-induced dp is more often helped by meds than therapy. Know why? Because most drug-induced dp people assume they have a brain problem due to their drug use - they are usually not too willing to enter long term therapy because they don't think they ever had any psychological reasons for their symptoms.
Those others, who did NOT use rec drugs, more readily believe that it must be psychological causes because they don't have another good reason for what might have "caused" their breakdown.
VERY often, TOO often, the choices of the patient (as to what kind of treatment they are open to) can make it appear that X Treatments work FOR certain conditions, and not others.
It may, in fact, have been true that the same rec drug users could have recovered from long term therapy HAD they seen it as a logical option. Maybe not. But maybe. The expectations/beliefs of the patient will determine the outcome of the treatment as much as any actual fabric of the treatment.
Keep a good forensic detective eye when forming theories in this field. Otherwise it's way too easy to jump to quick conclusions.
Peace,
Janine
It's probably true that most rec drug-induced dp is more often helped by meds than therapy. Know why? Because most drug-induced dp people assume they have a brain problem due to their drug use - they are usually not too willing to enter long term therapy because they don't think they ever had any psychological reasons for their symptoms.
Those others, who did NOT use rec drugs, more readily believe that it must be psychological causes because they don't have another good reason for what might have "caused" their breakdown.
VERY often, TOO often, the choices of the patient (as to what kind of treatment they are open to) can make it appear that X Treatments work FOR certain conditions, and not others.
It may, in fact, have been true that the same rec drug users could have recovered from long term therapy HAD they seen it as a logical option. Maybe not. But maybe. The expectations/beliefs of the patient will determine the outcome of the treatment as much as any actual fabric of the treatment.
Keep a good forensic detective eye when forming theories in this field. Otherwise it's way too easy to jump to quick conclusions.
Peace,
Janine
G
Actually, no. But your question is excellent and give us a chance to see how "Truths" in the mental symptom world can be very misleading.
It's probably true that most rec drug-induced dp is more often helped by meds than therapy. Know why? Because most drug-induced dp people assume they have a brain problem due to their drug use - they are usually not too willing to enter long term therapy because they don't think they ever had any psychological reasons for their symptoms.
Those others, who did NOT use rec drugs, more readily believe that it must be psychological causes because they don't have another good reason for what might have "caused" their breakdown.
VERY often, TOO often, the choices of the patient (as to what kind of treatment they are open to) can make it appear that X Treatments work FOR certain conditions, and not others.
It may, in fact, have been true that the same rec drug users could have recovered from long term therapy HAD they seen it as a logical option. Maybe not. But maybe. The expectations/beliefs of the patient will determine the outcome of the treatment as much as any actual fabric of the treatment.
Keep a good forensic detective eye when forming theories in this field. Otherwise it's way too easy to jump to quick conclusions.
Peace,
Janine
It's probably true that most rec drug-induced dp is more often helped by meds than therapy. Know why? Because most drug-induced dp people assume they have a brain problem due to their drug use - they are usually not too willing to enter long term therapy because they don't think they ever had any psychological reasons for their symptoms.
Those others, who did NOT use rec drugs, more readily believe that it must be psychological causes because they don't have another good reason for what might have "caused" their breakdown.
VERY often, TOO often, the choices of the patient (as to what kind of treatment they are open to) can make it appear that X Treatments work FOR certain conditions, and not others.
It may, in fact, have been true that the same rec drug users could have recovered from long term therapy HAD they seen it as a logical option. Maybe not. But maybe. The expectations/beliefs of the patient will determine the outcome of the treatment as much as any actual fabric of the treatment.
Keep a good forensic detective eye when forming theories in this field. Otherwise it's way too easy to jump to quick conclusions.
Peace,
Janine
that makes sense. i tend to think of my dp as physical damage cause it started due to drugs. what worries me about therapy is that most of the time i'm trying to think of anything but dp and, if i'm right, therapy would involve alot of talk/thought about it
that makes sense. i tend to think of my dp as physical damage cause it started due to drugs. what worries me about therapy is that most of the time i'm trying to think of anything but dp and, if i'm right, therapy would involve alot of talk/thought about it
<removed due to syntactical incorrectness>
<removed due to syntactical incorrectness>
i know that 'intellectually handicapped' people are often the happiest but i thought that drug abuse can cause damage to a different area of the brain. also although possibly i've always had dp in my nature, in my case i am convinced that its realisation was due to drug abuse. once realised it seems to be easier for it to return. anyway with my first episode of dp about 10 years ago i took prozac and it went. this time i'm taking zoloft and the dp is definately lessening. maybe therapy would help
i know that 'intellectually handicapped' people are often the happiest but i thought that drug abuse can cause damage to a different area of the brain. also although possibly i've always had dp in my nature, in my case i am convinced that its realisation was due to drug abuse. once realised it seems to be easier for it to return. anyway with my first episode of dp about 10 years ago i took prozac and it went. this time i'm taking zoloft and the dp is definately lessening. maybe therapy would help
<removed due to syntactical incorrectness>
<removed due to syntactical incorrectness>
God. You guys so blithely generalize from your own experience to so confidently explain to the rest of us what DP is and is not.
For example, (and just as an example, below sarcasm is rhetorical and not personal):
This is the most facile, easy, and obvious explanation of a complex phenomena that exists. Anyone, from a bright adolescent to a TV talk show psychologist can stand in the desert on a rock and pop this answer, with no thought, off the top of their heads. This may be the truth of your existence but it is not the truth of mine. Know why?
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of a more severe dissociative disorder, like multiple personality disorder. This can NOT be presumed. It does NOT explain all the phenomena. To simply claim this is the truth, and therefore put any other causes in quotes, meaning, of course, SO CALLED causes, is a simple logical fallacy.
Shit. Never mind. I?m sorry. I have no debate left in me. It makes me weary, and frankly, and I?m sorry, but I find it offensive (and fear being offensive). If I feel up to it, or if I can imagine it worth the effort, I can make a more positive and coherent case, essentially, that depersonalization is a disorder in and of itself.
For example, (and just as an example, below sarcasm is rhetorical and not personal):
Nemesis. Please send this paragraph to this address: Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 10029, USA, and tell them that they all can go home .DP is a product of the mind attempting to rationalise a sequence of events and resultant symptoms that started during a time when the mind felt it was completely powerless. . .
This is the most facile, easy, and obvious explanation of a complex phenomena that exists. Anyone, from a bright adolescent to a TV talk show psychologist can stand in the desert on a rock and pop this answer, with no thought, off the top of their heads. This may be the truth of your existence but it is not the truth of mine. Know why?
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of a more severe dissociative disorder, like multiple personality disorder. This can NOT be presumed. It does NOT explain all the phenomena. To simply claim this is the truth, and therefore put any other causes in quotes, meaning, of course, SO CALLED causes, is a simple logical fallacy.
Shit. Never mind. I?m sorry. I have no debate left in me. It makes me weary, and frankly, and I?m sorry, but I find it offensive (and fear being offensive). If I feel up to it, or if I can imagine it worth the effort, I can make a more positive and coherent case, essentially, that depersonalization is a disorder in and of itself.
God. You guys so blithely generalize from your own experience to so confidently explain to the rest of us what DP is and is not.
For example, (and just as an example, below sarcasm is rhetorical and not personal):
This is the most facile, easy, and obvious explanation of a complex phenomena that exists. Anyone, from a bright adolescent to a TV talk show psychologist can stand in the desert on a rock and pop this answer, with no thought, off the top of their heads. This may be the truth of your existence but it is not the truth of mine. Know why?
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of a more severe dissociative disorder, like multiple personality disorder. This can NOT be presumed. It does NOT explain all the phenomena. To simply claim this is the truth, and therefore put any other causes in quotes, meaning, of course, SO CALLED causes, is a simple logical fallacy.
Shit. Never mind. I?m sorry. I have no debate left in me. It makes me weary, and frankly, and I?m sorry, but I find it offensive (and fear being offensive). If I feel up to it, or if I can imagine it worth the effort, I can make a more positive and coherent case, essentially, that depersonalization is a disorder in and of itself.
For example, (and just as an example, below sarcasm is rhetorical and not personal):
Nemesis. Please send this paragraph to this address: Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 10029, USA, and tell them that they all can go home .DP is a product of the mind attempting to rationalise a sequence of events and resultant symptoms that started during a time when the mind felt it was completely powerless. . .
This is the most facile, easy, and obvious explanation of a complex phenomena that exists. Anyone, from a bright adolescent to a TV talk show psychologist can stand in the desert on a rock and pop this answer, with no thought, off the top of their heads. This may be the truth of your existence but it is not the truth of mine. Know why?
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of a more severe dissociative disorder, like multiple personality disorder. This can NOT be presumed. It does NOT explain all the phenomena. To simply claim this is the truth, and therefore put any other causes in quotes, meaning, of course, SO CALLED causes, is a simple logical fallacy.
Shit. Never mind. I?m sorry. I have no debate left in me. It makes me weary, and frankly, and I?m sorry, but I find it offensive (and fear being offensive). If I feel up to it, or if I can imagine it worth the effort, I can make a more positive and coherent case, essentially, that depersonalization is a disorder in and of itself.
[quote name="dalailama15"]
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of more severe dissociative disorders, like multiple personality disorder.
got the quote thing but i never said that
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of more severe dissociative disorders, like multiple personality disorder.
got the quote thing but i never said that
[quote name="dalailama15"]
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of more severe dissociative disorders, like multiple personality disorder.
got the quote thing but i never said that
You (all, not you personally N) are saying, from your experience, that DP is just a lower grade instance of more severe dissociative disorders, like multiple personality disorder.
got the quote thing but i never said that
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Depersonalization Support Forum
A forum community dedicated to support for those living with depersonalization disorder. Come join the discussion about treatment, health, life styles, spirituality, medication, research, recovery, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Recommended Communities
