Real World Event Discussions

Oppositional Defiant Disorder

POSTED BY: Bytemite
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 9, 2011 04:51
VIEWED: 6599
PAGE 10 of 11

CANTTAKESKY

Monday, February 7, 2011 6:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Sig, The brain is a physical thing, the mind is the information on it. Seems cut and dried to me.... Byte's problem here doesn't necessarily require repair though, it seem mental/chemical.
DT, I see where we differ. I include "chemical" with "hardware".

That's fine and dandy. But the DSM, including ADHD and ODD, is comprised of descriptions of the "mind," not the "chemistry/hardware."

They then find correlations between these "mind" labels and various chemical aberrations, and leap to assuming they are one and the same. Then without much further thought, many psychiatrists use chemical solutions as the first resort to correcting "mind" problems.

I won't say NEVER use psychotropic meds. But I do think LESS biologically / chemically intrusive solutions should be tried FIRST. Not all hardware problems need to be fixed with more risky physical interventions. Some can be managed with safer software fixes.

The main point parents need to understand is chemical restraints of undesired behavior come with serious risks to health that other softer interventions don't have. So try the softer interventions first before taking those risks.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, February 7, 2011 6:24 PM

Sig

Sometimes you discount my background as a chemist.

Receptor counts can be radically changed in most cases. If Parkinsons was a simple matter of receptor count, it could be forced into hypersensitivity with something as simple as opium. My understanding is that there are multiple causes, from failure to form dopamine receptors due to a genetic flaw, to outright damage to the hippocampus reducing dopamine production.

But the NTs are not part of the physical structure, and its easier to force a change in receptor counts than to even force a cognitive restructure in synaptic connections, but both can be done without physically altering the brain.

By contrast, you can't talk your way out of a stroke or hemorrhage. Sure, lobes share and exchange cells, but even this is very difficult to force in an adult brain, but it's not going to alter the raw major layouts of principle multi-axon bridged, vascular networks or sensor apparatus.

If someone is depressed, you're going to know that 99+% of the time, the reason is chemical. The most common teenage depression for example is a result of tryptamine competition between NT systems. The more sexually repressed the teen, the higher the sexual tryptamine levels attempting to induce mating behavior will be, and as a result, the lower serotonin levels are going to be, because there's a limited supply of raw material, receptors, brain cells, etc. All NT systems interact with others, and some compete more directly.

The best cure for this is sex. That naturally lowers the competition. Failing that, boost the raw materials with supplementation. A really bad idea would be intentionally inhibiting their libido to stop the competition, because which that may solve one problem, it can cause others, and in practice, long term application of tryptamine inhibitors reduces serotonin, as do SSRIs by depleting the vesicle ST reserves.

That last one is worth restating: vesicle depletion is probably one of the most dangerous neurochemical effects you can have.

All of that said, I'd agree the chemicals are part of the brain, because they're physical, but they're relatively easy to change, they're more like your USB flash drive then your CPU. Its not a great analogy, but my general rule is the brain needs physical treatments, the mind needs psychological ones. Not a well defined line, but a good judge.

CANTTAKESKY

Monday, February 7, 2011 7:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
All of that said, I'd agree the chemicals are part of the brain, because they're physical, but they're relatively easy to change, they're more like your USB flash drive then your CPU.

CD-ROMs and DVD-ROMs are "physical" entities too. Once they are installed, they become part of the hard drive, in a manner of speaking. But they are still considered software. The operating system is too, for that matter.

To me, chemicals are probably more like CD-ROMs. They are physical entities, but are more about functional information than structural capacity.

-------
Everything I say is just my opinion, not fact.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Monday, February 7, 2011 8:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Sig

By contrast, you can't talk your way out of a stroke or hemorrhage. Sure, lobes share and exchange cells, but even this is very difficult to force in an adult brain, but it's not going to alter the raw major layouts of principle multi-axon bridged, vascular networks or sensor apparatus.

Research into brain plasticity seems to indicate otherwise. http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/apr/07/brain-neuroscience-strok
e-depression

NIKI2

Monday, February 7, 2011 8:06 PM

Been gone a couple of days, so when I clicked on this thread, then realized it was 92posts long, can't conceive of reading the whole thing, at least right now. No got time. So I'll respond to Byte's original post only for now.

I agree, the diagnosis doesn't fit and it's wrong to be medicating him. It horrific to me that children are being diagnosed and MISdiagnosed so early in life.

And again, I'll paraphrase my hero, Hagop Akiskal, who said of biolars (tho' it applies to ALL those suffering from mental disorders) that they want relief from the symptoms of the disorder, they don't want to be medicated into zombies just to satisfy the convenience of society. It sickens me.

I wish there were some way you could help him; it's going to affect the rest of his life as it is doing to so many others, and it just makes me just want to

Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off

BYTEMITE

Monday, February 7, 2011 8:59 PM

Quote:
then realized it was 92posts long

Yeah, I think most of that was in a single day, too. But at least I'm picking up some information from all this.

Quote:
I wish there were some way you could help him

Thanks. Even the well wishing is good to hear.

HARDWARE

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 12:46 PM

Why amd I hearing a Pink Floyd song now?

...We don't need no thought control...

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

RIONAEIRE

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 5:19 PM

Okay so last night I read the whole thread. It was very upsetting to me and I had to go and have a cry and couldn't sleep well etc. But now that its tomorrow I'm going to respond.

I feel that Megan's daughter makes good parenting points, for most kids that is the best strategy in my opinion, clear rules but with love and understanding. Some good points from her.

SignyM, I'm glad you guys are to a place where your daughter is feeling more safe and content and is able to communicate and interact, those four things are the most important in my opinion.

Maybe indeed Van Gogh's mental health differences added to his creative abilities, I have no quarrel with that and I'm glad he was able to use that to create art. But it sounds like there was a flip side to it for him: What if he destroyed those paintings not because he honestly didn't feel they were good. Waht if he destroyed his best work because mean nasty voices were telling him to do it and the only way to get them to shut up was to comply? What if he destroyed them because he was under a heavy and horrid dillusion that if he didn't something horrible would happen? What if the dillusion or intrusive thoughts were so strong that the only way to get temporary relief and make the pain subside a little was to do it? What if it was a nasty compulsion? We can't know because he's long dead, but what if? Would you doom someone to suffer such intense pain just because you're against something (medicine) in principle? Just some things to think about in this discussion.

I get the impression that the kid is still little, under 10, so, like it or not, his parents are in charge. I think that informing the parents about things would be good so they can look at the situation and hopefully make an educated decision about the situation. I fear that subverting the parents at this point would possibly make it worse for the kid, something you don't want because I know your objective is to help the kid. Does that mean parents are always right? Absolutely not. One of the things that concerns me in this situation is that only one teacher has seen a problem, that means its sort of subjective, can he be switched to a different class?

I agree with the poster, can't remember who it was, who wrote about how the important thing is how the kid feels, sometimes when we are observing from the outside we only get a small piece of the puzzle. Similarly sometimes the person in the middle of something can't see the forest through the trees. There's merrit in both vantage points.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

BYTEMITE

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 5:31 PM

You ever deal with anything like this in your work?

Sorry you didn't sleep well. Yeah, this isn't a happy thread.

WULFENSTAR

Tuesday, February 8, 2011 5:49 PM

Byte,

Again, its how far are you willing to take it?

Would your actions help or hurt?

IS, whats happening to the child SO WRONG, that you are willing to do something about it?

If so, what are you willing to lose?

If not, what are you willing to watch happen?

"Hope is a good thing, maybe the best of things, and no good thing ever dies"