Lioninwinter

Dissociative disorders may manifest in several ways; amnesia surrounding one event, depersonalisation and detachment or DID. All of these can be very disconcerting for the person who has those experiences. Actually addressing the ultimate cause is often extremely difficult. Dissociative disorders are difficult to diagnose because they can frequently be mistaken for other personality disorders (for example, Borderline Personality Disorder or Bipolar Disorder). They are more common than many people realise, with DID alone affecting as much as 1% of the population. Diagnosis is often complicated by symptoms such as substance abuse, self-harm, anxiety, eating disorders and other factors that can be misinterpreted. It is a complicated diagnosis due to the overlap with psychotic symptoms such as "hearing voices" or the mood changes that occur with Bipolar Disorder. Contrary to its previous misconception as "Multiple Personality Disorder," DID is better described by the the presence of two or more "states" in which the person perceives (and reacts to) the world in different ways. These "identities" can determine a person's behaviour as if they are independent of one another. Perhaps the most apparent symptom is that memories and actions are isolated to those states, such that those memories and actions are compartmentalised beyond simple forgetfulness. Other dissociative disorders can be equally ill-conceived and misunderstood. The core aspect of depersonalisation or selective amnesia can be very difficult to describe due to their very nature. There is also considerable prejudice surrounding dissociative disorders in general, difficulty in ascertaining a correct diagnosis, and the way in which they are understood and perceived. Dissociative disorders are simply the way that a person's brain chooses to interpret and compartmentalise certain experiences so that a person can continue to function. It can be very confusing, but this is a place where you can discuss those feelings and very difficult experiences. You certainly are not alone. Please use this board to post your topics regarding the subject.

I appreciate all of the comments above and they make valid points. The problem with an open field ("Please specify") is that it is too open to abuse. Somebody could enter "Agender Jedi Monk" or something equally ridiculous or possibly insulting. For that reason I would prefer to restrict the options to a limited list. I hope that the new options, limited as they are, are at least satisfactory. The statistics that concern mental health and even suicides relating to what should be an incidental issue are truly tragic. These are very real problems with serious consequences that we should not ignore.

Frankly, I don't want to be associated with this decision. It's been described as a technical problem and by association that means it's something that I somehow don't have time for or don't support. I do agree that the "male"/"female"/"other" options are not inclusive especially given the role that sexuality and gender can play in contributing towards mental health issues. I disagree with the idea that a long list of gender options needs to be available. The focus of the forum is after all depression and mental health. I think that compartmentalising gender roles too much serves no real purpose, and there are some technical issues once you create that many options for a profile field. However, I agree that a more inclusive set of options is both appropriate and beneficial -- at least including "transgender" and changing "other" (which sounds diminutive IMO) to "Not Telling," which are the basic options that I see on most forums. It's a very minor change that would require very little effort (as would be adding a couple more options to that list). It certainly would not detract from the hours I've spent working on the upgrade. I'm sorry for sounding off but I don't want this issue to be passed off as some sort of technical acrobatic exercise that would impede more important tasks when it's really a simple task and something I'd happily do with very little consequence. [EDIT] I should have said: ...little consequence to me or my time compared to the significance of what that represents.

Have you had your review at the day hospital yet (I'm assuming that's the same thing that we have here, used in cases of crisis)? How are the voices being today? :hugs:

I guess what it achieves in firstly just a simple assertion of dominance. You are setting the rules by which you can communicate. It probably won't be effective but it's still a statement. Second, if people don't want to converse genuinely then sometimes letting them just shout it all out is still a signal; it's a decision that you make and I guess in some ways it's like opening a can of shaken up soda -- at some point it fizzles out. More importantly, you're not fighting them. You're setting boundaries, but not engaging from the standpoint of a a victim; by giving permission you are also taking some control. Apart form this, you are also acknowledging that they exist, and they aren't buggering off. If they're having a tantrum then parent them. I guess what I'm saying is that maybe treating them as "just voices" is important to realise as far as centering yourself is concerned, but also the most assertive stance that you can take is possibly to acknowledge them and treat them as you would anybody else. By doing that you assert yourself and your principles (which I know to be good and true) as the core that guides what is undoubtedly an unpleasant situation.

Maybe don't even try to have a "conversation" then. Perhaps just set aside however long a time you feel comfortable with, having defined it clearly beforehand, where you listen -- maybe even write down or record some of the things being said as without passing judgement on them or taking them to heart (which is why I stress "however long a time you feel comfortable with"). Recording the things said (as best as you can if everyone's talking over themselves) in some way is just a physical reminder to them that you're listening. State (even if they take notice of you) that you're not agreeing with them, or giving them power to influence you, you're simply listening for that time. If you can then distinguish it physically somehow -- maybe go out and run madly up and down the street afterwards or do something that asserts that (even though they're unlikely to stop) that's the end of your allotted time. Perhaps just start with that?

I'm just curious, but can you actually open a dialogue with one of the "leaders?" Set aside a specific time for what's basically a "meeting"? You're quite right when you say that you're a physical entity and they are not and you have a right to assert some control, but I'm wondering if you could essentially negotiate -- so an hour of your time just to interact, with no specific demands at first other than to do just that? Approach it as you would any negotiation with an unwanted but unavoidable influence...

Sorry for not commenting in a while.... I think you're all being very brave (cm really held the snake? That was worth graduating for alone!) . I know you're struggling and scared (and not been in a good place), but you've been so committed this far and you all have the strength to face some scary things. I hope the partners in recovery is something you can use. You've come this far by taking little steps one at a time. No-one's expecting you all to suddenly take a leap. Love to you all :hugs:

Hrm... I can't reply from a parental perspective, so forgive me for that, please. Regarding the medication, if you want to stick with Tramadol for the pain then I can see why you antidepressant options are limited. You can't use an SSRI or SNRI because of the serotonin effect, which only leaves you with tricyclics or possibly tetracyclics (although the latter also affect serotonin levels... just to a lesser degree). The benzodiazepines aren't antidepressants -- they are sedatives and they have the associated problems of both desensitisation and addiction, meaning that you need more to achieve the same effect if they are used constantly. MOAIs are an option, but they require quite strict dietary requirements. If you feel that the chest pains and/or migraines could be more stress related due to the pain then benzodiazepines could be a solution for specific instances, provided they are not used daily, but if you are more concerned with the general depression caused by ongoing pain then tricyclic antidepressants are probably your only option without changing the pain medication. I'm unclear as to whether there is a definite cause for your son's physical pain. Some of the symptoms sound like they could be anxiety/panic-related or psychosomatic, in which case switching gradually to a combined antidepressant such as an SNRI (I'd recommend duloxetine over venlafaxine) or a tetracyclic might be effective alongside a different painkiller. It would be unusual for fibromyalgia to manifest at such a young age so if it's not been specifically diagnosed I wouldn't worry too much about that. As an example of what onmyown was talking about, in my teens I had a lot of pain in my joints because my muscles and bones were growing at different rates and they would "creak" when I bent them and I couldn't put any significant pressure on them. I found exercise that moved the joints without pressure (swimming and cycling, for example) to help. These are just ideas I am throwing out for you to explore (my knowledge lies in neurobiology rather than general physiology, I'm afraid), but maybe some of what we've said will be of use to you. I'm sure it must be very upsetting to worry about your son's health, especially given the situation with school. I hope if nothing else that you can find support here, even if we don't have answers Best wishes and