Close "I think I have..." threads in Psychiatic Ward.

[Jean Poutine]

Some people come on this forum for help. Sometimes nothing more than a push can help. Other people need stern kicks in the ass. I consider it my job to deliver these kicks in the rectal area to get people moving. Where I'm from, they call it "tough love". This is how I was raised, and this is how I dispense wisdom.

Some teens need tough, but fair lectures. There is a category, I believe, that needs to be uniformly given ass kicks towards the nearest psychotherapist. They are the ones that post topics in the Psych Ward forum about how "I think I got X" or "can you tell me what's wrong in my head?"

Counteracting the stern asskickings we might decide to give, are the bumbling morons that decide that they are qualified to diagnose people. I know everyone on the Internet has at least a doctorate in psychology, but this forum is absolutely not qualified to issue any sort of diagnoses and/or hypotheses, and the members that seek help to solve their own problems cannot afford to fall on fools that give bullshit advice.

An e-diagnosis is much more dangerous that it may seem. It can first lead to the person, content with the idiot's response, not seeking any help at all for his or her condition, because that person may feel comforted by false information. It can even lead to being lazy, making no efforts to fix one's shortcomings because "hey lol i haev x", even though it's in all probability, not true.

Even though the e-diagnoser, in all his completely moronic logic, may decide that relating to someone because he or she thinks that the other person shares his or her diagnosis, this is also something not to pursue. The human mind is simply too complicated, and even though psychologists try to group under umbrellas a number of symptoms, because one person believes that another shares a diagnosis, they should not give advice that might turn out to be ineffective and plunge the seeker into a deeper anguish, but perhaps, that could even be completely detrimental. Every case is unique and subtleties may make one case very different to attempt to treat than another case of the same emntal illness. In any case, this is not something e-diagnosers are qualified to analyze.

The solution to all of this would be, I think, to immediately lock every topic where the original poster asks a question, IN DIRECT OR INDIRECT FORM, that leads to a diagnosis, such as "I think I have..." or "can you guys tell me what's wrong..." and other gems of this sort. Accompanying the locking should be a reminder, possibly in extremely big and colored font, to SEEK QUALIFIED HELP.

The relating to fellow endurers of x mental illness and other mushy stuff can be done when the person has gotten help and is under the guidance of a psychotherapist, and actually has an idea of what goes wrong. Then, the Psychiatric Ward section can serve its purpose. Until then, it is completely unwise to respond to such queries and the VT staff should prevent any random asstards from worsening a person's mental condition by making unlightened guesstimations.

This is my opinion. Please consider it and do with it what you will.

A person's mental health is not a bingo game.

[The Batman]

I just read a few threads like the ones your talking about and really the first thign anyone says in them is,"We can't diagnose you only a trained professional can" or something to that. So we aren't really telling people that they have something they probably don't if anything we're telling them to go get some help from someone that can diagnose them so they won't get e-diagnosed. So even though it's a good idea the way we are currently handling them isn't really doing anything harmful and it's telling them exactly what they should do.

[Jean Poutine]

I just read a few threads like the ones your talking about and really the first thign anyone says in them is,"We can't diagnose you only a trained professional can" or something to that. So we aren't really telling people that they have something they probably don't if anything we're telling them to go get some help from someone that can diagnose them so they won't get e-diagnosed. So even though it's a good idea the way we are currently handling them isn't really doing anything harmful and it's telling them exactly what they should do.

The way I'd put it is, don't be happy with mediocrity only because there is a semblance of a status quo.

Eventually someone will say "don't listen to the guy, he's an asstard, go see somebody qualified" but what if nobody does? What happens then? What if a scenario I described happens?

Better run the full mile. Exceptions (where somebody is fed fucktard information without anyone intervening) may be rare, but one person's mental health is worth too much to rely on the rarity of exceptions.

[Kaleidoscope Eyes]

...Like Thomas said, pretty much every time there are many responses saying, "We can't diagnose you, see a doctor." I've rarely, if ever, seen someone say, "Yes, you without a doubt have *insert diagnosis here*." Even if they did, the kid would have to see a doctor for treatment, and you can't just tell the doctor "I have blah-dee-blah." The doctor has to diagnose you themselves, they won't just take your word for it.

I don't think there's really a problem in how the Psych Ward is handled right now.

[The Batman]

We'll just have to cross that bridge when we approach it. I don't like the idea of locking threads like that for other reasons too. Mainly because of what I said but also because it doesn't look right on our part just locking threads when someone is concerned about their mental health because we're scared someone might try to diagnose them online. We're here to help them and just locking a thread saying,"Go see a professional" is off putting.

[Maverick]

I disagree, those type of threads shouldn't be locked immediately. There's nothing harmful about giving them resources or information about the symptoms they are experiencing. There's also nothing harmful about talking to their peers who may have gone through the same thing.

Saying point blankly "Go see a doctor as we aren't professionals. Thread locked" isn't helpful at all. Some people may be scared or nervous about seeing a doctor and they need to be guided and walked through on getting help. Its not always an easy thing getting help. A simple statement isn't likely to get them anywhere but talking to them and maybe relating can make a difference. If you value someone's mental health that much then why would you suggest a policy to provide the minimalistic amount of help possible?

We can help them get to the proper qualified professionals without being so blunt.

[Jean Poutine]

the kid would have to see a doctor for treatment

I have actually seen many people taken aback by complacency when someone offered them an e-diagnosis on a platter. There is comfort in knowing what is wrong, even if it just a lie, and that comfort can bring you to think that you can face it all alone.

How do I know? Younger, I used to be one of them.

I did not go see a psychotherapist until 17 years old. I went through high school without any sort of help or support, with an extremely socially debilitating condition. It made me stronger, but that's not something I'd wish on anyone.

We're here to help them and just locking a thread saying,"Go see a professional" is off putting.

It's a common fallacy that all sorts of help have to take the form of a nice, or even just polite, reply. I'm not saying you're being inconsiderate or anything by thinking about form. Sometimes brute force and directness is the way to go. I believe it is, now.

If you value someone's mental health that much then why would you suggest a policy to provide the minimalistic amount of help possible?

My mom often used to say "love people less, but love them better". Minimalism is sometimes necessary.

By engaging into the analysis of symptoms without being trained professionals, we run the risk of screwing something up, as we do when we try to make someone's condition, something it isn't. Personally I don't believe that's a risk I'd be willing to take, others may feel otherwise.

Anyway just my two cents.

[Kaleidoscope Eyes]

It's a common fallacy that all sorts of help have to take the form of a nice, or even just polite, reply. I'm not saying you're being inconsiderate or anything by thinking about form. Sometimes brute force and directness is the way to go. I believe it is, now. Kinda like P101. >_>

Ant didn't say that we had to sugar-coat everything.

This site was originally established to help teens with mental disorders, we're not going to just say, "Don't ask questions or your thread will be locked."

Being able to tell a kid, "Well, here are the common symptoms of the disorder you're concerned about," helps because a lot of them realize, "Ok, that doesn't actually sound like me, I'm probably overreacting." Being able to explain to them the difference between bipolar disorder and regular teenage moodiness, for example, is something helpful. Suggesting that we stop all of that makes no sense. We tell them we're not professionals already, and advise them to seek professional help if they're concerned, but any actual information about mental illnesses needs to be cut out? That just shouts, "Go away concerned teenagers, you are not welcome."

By engaging into the analysis of symptoms without being trained professionals, we run the risk of screwing something up, as we do when we try to make someone's condition, something it isn't. Personally I don't believe that's a risk I'd be willing to take, others may feel otherwise.

Anyway just my two cents.

The only "analysis" we do is to list common symptoms, and compare what they're describing to that. And the only time I ever even do that is to reassure someone that the disorder they're concerned about doesn't fit the bill at all and they need to chill out.

We don't attempt to sound like we know all and like we're offering a serious diagnosis here. I don't know why you're so worried that a little support in the form of basic information is going to screw everyone's lives up.

[Jean Poutine]

Ant didn't say that we had to sugar-coat everything.

This site was originally established to help teens with mental disorders, we're not going to just say, "Don't ask questions or your thread will be locked."

Being able to tell a kid, "Well, here are the common symptoms of the disorder you're concerned about," helps because a lot of them realize, "Ok, that doesn't actually sound like me, I'm probably overreacting." Being able to explain to them the difference between bipolar disorder and regular teenage moodiness, for example, is something helpful. Suggesting that we stop all of that makes no sense. We tell them we're not professionals already, and advise them to seek professional help if they're concerned, but any actual information about mental illnesses needs to be cut out? That just shouts, "Go away concerned teenagers, you are not welcome."

Nobody ever reads disclaimers. People will not listen unless you shove it in their face.

The chances of the kid saying "it doesn't sound like me" is about 50/50 with saying "it totally sounds like me I'm sure I have that LALALA I'M NOT GOING TO IMPROVE ANYMORE".

How about a compromise? Take a DSM-IV, list all the symptoms of the most common mental illnesses claimed (personality disorders, Asperger's, bipolar, etc), sticky it, and point them to the sticky then lock. Sounds more reasonable?

Don't take me as a belligerent, unflexible ass. I don't wish to argue for the hell of it. Just trying to find an acceptable solution to what I feel is a problem. If you don't think it is, do as I'd do, tell me to stop whining and that's that. :)

The only "analysis" we do is to list common symptoms, and compare what they're describing to that. And the only time I ever even do that is to reassure someone that the disorder they're concerned about doesn't fit the bill at all and they need to chill out.

We don't attempt to sound like we know all and like we're offering a serious diagnosis here. I don't know why you're so worried that a little support in the form of basic information is going to screw everyone's lives up.

Perhaps you do it that way. Others look at symptom lists as gospel for guidance as to what they could have. The problem is that so many overarch that it's impossible to draw logical conclusions without more tests.

Never said anyone attempted to sound like they were the be-all-end-all, well except e-diagnosis screwtards.

I'm worried because I've been through this and I consider myself as fairly intelligent. No doubt more people than me have fallen into the trap.