Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 471g4:questions:471g4--week_1 [2021/08/26 00:56] – 173.71.200.119
+++ 471g4:questions:471g4--week_1 [2021/08/26 11:55] (current) – 75.75.52.120
@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 . Jonathan Sandowsky in his text "The Empire of Depression A New History" speaks of two main forms of talk therapy for patients, Depth Psychology and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT) these two talk therapy being based on Freudian ideas or working to correct behavioral errors through counseling. Now after reading through "The Art of Asylum-Keeping" by Nancy Tomes. I find that there is a connection between CBT and the concept of moral treatment. Is there any deeper connection between the two beyond what seems like a some what superficial glance? Or was the seeing the "failure" of moral treatment over time in the asylum system lead to the rapid adoption of Freudian ideas?
+**Jack Kurz**
+.	Has the vagueness that comes with diagnosing modern depression and anxiety lead to an increased willingness to accept pharmaceutical treatment over talk therapies, which may have less drawbacks?
+.	There are parallels between how we view the use of pharmaceuticals today and as it was viewed in the 1950’s when taking pharmaceuticals was a sign of struggle and many did not see them as embarrassing, rather it signaled an individuals desire for personal growth. Debate topic.
+** Janis Shurtleff **
+. Tomes discusses the role of family within the treatment of an ill family member which plays into the larger notion of the environment’s effects on mental health, in modern times has this role increased or decreased in significance?
+. When Sandowsky poses the discrepancies between depression and melancholia and the rise in current diagnoses, does the rise in technology/media and its subsequent (and ironic) disconnection from reality stand as a cause?
+**Griffin Nameroff**
+Grob, Preface and prologue:
+	Question 1: Grob states that the book focuses less on the mentally ill themselves and more of the American people’s response.  Wouldn’t discussing the mentally ill in the book help clarify the responses of the American people and the book’s focus?
+	Question 2: What does Grob mean when he states on page 3 that family members who want to take care of mentally ill relatives threatens the integrity of the household?
+Tomes, Intro:
+	Question 1: Was it common for therapists to marry their patients similarly to Kirkbride in the 1800s?
+	Question2: Where were African American and other minorities who had mental health problems sent during the beginning of asylums?
+Shorter, Preface:
+	Question 1: How did black and white patients in asylums get along? Was their animosity between patients?
+	Question 2: How many asylums were started by a religious organization?
+Sandowsky:
+	Question 1: who coined the term depression?
+	Question 2: what were some of the early treatments for depression that were considered extreme?
+Chris O'Neill
+.	An interesting dilemma, noted by Nancy Tomes in The Art of Asylum Keeping, is how to balance the needs of the mentally ill, their families and their community when treating mental illness. Who is the treatment really for?
+.	Jonathan Sandowsky, in An Empire of Depression, makes an interesting point that the high rate of prescriptions for drugs to treat depression does not necessarily mean that drugs are being overprescribed but could be a result of 1. There is actually more depression in society 2. Better diagnostic methods are being used to catch depression 3. Symptoms previously categorized under other illnesses now fall under depression. He then suggests if there is indeed more depression in society, we need to ask why.
+.	Edward Shorter, in A History of Psychiatry, in answer to critics who do not think mental illness is real, states that schizophrenia and depression are no more “social constructs” than parkinsonism or multiple sclerosis. To what degree is this true?
+Carson Berrier (I pledge...)
+) In Tomes’ The Art of Asylum Keeping, the author notes that the American Psychiatric Association was over 150 years old. With as old a field as psychiatry is, why has the shift towards mental health being not such a taboo thing been so recent? What has made mental health “easier” to talk about?
+) Shorter’s Preface noted that “zealot-researchers… have converted protest into illness, locking into asylums those who otherwise would be challenging the established order.” Historically, what power did this give psychiatrists? What did this take away from a patient?
+) Sandowsky frames and holds the idea that depression is shaped and changed by history and culture. Through no further research, how do you think the idea of depression has changed over the past few decades?
+**Allison Love** (I pledge...)
+The only reading that really talked about minorities being left out of the history of mental health was the Tomes reading. So, has there been more recent research that has included their input into the narrative? And what about children?
+In the Tone reading, they talked about how popular and socially acceptable the tranquilizers were and that there were shortages. I don’t understand why they didn’t limit prescribing the pills when the need exceeded the demand for the product. Wouldn’t that have helped to control the whole dependency issue that they realized was a side effect later?
+A theme that I noticed repeating in some of the readings was the debate of over diagnosing disorders and where do you draw the line from just normal feelings and actually having clinical depression or an anxiety disorder? Why is this a reoccurring debate in scholarship when it’s nearly impossible to prove?