Differences

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

--- 471g4:questions:471g4--week_1 [2021/08/26 04:20] – 98.118.240.108
+++ 471g4:questions:471g4--week_1 [2021/08/26 11:55] (current) – 75.75.52.120
@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 .	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**
@@ Line 76: / Line 81: @@
+**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?