one in five children in Ireland hears voices

Perspective is an interesting thing isnt’t it.
When I read the headline, 1 in 5 children in Ireland hear voices, I thought, well there you go, if the numbers are that high, it proves that it is a common variation of human experience, rather than an exception.
 
Yet when I read the article, which instead is alarmed that so many children may be mentally ill.
 
The question that begs to be answered, is what percentage does there need to be of people hearing voices before it is accepted as a common human experience? 50 %?  80 %? 100 %?
 
 

Open Dialogue- Successful in treating Psychosis in Finland

I had seen something on this a while ago, but a documentary has now been made about this technique that is helping many people in Finland, without medication. The nurse in the youtube trailed states that  Schizophrenia is just a name for an experience that people have had that they cannot find words to express ( or something like that!!)

Here is a snippet from the blog of the documentary maker Daniel Mackler.

 second key thing I learned about Keropudas Hospital, which, like most mental hospitals, is placed on the far outskirts of town (in their case, on the edge of the forest), is that it’s a rather large hospital that is relatively unused. There are one or more whole wards that are unused. I remember visiting one. It looked like an average, spacious hospital unit, but it was silent — and empty. It was dusty. Nothing was happening there. And the reason: they no longer have patients for them. They’ve developed such an effective system of helping people get well from psychosis, and get permanently out of the psychiatric system, that they no longer need so many beds. (No wonder they have some of the lowest per capita spending for psychosis anywhere in Finland — at least that’s what I’ve heard. When people get fully well, and are able to get off all their psychiatric drugs, they save the system a lot of money.)

Also, much of the work they do helping people with psychosis, most of it, in fact, has nothing to do with the hospital itself. In most cases they don’t prefer that people in crisis come to the hospital, and they don’t even do much therapy in the outpatient clinic that is located at the hospital. In fact, their hospital outpatient clinic has only one therapy room — one therapy room to serve a population of around 70,000 people!

Granted, the Open Dialogue clinicians do have an outpatient therapy clinic in each of their catchment area’s two largest towns (Tornio and Kemi), but they even prefer to avoid using these clinics for therapy, if at all possible. Their best preference is to meet in people’s homes. The therapists, usually a team of two or three trained family therapists, travel to the homes of the people in crisis. The clinicians made a point of telling me repeatedly that they saw no value in having people come to the hospital for therapy, because of the stigma. They felt that if they could help people get better at home, in their natural environment, then it was all for the good. Also, the clinicians told me repeatedly that they learned far more from people by seeing them in their homes than they could ever learn by seeing them in such an artificial place as a hospital or clinic.

So, although some of what I’m writing overlaps with the content of my film, I feel this is important enough to bear repeating. In two weeks of staying in Western Lapland, I really came to believe that this program is what it claims to be: a program that helps a lot — a lot — of people get well from psychosis, without meds. Although in one sense I gained this belief by talking with clinicians, who said things that people who have never watched someone go through the process of recovery (or who hadn’t lived it themselves) could have known, I gained it more from talking to the people they worked with.

As I said, I sat in on many Open Dialogue sessions, and although they were mostly in Finnish (sometimes, when the people coming for help felt comfortable, they adjusted and spoke in English for me), I still was able to gather a surprising lot — about their openness, their humanity, and their respect. Also, sitting in the sessions gave me an entrée to talk afterward with the people coming for help, the so-called clients and their families. One thing that struck me profoundly, even in really complicated and sticky emotional situations — situations that would have ended up with someone getting heavy medicated almost everywhere in the United States, but weren’t ending up that way here — was that I didn’t meet a single person seeking psychiatric help here who was bitter, or even unhappy, about the treatment they were getting. In fact, I didn’t find “treatment” to be a dirty word in Western Lapland. Nor was “psychiatry.” That struck me as bizarre, because for me both of those words have an inherent dirtiness for me, the second especially. And that’s entirely because of my own experience with each, both personal and professional.

What I heard from the Finnish people seeking help was that they felt the Open Dialogue system was fair — and honest. They also told me repeatedly that it felt “normal” to them. They used those words repeatedly. Interestingly, most of them seemed to have no idea that psychiatry was commonly hated and mistrusted in many other parts of the world, and even in parts of their own country. In fact, when I explained this to them many were genuinely surprised, as it contradicted their experience. This led them to tell me other things they liked best about their system. And they liked many things.

They liked the openness and frankness of the therapists. They liked it that above all else their own voices were heard and valued. They liked it that they had a key say in the decision about whether or not psychiatric drugs might be of benefit to them or not. They liked it that they had alternative options to drugs presented to them. They liked it that when they were in crisis they could invite their family and friends and other important people from their lives into therapy meetings — if they wished.

They also liked it that the therapists worked in teams, right in session — because they liked listening to what the therapists had to say to each other, in the middle of session. They told me that they felt they deserved to know what the therapists were thinking! And doesn’t it make logical sense?

They also told me that they liked it that their therapists met with them immediately in their crises, and didn’t put them off for months on endless, bureaucratic waiting lists. They liked it that therapists gave them the choice of meeting in their own homes or in clinics. They liked it that hospitalization was only used in cases of dire safety issues, and that hospitalizations were generally quite short. And they also liked it that visitors like me were so interested in what was going on with Open Dialogue — and were also interested in their lives. Many of them wanted to know what I myself thought of their lives, their situations, and of their therapy too. And, because it was Open Dialogue, and because I felt safe there, I shared my opinion. And they valued it. And it even felt therapeutic — which felt good to me.

 You can see the whole article on this website here http://beyondmeds.com/2011/03/21/finnishopendialogue/

Here is the youtube video

Mental Health screening for 4year olds in NZ??

I was horrified to read this today. I don’t know that many parents are aware of this, but think that they should be. They should also be aware of how difficult it is to extricate a person of pychiatric drugs once they have started taking them.

http://www.madinamerica.com/2012/03/universal-psychiatric-screening-for-nz-pre-schoolers/ 

Universal Psychiatric Screening for New Zealand Four Year Olds

In September 2008, the New Zealand Government rolled out a new universal four year old health screen, the B4 School Check. . In addition to the general health, vision, hearing and dental checks traditionally conducted on kiwi kids, the B4 School Check includes a screening test for mental disorders, an initiative that arose out of a government plan for addressing conduct disorder in New Zealand children.

In the following year prescribing for 0-4 year olds in New Zealand increased over 140% while Ritalin extended release prescriptions for pre-schoolers doubled.

The lack of effectiveness and potential harm of pre-school mental health screening programmes is well established.  A randomized controlled trial of a public health and education screening program which included 4,797 four to five year old children found that at the end of the third school year, no differences were found between children who screened positive for disorders and received intervention and the “no intervention” groups using individual academic achievement, cognitive, and developmental tests.[1]

In its policy paper on the B4 School Check, the Ministry of Health acknowledges that “research does not support the use of mass screening for mental disorders in pre-schoolers” but does not explain why it is then proposing its introduction in NZ.The mental health screen used in the new B4 School Check, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), was developed by child psychiatrist and neurologist Dr Robert Goodman of the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College in London.

This screening test has been introduced despite the Ministry of Health acknowledging that the test is “still being evaluated for predictive validity, reliability, sensitivity and specificity.”

Even if the test was valid elsewhere it would not be in New Zealand given that health professionals conducting the test are told by the Ministry that the scoring sheet being used in NZ “is based on the SDQ for older children, and the wording differs in three questions.” No explanation is provided as to why the scoring sheet for an older population has been substituted for the one designed for the pre-school test or how the wording differences affect validity.

Research shows the SDQ produces more false positives than false negatives, resulting in many children with no disorders being referred for diagnostic assessment[2] with false positive results affecting15% to 30% of children.

See the article on the site for more info.

Dreams Visions and Realities, Video on ” the dreamtime”

 have just watched this excellent video, with an Aboriginal storyteller Bill Harney and Dr Stephen Aizenstat talking about the “dreaming”. In this context it not only includes night dreaming but also includes ” dreaming” during the day, or hearing from other “entities”, or the Dreamtime.

 
They offer some great insights that can also be applied to anyone hearing voices and having visions.