{"id":19821,"date":"2012-02-17T12:00:23","date_gmt":"2012-02-17T17:00:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=19821"},"modified":"2012-02-17T06:42:52","modified_gmt":"2012-02-17T11:42:52","slug":"no-contest","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2012\/02\/17\/no-contest\/","title":{"rendered":"no contest&#8230;"},"content":{"rendered":"<br \/>\n<blockquote>\n<div align=\"center\"><u><strong><font color=\"#200020\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.thelancet.com\/journals\/lancet\/article\/PIIS0140-6736%2812%2960248-7\/fulltext\" target=\"_blank\">Living with grief<\/a><\/font><\/strong><\/u><br \/>   <sup><strong><font color=\"#200020\">An Editorial<\/font><\/strong><\/sup><\/div>\n<div align=\"center\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">The Lancet<\/font><\/strong><br \/>   18 February 2012<\/div>\n<p>  <\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>When  should grief be classified as a mental illness? More often than is  current practice, proposes the American Psychiatric Association in its  forthcoming fifth edition of the <em>Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders<\/em> (<span class=\"ja50-ce-inter-ref\">DSM-5<\/span>).  Previous DSM editions have highlighted the need to consider, and  usually exclude, bereavement before diagnosis of a major depressive  disorder. In the draft version of DSM-5, however, there is no such  exclusion for bereavement, which means that feelings of deep sadness,  loss, sleeplessness, crying, inability to concentrate, tiredness, and no  appetite, which continue for more than 2 weeks after the death of a  loved one, could be diagnosed as depression, rather than as a normal  grief reaction.<\/p>\n<p>  The death of a loved one  can lead to a profound, and long-lasting, grieving process, which is  movingly described in an essay by Arthur Kleinman in this week&#8217;s Art of  Medicine section. After his wife died, it took 6 months before  Kleinman&#8217;s feelings of grief became &ldquo;less acute&rdquo; in his own words, and  almost a year on, he feels &ldquo;sadness at times&rdquo; and harbours &ldquo;the sense  that a part of me is gone forever&hellip;I am still caring for our memories. Is  there anything wrong (or pathological) with that?&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>   Most  people&#8217;s experiences of grief would align with Kleinman&#8217;s. It is often  not until 6 months, or the first anniversary of the death, that grieving  can move into a less intense phase. Grief is an individual response to  bereavement, which is shaped by the strength of relationship with the  person who has died, being male or female, religious belief, societal  expectation, and cultural context, among other factors. Malcolm Potts,  in an <strong><u><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1111\/j.1399-0012.2005.00338.x\">essay<\/a><\/u><\/strong>  in this journal in 1994, after the death of his wife, said: &ldquo;Grief is  an astonishing emotion. It is the tally half of love and it has to  be&hellip;.Anguish, body-shaking weeping, grief: a biological behaviour that  had been latent and unused in my brain&hellip;I would not and could not forgo  it. Grief has to be.&rdquo; 18 years after his stillborn daughter was born, <u><strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.thelancet.com\/journals\/lancet\/article\/PIIS0140-6736%2811%2960107-4\">Steven Guy<\/a><\/strong><\/u>  said: &ldquo;I have moved on; I can talk about the day she died and not cry,  sometimes&hellip;She has changed me from the shy insecure person I was then to  the openly emotional, caring, supportive, and strong man I am now.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>   Medicalising  grief, so that treatment is legitimised routinely with antidepressants,  for example, is not only dangerously simplistic, but also flawed. The  evidence base for treating recently bereaved people with standard  antidepressant regimens is absent. In many people, grief may be a  necessary response to bereavement that should not be suppressed or  eliminated. For some, though, whose grief becomes pathological  (sometimes known as complicated or prolonged), or who develop  depression, treatment with drugs or, sometimes more effective  psychological interventions such as guided mourning, may be needed.  WHO&#8217;s International Classification of Diseases, currently under revision  as ICD-11, is debating a proposal to include &ldquo;prolonged grief  disorder&rdquo;, but it will be another 18 months before that definition will  be clear. Bereavement is associated with adverse <span class=\"ja50-ce-inter-ref\">health outcomes<\/span>,  both physical and mental, but interventions are best targeted at those  at highest risk of developing a disorder or those who develop  complicated grief or depression, rather than for all.<\/p>\n<p>   Building  a life without the loved person who died cannot be expected to be  quick, easy, or straightforward. Life cannot, nor should not, continue  as normal. In a sense, a new life has to be created, and lived with.  After the loss of someone with whom life has been lived and loved,  nothing can be the same again. In her memoir to her husband, <em>Nothing was the same,<\/em> Kay Redfield Jamison, comments: &ldquo;There is a sanity to grief&rdquo; in contrast to her own experience of bipolar disorder. In  Kleinman&#8217;s words, &ldquo;My grief, like that of millions of others, signalled  the loss of something truly vital in my life. This pain was part of the  remembering and maybe also the remaking. It punctuated the end of a  time and a form of living, and marked the transition to a new time and a  different way of living.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>   Grief is not  an illness; it is more usefully thought of as part of being human and a  normal response to death of a loved one. Putting a timeframe on grief is  inappropriate&mdash;DSM-5 and ICD-11 please take note. Occasionally,  prolonged grief disorder or depression develops, which may need  treatment, but most people who experience the death of someone they love  do not need treatment by a psychiatrist or indeed by any doctor. For  those who are grieving, doctors would do better to offer time,  compassion, remembrance, and empathy, than pills.<\/sup><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<div align=\"justify\">If the DSM-5 Task Force doesn&#8217;t understand this editorial in the Lancet, maybe letting the DSM-5 die its own natural death might be the best thing to do after all. I doubt I&#8217;ll feel any grief over its loss. I doubt anyone will. Maybe it&#8217;ll put an end to the agony of the era. For contrast, here&#8217;s the other side of the argument from the DSM-5 Task Force:                 <\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<div align=\"center\"><u><a href=\"http:\/\/www.dsm5.org\/about\/Documents\/grief%20exclusion_Kendler.pdf\" target=\"_blank\"><strong><font color=\"#200020\">By Kenneth S. Kendler, M.D.: Member, DSM-5 Mood Disorder Work Group<\/font><\/strong><\/a><\/u><\/div>\n<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>Misconceptions about the proposal to  eliminate the grief exclusion criterion from DSM-IV have been presented  online and in the media. Writers have expressed fear that the change  will lead to automatic diagnosis of individuals who are grieving with  Major Depressive Disorder. I would like to provide some background on  the grief exclusion and some insight into thinking behind the proposal  to remove it for DSM-5 in order to put this change into perspective.   <\/p>\n<p>                  First, the grief exclusion criterion &ndash; which states  that someone who has experienced a recent bereavement is not eligible  for a diagnosis of major depression &ndash; was not present in the two major  psychiatric diagnostic systems that formed the basis for the DSM-III &ndash;  the diagnostic manual that is the immediate precursor of our current  DSM-IV. Rather, it was added to DSM-III largely on the basis of the work  of one of the DSM-III task force members who was then studying grief  and was carried forward with little modification into DSM-IV. Second,  the other major psychiatric diagnostic system used in the world &ndash; the  International Classification of Diseases &ndash; has never had a grief  exclusion criterion for major depression.<\/p>\n<p> Third, a broad range  of evidence agreed to by both sides of this debate shows that there are  little to no systematic differences between individuals who develop a  major depression in response to bereavement and in response to other  severe stressors &ndash; such as being physical assaulted and raped, being  betrayed by a trusted spouse whom you learn has been unfaithful or a  beloved child whom you are told is dealing drugs, having your doctor  tell you that your breast or prostate biopsy for cancer is positive or  the loss of your treasured job. So the DSM-IV position is not logically  defensible. Either the grief exclusion criterion needs to be eliminated  or extended so that no depression that arises in the setting of  adversity would be diagnosable. This latter approach would represent as  major shift, unsupported by a range of scientific evidence, in the  nature of our concept of depression as epidemiologic studies show that  the majority of individuals develop major depression in the setting of  psychosocial adversity.<\/p>\n<p>                     Fourth, the vast majority of individuals exposed to  grief and to these other terrible misfortunes do not develop major  depression. That does not mean, and here is the source  of much confusion, that they do not grieve. They do. It does not mean  that they do not feel terrible pain and loneliness. They do. Depression  is a slippery word and we are so used to using it to mean &ldquo;sad&rdquo;, &ldquo;blue&rdquo;,  &ldquo;upset&rdquo; or, in this specific case, &ldquo;grieving.&rdquo; Major depression &ndash; the  diagnostic term &ndash; is something quite different. Finally, diagnosis in  psychiatry as in the rest of medicine provides the possibility but by no  means the requirement that treatment be initiated. Watchful waiting is  important tool for all skilled clinicians. As a good internist might  adopt a watch and wait attitude toward a diagnosable upper respiratory  infection assuming that it is unlikely to progress to a pneumonia, so a  good psychiatrist, on seeing an individual with major depression after  bereavement, would start with a diagnostic evaluation.<\/p>\n<p>                  If the criteria for major depression are met, then  he or she would then have the opportunity to assess whether a  conservative watch and wait approach is indicated or whether, because of  suicidal ideation, major role impairment or a substantial clinical  worsening the benefits of treatment outweigh the limitations. As with  the psychiatric response to the other major stressors to which we humans  are all too frequently exposed, good clinical care involves first doing  no harm, and second intervening only when both our clinical experience  and good scientific evidence suggests that treatment is needed.<\/p>\n<p>  <\/sup><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>   No contest&#8230; <\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\">&nbsp;<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Living with grief An Editorial The Lancet 18 February 2012 When should grief be classified as a mental illness? More often than is current practice, proposes the American Psychiatric Association in its forthcoming fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Previous DSM editions have highlighted the need to consider, and [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-19821","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19821","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=19821"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19821\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":43837,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19821\/revisions\/43837"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19821"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19821"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19821"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}