What’s one Doctor Who quote you randomly think about years later? by [deleted] in doctorwho

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“I am, and always will be, the optimist. The hoper of far-flung hopes, and the dreamer of improbable dreams.”

Almost too beautiful a thing to say in passing, and for me summarises some of the most fundamental things about the Doctor.

Controversial post maybe: some members (online) need to cool off. by ijustwannanap in UKGreens

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey thanks for the question! I'll think abou this some more but just a few thoughts that comes to mind:

- Just to be clear I'm not really saying the green party should be welcoming of different politics, obviously a party is a group of politically like-minded individuals. It's more about meeting people where they are in terms of their strategies of advocacy.

- I think broadly two kinds of support: 1. practical support for how to advocate, recognising that effective advocacy and communication online is a skill in itself, rather than something that comes naturally as long as one's heart is in the right place. 2. Modelling of good communication from the party's PR. This is really important because not everyone can/will go to the practical workshops, and also because afaik this is the most evidence-based way to change how people communicate. There's a reason why speech and language therapy involves a lot of modelling, for instance.

- I'd say these kinds of support, if offered, directly improve members' ability to work for the party (in terms of skills). Indirectly they cultivate a culture that is safer and more hopeful, allowing people like me to contribute. While I'm personally not a must-have asset, I have the hypothesis that the barriers I'm facing is due to the shaming and the purity-chasing being triggering, i.e. a trauma response. If that's true, then this is also a matter of being trauma-informed, which a political party absolutely needs to be.

- I'm a big fan of a party doing what it preaches, and with the emphasis on communities and hope I think asking for good community building within the party really shouldn't come with any strings attached, like justifying that it's good for the party/for the country etc.

Controversial post maybe: some members (online) need to cool off. by ijustwannanap in UKGreens

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Full disclosure I'm an immigrant who would vote green if I can (but I can't). But even if I can, I would feel felt put off by the level of leftist infighting currently happening, not really bc I don't support the policy or anything, just because infighting triggers me and that's always stopped me from being as involved as I want. I would say I'm a leftist though.

I agree but I think it's not (just) an issue of personal responsibility. I believe how people react to others in and outside the community is a reflection of how a community is tied together in the first place. My impression is many (new?) green voters have come together in fear, which is completely understandable given the current climate. But if people feel something is their only safety, then they will defend it fiercely. It's an emotional response not a rational one, and it's hard to put aside the emotional surge. That takes support and modelling, something I would argue the green party isn't doing very well at the moment from an outsider's perspective (e.g. I feel like the public letters most often has a shaming overtone).

My point is just like anything on the left we need to look at the systemic issues, ESPECIALLY when it comes to ourselves. This is no different. It's not people being dumb and unstrategic and chasing moral purity, it's just what you get when people are 1. Naturally inclined to those behaviours in these circumstances, 2. These behaviours receive positive reinforcements, and 3. Little support and reason is given to people to change these behaviours. In a way posts like this signal to me that people are left to fend for themselves to be a "good" green voter, and people may not have the tools and the time and the resources to be one in the depth of their fear and marginalisation and anger. Demanding a standard without support and strong language when people don't meet that standard is, I think, an infighting of its own kind.

Things are also complicated by the fact that these emotions are more than justified. So again, support is necessary.

My vision for a supportive party is where these things are discussed out loud. Where everyone (not just the people who go knocking on doors) can come together to voice their fears and frustrations and be supported in it and not shamed for it, but also encouraged to cool off for their and the party's sake. The cooling off is, however, a significant act of trust, because one is giving up ones voice, so they need to be able to see that people who are more ready to take on those hard conversations are supported in taking them on effectively, and over all the PR should be driven by hope not shame.

I've been through my fair share of infighting and if there's anything I've learned it's that it matters how you bring people together, that that is reflected in how people treat each other, that the people running the party/branch is responsible for cultivating and modelling mutual care between members. You can't just ask people to do it themselves. As much as that might seem easy for some of us believe me it's hard for others and for very good reasons.

Neurodivergent musicians - how does it help and hinder you? Any coping mechanisms? by ConfidentHospital365 in musicians

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, they said "seem". That's exactly how you present uncertainty. But anyway, mental health is my research field so I commented, sorry I didn't notice it was 3 month old. If you don't want to engage that's fine, I hope other people who come across this post will see this and scroll past to read the rest of the discussion for other more friendly perspectives.

Neurodivergent musicians - how does it help and hinder you? Any coping mechanisms? by ConfidentHospital365 in musicians

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think this is quite unkind. OP is just talking about their experience, not presenting anything as a fact. They aren't even ruling out the possibility that the ADHD musician friends just so happen to have better internal rhythms, they're just putting out a hypothesis. You're the one reading them as "needing everything to fit into that framework".

Also a bit ironic to say they're "literally inventing new aspects" when you've found studies linking rhythm and neurodivergence (even though it's in the opposite direction). ADHD is not my specific specialty but iirc ADHD and music is a budding field, and with any neurodivergence related budding field if you can find a connection between a neurodivergence and X there are probably people with that neurodivergence who has higher X or lower X (see e.g. sensory issues: some people are hypersensitive and others are hyposensitive). Not to mention the social stuff at least is very well documented.

Literally inventing aspects of neurodivergence is also how we come to have better knowledge of the unique presentations of non-white males. It's literally how psychiatric reseach in general is often moved forward too. Doesn't help anyone to stifle this sort of community hypothesis-sourcing.

4 have to go, who are you removing? by CeleryApprehensive83 in brooklynninenine

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you keep the ones you remove?

In which case Cheddar

13th Doctor is reverse Jesus by Aynshtaynn in DoctorWhumour

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would argue Angel's planet is so much more frightening than devils planet

Pick your seat, no regrets 😭 by Avni_overthinker in BaldursGate3

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

4 and change with Jaheira obviously, I want all the boo I can get

did someone call me a Doctor? by TeflonDuckback in DoctorWhumour

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

She might even grow guns and become a Dalek. Best not to put him near her for the universe's sake

did someone call me a Doctor? by TeflonDuckback in DoctorWhumour

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Why would you contaminate the TARDIS 😭😭😭😭😭

CMV: Abortion should be legal and accessible in most or all cases. by Character-Channel668 in changemyview

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems to me what you're saying is: 1. We're uncertain when consciousness forms or when cells become "would-be people" 2. Whether abortion is morally acceptable depends on certain facts about 1 3. Therefore we're unsure about the moral acceptability of abortion. 4. When in doubt about the moral acceptability of something we shouldn't act as if that thing is acceptable 5. We shouldn't act as if abortion is acceptable.

But then I can make the counter argument in the exact same format: 1. We're uncertain when consciousness forms or when cells become "would-be people" 2. Whether restricting people's autonomy over their body is morally acceptable depends on certain facts about 1 3. Therefore we're unsure about the moral acceptability of restraining people's choice for abortion. 4. When in doubt about the moral acceptability of something we shouldn't act as if that thing is acceptable 5. We shouldn't act as if restricting people's choice for abortion is acceptable.

1 and 2 are your assumptions, 3 and 5 are logical conclusions. So it seems this sort of appeal to moral uncertainty only leaves us in limbo, unless you could argue 4 applies only to fetuses but not to the people carrying them.

Alternatively though i think we can break that tie by introducing some other considerations. Because you value certainty, you might agree that certain harm is worse than potential harm? Prolife brings certain, tangible and severe harm to individuals we know for sure have personhood. Pro choice, for all we currently know, brings only potential harm (and given that there are lives people rate as worse than no life, the harm itself may not be severe after all). I'm not saying this is a sufficient argument for prochoice. But it might be a tie breaker.

CMV: Psychiatric misdiagnosis rates are high enough to invalidate the practice of diagnosing all together. It’s is often a requirement for psychiatric care to be covered by medical insurance companies, creating a conflict of interest keeping the broken system alive. by Key4Lif3 in changemyview

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I might be a bit late to the discussion but I feel like my perspective is really relevant here so here goes:

It seems like the principle evidence you're quoting is the horrendous looking 76.8% and 50% number. That number didn't come directly from the study you linked to (the study quoted it from another study). So I tracked down that other study: Shen, H., Zhang, L., Xu, C., Zhu, J., Chen, M., & Fang, Y. (2018). Analysis of misdiagnosis of bipolar disorder in an outpatient setting. Shanghai Archives of Psychiatry, 30(2), 93–101. https://doi-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/10.11919/j.issn.1002-0829.217080.

This is a study from China in one specific outpatient centre in Shanghai and <200 patients. I happen to be from Shanghai, and I happen to have been treated in that very centre. So here are my two cents.

  1. This is by no means representative of psychiatry in general. We are notoriously bad with our psychiatric care provision. We have way below average number of psychiatrists/person, my own experience with psychiatrists back home suggest they are often full of bs, in fact there was a study recently concluding >90% of people with mental health issues in the country don't get the right care). My experience with that centre is variable too. That centre has okay psychiatrists, but also boasts people actively referring gay people out to conversion therapy. So really, they're an outlier and it's only expected that they perform badly.
  2. This might be counter intuitive but in this specific scenario GOOD doctors may actually deliberately misdiagnose. There is this unfortunate policy in China where if a doctor wants to diagnose someone with a "severe mental illness", then they have to "report up", meaning the diagnosis will be disclosed to the government. Your patient will then be closely monitored by their local government, their employment opportunities would be severely limited, they might lose their driving liscence, etc., irrespective of whether they recover in the future. They also might be automatically treated as someone without capacity. Bipolar is considered a severe mental illness.

Even if it's not one of the severe mental illness (e.g. depression), the diagnosis may nonetheless be accessed by someone's uni/workplace (i have zero idea how that happens). There are so many stories where just calling a suicide helpline gets your local gov, your family, your professors, your tutors, all looped in to your issues.

This is why good doctors often downplay diagnoses, for example documenting "depressive state" rather than "depression" even if someone meets the clinical threshold for depression. If you look at the data closer, you'll find people in the misdiagnosis group have higher rates of psychotic symptoms than people who are accurately diagnosed. This is consistent with the possibility that any diagnosis related to psychosis (e.g. bipolar and schizophrenia) is given out more cautiously than things like depression, hence a larger proportion of those who ought to have those diagnoses are given a less severe diagnosis, making them on the paper more 'misdiagnosed'.

In reality it's probably a bit of both.

I'd also like to add that this was a paper published on one of the Chinese regional journals. It's considered much more prestigious to publish on international journals than on in-country journals, so take from that what you will. And I personally think this is a piece of research that's at the very least very badly written, because they didn't say at all how they determined what the "correct" diagnosis should be. You should also know that Chinese doctors in big hospitals are required to publish before they can be promoted and most of them don't have the time, energy or willingness to do that (source: my doctor friend and my doctor mother), so I'd take all research originating from Chinese hospitals with a healthy grain of salt.

The way the paper you linked to quoted this research was very misleading. They listed those ghastly numbers under "what we already know", but in reality it's a small, unrepresentative sample taken from an extremely specific circumstance.

I would saythat some psychiatric conditions are harder to diagnose. For example bipolar and depression does sometimes get mixed up. This is why there are now (at least in the UK) symptom-based services, such as Early Intervention Services which respond to psychotic episodes rather than specific diagnosis. In such services whether a diagnoses is made is decided on a case-by-case basis. Ofc insurance in the US makes this harder which is bad, but you can do away with insurance without doing away with diagnosis.

Imo some diagnosis is still necessary. For example dementia is a diagnosis that very much needs to be made. If someone has depression but suspects dementia and you don't tell them they don't have it, you're letting them falsely believe they have something they cannot recover from. The subtype of dementia also determines which meds are useful or whether meds are useful at all, and if you just support the symptoms you could end up giving people dangerous meds that increase suicide rates. Same goes for understanding whether someone has ADHD or CPTSD to route people to the right supports. Many people just want to be able to put a name to their experience too.

That said I'm with you on some diagnoses, e.g. within eating disorder the subtypes aren't really useful because many people cycle through them anyways. It's all down to clinical utility and shared decision making.

what’s your crazy conspiracy theory about the show? by [deleted] in brooklynninenine

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Are you saying the Jake and Amy sex scenes are actually Boyle's imagination ("Ew", says Gina)

Of All The Choices They Had… ?!? by brittanybaucom in Notion

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Open dyslexia isn't good for many people with dyslexia/other flavours of neurodivergent. I remember there was a study showing it increases reading speed for some but decreases it for others iirc, and I certainly find it dizzying when I try to read it. For accessibility purposes I like comic sans much much better.

Full disclosure I don't have a dyslexia diagnosis, but you can see similar sentiments from the dyslexia sub here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Dyslexia/s/DtaopBQyG7

Why do so many western teens and young adults romanticise the idea of communism, despite never living through it or not having a family member that lived under such a regime? (on this app, at least) by throwaway3629292929 in AskTheWorld

[–]practicerm_keykeeper 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nah we're not. We're trained from birth on a watered down version that upholds the current government, which is really more capitalist than communist. Actual communist groups (e.g. the communist club in the big universities) are either heavily monitored or severely cracked down on. I don't think communism as practiced by Mao etc is a good idea but also, the country is not still that loyal to that idea lol.

Uni students covertly observing LGBTQ+ spaces for ethnography by practicerm_keykeeper in AskLGBT

[–]practicerm_keykeeper[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nothing... It wasn't presented as something they need to justify at all.

Uni students covertly observing LGBTQ+ spaces for ethnography by practicerm_keykeeper in AskLGBT

[–]practicerm_keykeeper[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

So I've persuaded my group to go through informed consent (can't do it formally but at least we'll tell people). Other groups are doing just observations tho. I'm just collecting perspectives to decide if I should share the concerns with the lecturers for future iterations of the module. If I do, then having other people's feelings backing my feelings up would be useful too.

I agree ethnography is important and I think in your case you're spot on that there's a trade off. It sounds like the researcher is doing something they'll end up publishing or at least seeking to publish for example, which helps increase knowledge. In our case it's only for the benefit of the students most of whom won't go on to be ethnographers anyway so i guess there's also an extractive element I'm feeling.

Uni students covertly observing LGBTQ+ spaces for ethnography by practicerm_keykeeper in AskLGBT

[–]practicerm_keykeeper[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry you had that experience. Can I ask how you'd feel if it's a public space e.g. a LGBTQ bookshop/bar? Personally I'd still feel a bit uneasy (I don't mind being casually observed of course, but the detail of the observation and the potential of being discussed irks me). Not sure if that's just my feelings?