Licensed clinical psychiatrist specializing in cognitive behavioral therapy. Accepting new patients.
tracking: afteryourdeathormine
Please read disclaimer and FAQs carefully before sending an ask.
This blog contains NSFW and triggering content.
Est: June 2013.
Forget the headlines – schizophrenia is more common than you might think
Which illness frightens you most? Cancer? Stroke? Dementia? To judge from tabloid coverage, the condition we should really fear isn’t physical at all. “Scared of mum’s schizophrenic attacks”, “Knife-wielding schizophrenic woman in court”, “Schizo stranger killed dad”, “Rachel murder: schizo accused”, and
“My schizophrenic son says he’ll kill… but he’s escaped from secure hospitals 7 times” are just a few of dozens of similar headlines we found in a cursory internet search. Mental illness, these stories imply, is dangerous. And schizophrenia is the most dangerous of all.
Such reporting is unhelpful, misleading and manipulative. But it may be even more inaccurate than it first appears. This is because scientists are increasingly doubtful whether schizophrenia – a term invented more than a century ago by the psychiatric pioneer Eugen Bleuler – is a distinct illness at all. This isn’t to say that individuals diagnosed with the condition don’t have genuine and serious mental health problems. But how well the label “schizophrenia” fits those problems is now a very real question.
What’s wrong with the concept of schizophrenia? For one thing, research indicates the term may simply be functioning as a catch-all for a variety of separate problems. Six main conditions are typically caught under the umbrella of schizophrenia: paranoia; grandiosity (delusional beliefs that one has special powers or is famous); hallucinations (hearing voices, for example); thought disorder (being unable to think straight); anhedonia or the inability to experience pleasure; and diminished emotional expression (essentially an emotional “numbness”). But how many of these problems a person experiences, and how severely, varies enormously. Having one doesn’t mean you’ll necessarily develop any of the others.
Why hasn’t this been noticed by clinicians? Mental health professionals, inevitably, tend only to see the most unwell individuals. These patients tend to suffer from lots of the problems we’ve mentioned – the more difficulties you’re experiencing, the more likely it is that you’ll end up being seen by a specialist – prompting psychiatrists like Bleuler to assume these problems are symptoms of a single underlying condition. But defining an illness by looking only at the minority who end up in hospital can be a big mistake.
The traditional view has been that schizophrenia occurs in approximately 1% of people. But it’s now clear that the sort of experiences captured under the label are common in the general population – frequently far less distressing and disruptive, for sure, but essentially the same thing. Take paranoia, for instance. Almost 20% of UK adults report feeling as though others were against them in the previous 12 months, with 1.8% fearing plots to cause them serious harm. We tested the level of paranoia among the general public by asking volunteers to take a virtual reality tube train ride, during which they shared a carriage with a number of computer-generated “avatars”. These avatars were programmed to behave in a strictly neutral fashion, yet over 40% of participants reported that the avatars showed hostility towards them.
Moreover, triggering the odd sensations associated with schizophrenia is remarkably easy. Go without sleep for a night or two and you’re likely to experience some very peculiar thoughts and feelings (as demonstrated by a recent study of sailors in solo races). Consume a lot of cannabisand the effects can be similar. Meanwhile, a classic study by the psychiatrist Stuart Grassian showed that prisoners placed in solitary confinement were soon prey to hallucinations and delusions.
What all this suggests is that schizophrenia isn’t a specific, relatively rare, and rigorously defined illness. Instead, it covers a wide range of often unrelated conditions, all of which are also seen in people who are not mentally ill, and all of which exist on a continuum from the comparatively mild to the very severe. People with conditions like schizophrenia are simply those who happen to fall at the extreme end of a number of these continua.
What causes psychotic experiences? Research has pointed a decisive finger at living in cities, drug use, poverty, migration, traumatic experiences in childhood and later negative events such as being the victim of an assault. Experiences like paranoia are also linked with a number of psychological traits, such as a tendency to worry, feel depressed, sleep poorly, or jump to conclusions. These factors seem to work in what scientists call a “dose-response” manner: the more of them you experience, the more likely it is that your mental health will suffer.
Genetic factors also play a part, though there’s no evidence for a single “schizophrenia” gene. Instead, a multitude of genes are likely to be involved – with their effect, crucially, conditioned by environmental factors. So the people who end up being treated for schizophrenia aren’t the unlucky few who happen to have inherited a rogue gene. Genetic susceptibility exists on a spectrum too. The more of the relevant genes you possess, the further you are to the extreme end of the spectrum and the less of a push you’ll need from life events to become ill. It’s worth remembering, however, that genetic research into schizophrenia has focused on the people who present for treatment: the severest end of the continua. What it hasn’t done is look at the various types of psychotic experiences across the general population.
Not everyone agrees with these new ways of thinking about schizophrenia. An editorial in the British Journal of Psychiatry, for example, lambasted the approach as “scientifically unproven and clinically impractical”. But one thing is certain: deepening our understanding of psychotic problems must be a priority. Diagnostic criteria for mental illnesses change over time, and the same will happen with schizophrenia. Rather than getting sidetracked by day-to-day debates about the symptoms required for a diagnosis, it will be more productive to focus on the individual psychotic experiences, remembering that they don’t only occur in those who come into contact with mental health services but exist on spectra in the general population. This isn’t merely a theoretical issue: if we target specific problems, rather than a loosely defined illness, we’re likely to improve treatment outcomes for the many people struggling with these debilitating experiences.
thingsineedremember reblogged this from sagansense 
punkgrocerydad reblogged this from sagansense 
slava-soloviev liked this 
wrappy reblogged this from themedicalstate 
aworldof-pureimagination liked this 
hello095 reblogged this from easacommunity 
kanyeonvogue liked this 
quichetein reblogged this from lameofgod quichetein liked this 
lameofgod reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage 
thecolourofjay liked this 
cluster-a liked this 
angryanticolonialist reblogged this from sagansense 
supreme-andy liked this 
profanedrseuss reblogged this from afteryourdeathormine 
thefannibals liked this 
mxsterwayne liked this 
sunstarsmoons liked this 
perhapsmercytoo liked this 
nightshadow12 reblogged this from afteryourdeathormine 
afteryourdeathormine reblogged this from themedicalstate 
iamladyloin liked this 
cynical-barnacle reblogged this from kelrez 
kelrez reblogged this from stargazington kelrez liked this 
mayrolando liked this mayrolando reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage 
stargazington reblogged this from thenewenlightenmentage 
yixingstwin liked this 
lesteiny liked this 
this-body--holding-me liked this 
themedicalstate posted this A truly well-tailored person suit must be worn with panache.
Expedit esse deos, et, ut expedit, esse putemus.
Nomenque erit indelebile nostrum.
Nec species sua cuique manet, rerumque novatrix ex aliis alias reparat natura figuras: nec perit in toto quicquam, mihi credite, mundo, sed variat faciemque novat, nascique vocatur incipere esse aliud, quam quod fuit ante, morique desinere illud idem. cum sint huc forsitan illa, haec translata illuc, summa tamen omnia constant.
The default is NBC canon; fleshing out the details will take place, as needed, in each individual thread. Hannibal is fluid, and his concept of truth & history is abstract, to say the least. No truth is immutable. No lie is wholly without backing. I tend to use Harris for more thorough fleshing out, but overlay NBC canon where Harris was just too cracky.
There was a cliff; there was a fall. And where, indeed, did the physical remnants drift to?
One could argue about Hannibal's psychology; he certainly expresses traits common to psychopathy and sociopathy (both loaded terms with their own historical biases) but does not neatly fit into any category. He is articulate, polite, charming, and disarming. A grudge will not be forgotten.
I am not a medical professional. I am not certified to offer medical, psychiatric, or personal advice in any way. This is a roleplay blog—based off of a manipulative, abusive, charming character whom I do not own or in any way represent.
Do not use any of Dr Lecter’s advice. By submitting any ask, you are actively accepting the fact that this is purely entertainment and not any substitution for medical care. By submitting an ask, you are also accepting that I am not responsible for what you choose to do with the completely fictitious content which I produce.
To be very blunt: I don’t know what I’m doing. You should not expect me to. I don’t want to be sued because someone took a fictional character’s fictional advice. (Would you take the advice of a stranger at the bus stop? Your answer should be no, and you should treat this no differently.)
That being said, if you want someone to talk to, I can always offer a shoulder.
You can find psychiatric, survivor, and crisis resources in the Resources tab. Please use them.
This blog is private and 21+. My expectation is that you’re the legal age of majority for your location. And that you don’t actually kill people.
I will only be following back blogs that I’m actively playing with on this account. I will not follow you back if you do not list your age somewhere on your blog; I will not play with you if you are not at least 18 years old, regardless of thread content or geographical location.
I don’t believe in ‘exclusivity’ and find it an abhorrent, exclusionary practice.
The more established and fleshed-out your character, the more likely I am to want to play. This goes across the board for canonical characters and OCs. Grammatically-aware para/paragraph-style (third-person prose) preferred. I get rankled easily by consistent errors and/or lack of proofreading.
There is a very large difference between creative grammar/word choice/formatting and purple prose. 'Cerulean orbits' or other such nonsense? That's not creative; it makes no linguistic sense whatsoever. Bend grammar; don't flay the languague, ffs.
I don’t automatically post new follower starters, nor do I respond to unnegotiated starters from others, mutuals or otherwise. Drop me an OOC message or ask to negotiate play. Do feel free to send in memes, and certainly come talk to me OOC in general.
If you find that replying to a thread is becoming a chore/you’re not looking forward to it/you’re no longer feeling it, please let me know. I’m more than happy to drop a thread, start something completely new, put something on hiatus, etc. I just ask for the same courtesy in return.
If you’re just not feeling RP with me in general, that’s really ok. I promise I won’t get upset or turn you into salami. Just let me know so neither of us feels awkward about an abandoned thread sitting there. I’m drama-free, so please just communicate with me. Communication is awesome.
Relationships are not presumed, regardless of canon, without previous discussion.
Hannibal is not a woobie. He is not a sweet, misunderstood gentleman who just ‘happens’ to have a penchant for eating people whom he finds crass. Hannibal is a self-aware sociopath*; a calculating, cold-blooded monster hiding in a very fine suit. Please do not be surprised when he acts accordingly.
Your character has high odds of being maimed, murdered, and/or consumed.
On various spectra, I would categorise Hannibal as grey-panromantic (generally presenting as aromantic) and grey-pansexual (presenting as asexual). The vast majority of his physical sexuality is a power play; getting under his skin to something less constructed is extremely unlikely.
It should go without saying that this entire show is a giant trigger & ergo this blog will contain consistently mature/disturbing fictional content. Gore, NSFW images, and NSFW threads are not usually behind readmores. I will not make a habit of tagging gore, murder, cannibalism, etc, since doing so would be redundant.
However, if you would like a specific trigger tagged or put behind a readmore, please let me know. I’m more than happy to oblige.
And finally:
disclaimer: Hannibal Lecter is not my creative property, and I own nothing here except my own prose. This is all in good fun; I thank you in advance for not suing me.
Pending.
Pending.
Pending.
Pending.