Her /An Unquiet Mind/ is also an excellent read, and will help those who are unclear about the distinction between normal sadness and depression, or between normal "ups" and mania. She is both a scientist studying neurophysiology and a long-term survivor of a rather serious manifestation of bi-polar disorder. She is frank both about the difficulties that her medications have caused her and the vital role that these same meds played in repeatedly saving her life.

There are often gray areas between a diagnosable illness and an adjustment problem, but there are scores upon scores of cases where it is fairly clear that someone has crossed a line from life problem to serious mood disorder. David Sugarman, you might want to take a look at the DSM-IV criteria for the illnesses you mentioned (you can find listings all over the internet). The manual makes things sound more clear-cut than they actually are in real life, but it will probably help clarify how the profession attempts to distinguish between emotions like stress and sadness and full-blown pathologies. It's not a perfect system by any means, and psychiatric diagnoses are best understood as clusters of symptoms rather than entities in-and-of-themselves. But in a majority of cases it serves its purpose rather well. And in some cases it goes terribly, terribly wrong. Compared to the rest of medicine, we're in the stone age when it comes to the science of mental illness, I'm afraid. Or maybe at least the Medieval period.

Also, to the person who suggested that psychologists are bilking people of money when they try to focus on helping their clients learn to solve their own problems rather than giving them advise/answers - I can see how frustrating such a response can be when you are in pain and/or crisis. A competent, well-attuned therapist should know the difference between a client who is in need of more straightforward support and one who is ready to work on building his own problem-solving skills. However, the psychologist who is willing to keep being the one giving the advise and isn't interested in encouraging independent coping skills in her clients is really the one who wants to keep people in need of professional help. I prefer a therapist who wants to empower me and help me be a wise person rather than one who is focussed only on excersizing his own power and dispensing his own wisdom.

David, you asked about how you are dealing with this young woman who may be depressed. It's not part of any official description that I know of, but it is true in my experience (having been both the depressed individual and the caretaker of many depressed individuals) that depressed thinking can be so persistent as to take on a nearly delusional quality. People who are severely depressed are often completely and unshakably convinced that they are worthless and that there is nothing that will help them. It can be extremely frustrating to deal with. In other words, your reaction to this young woman is both normal and entirely understandable. Of course, distinguishing between depressed thinking and stubborn teenage angst can be a bit of a challenge, but fortunately you don't have to make that judgment call.

I agree with AKA Smith that setting boundaries is a good idea. One thing you can do is explain to her that, while you and your sons wish to support her, you can't keep doing so unless she takes some steps to help herself, such as seeing a doctor or counselor. Another thing you could do is contact a responsible party, such as her parents if you trust them or her school counselor. Her problems shouldn't be on your and your family's shoulders.

What was with the extended sleep med commercial we saw AJ watching towards the end of the show?

Also, I think the bus comment was a performance. Tony came up with something to say that would please his therapist. In my opinion, it is essentially meaningless.

Um, but since when should we take morality lessons from Osama Bin Ladin? If he thinks we're too liberal, good for us. He would think that 99.9% of everyone in the world is too liberal, including most people of his own faith (who have always been and will remain the primary targets of both his propoganda and his violence), so his judgement on this issue doesn't seem particularly pertinent. Anyhow, I don't think our liberal culture caused the attack so much as the perception in many parts of the world that we are cramming said liberal culture down their collective throats by economically and militarily invading their countries.

And I think that gets at the heart of the outrage over Gere's acts. To our eyes, it's merely a boorish American demonstrating his cultural ignorance. To the eyes of those who feel (rightly or wrongly) like they are desperately holding back an overwhelming tide of cultural change, the actress was symbolic of the inviolability of thier culture and their country, and Gere's unwanted affection was a metaphor for our (perceived) intrusions.

Of course, it makes little sense for someone to be threatened with imprisonment for being a metaphor. To the degree that people were serious rather than cynically manipulative with their response to the situation, it would be nice to see some ability to acknowledge the multiple perspectives one could take on the issue. But then again, who among us is good at that? Lack of perspective-taking in matters of sexuality and cultural sovereignty is endimic to most every culture I have ever encountered.

It's also noteworthy that the actress was also burned in effigy and threatened with jailtime. This issue isn't about lashing out at a clueless Westerner: it's a particular faction of Indian culture trying to police the response of its fellow citizens towards what it perceives to be Western incursion.