Letters to the Editor
Bollinl
Published Letters: 17 Editor's Choice: 5
-
Feeling Good, meds for grief
[Read the article: I am depressed, but that's not really the problem, is it?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I wanted to second the suggestion for the book Feeling Good--it's got some really solid advice on how to live inside your own brain and make your self-talk be productive rather than destructive. It's a cheap good first start--and has an excellent quiz in the beginning to give the LW a sense of how severe the problem is, which may also clarify how urgent treatment would be.
But for LornaDoone and those saying that anti-depressants aren't appropriate for grief issues: I would respectfully disagree. Yes, there are normal experiences of grief, and the LW clearly is entitled to experience some genuine grief. Grief hurts. But short-term (or long term if appropriate) use of an SSRI can give the person a chance to experience that grief more productively, more effectively. Depression can have a cause--an event, a trigger, that legitimates grief. But the thing is, an SSRI isn't a "happy pill." It doesn't make you feel happier; it gives you more internal resources to process the experience of grief. The experience of grief can deplete seratonin in the brain, meaning that it becomes a pit a person may not be able to climb out of all on his or her own. The SSRI doesn't eradicate the grief. It just may make the person able to keep functioning through the grief.
I'd suggest the person call any local offices of NAMI--ours is in the phone book alphabetized as NAMI. National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. They often offer low-cost/free counseling, but more: they'll probably know what the local resources are for the LW. Also, if the LW has become involved in a synagogue, probably the rabbi knows some resources. Certainly ministers receive training in these issues, and can often do a little bit of counseling, but they also almost certainly have parishioners with similar needs and often know the local resources very well. Better than dialing up a psychiatrist/psychologist at random and asking them.
-
Not that young . . .
[Read the article: I'm an analytical chemist with a two-body problem]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I guess I'm puzzled about the assumption that the LW is young. He's 27 for goodness sake! That's young in career terms in academia where earning the PhD takes some time, but hopefully he's old enough and mature enough to begin to take responsibility for his emotions.
His GF, OTOH, may not be ready for that responsibility yet. If we're reading right that his GF is an undergrad, she's 5+ years younger than that. He tells us he's her first real boyfriend. That's not a good combo for career-effacing decisions on his part. Chances may be that as a science-type, her HS years were marked by being seen as geeky (which would explain why she didn't do the puppy-love/immature-little-girl thing when she was actually a teenager); as she moves more deeply into the sciences she's likely to find herself one of only a relatively few women hanging out with a rather larger number of men. She may well find herself blossoming socially as well as professionally.
He might be the love of her life, he might not be. Obviously if he goes to Toronto he leaves the field open for those other guys to step in (and in my experience nothing increases the erotic appeal of a young woman more than the implication that she's already involved and therefore clearly desireable--I was innundated by male attention once I was engaged, when I'd had considerably less of it prior to that point!). But in a couple of years as the post-doc finishes up, they'll both have a clearer idea about the importance they hold for each other.
And maybe then *she'll* be old enough to take responsibility for her emotions too. Sounds like that's not where she is yet--and frankly, that much younger than he is, perhaps not where she needs to be. Go to Toronto. If she's the right one and you're the right one, you can survive a couple of years apart. (My dh and I were separated for 2 years while we were engaged, and we just passed 19 years of marriage. Of course, we *both* were sure the other was 'the one' when we became engaged. But it worked.)
-
I appreciate the fairly delicate spoilers
[Read the article: Goodbye, Harry Potter]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've got an 11 year old, highly sensitive daughter who got a ticket to get a book at midnight tonight--and she doesn't want to read it before I do, so she can decide if it's "safe." I don't have time to do that this weekend, for heaven's sake! But she's still traumatized over Dumbledore dying in book 6, and wants to be sure it'll be 'ok' to read this book. So really, the sole major spoiler is that the worst-case ending wasn't what happened--so? It is a kid's book; that worst case ending would have been an unconscionable decision to make on Rowling's part. And with the review, I can at least reassure my daughter that yes, there will be pain involved, but it shouldn't be so agonizing that she can't stand it.
But if you want to know nothing about the book beforehand, there's such an easy solution. When I see reviews here of Battlestar Galactica episodes that I've TiVo'd but not seen yet, I just don't read the reviews until I see the show. But knowing where to turn after I have seen the show and want more, more, more--that's been great.
Make a mental note that there's a review, go get the book tonight, and when sometime Sunday you're blearly desperate for someone to talk to about the book, the review is here waiting. And if you read fast enough that it's actually sometime Saturday, that's fine too.