Shock Therapy Ect - I'm Shocked It Is Still Used, What Are Your Feelings?

[Queen Boudica]

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/shock-therapy-figures-spiking-20150516-gh33pi.html

An article on shock therapy and even its use on children in this country. I am horrified that a process that clearly causes brain damage is still used and is being used on children. What are others experiences or opinions on this.

 

[Deleted member 1860]

I haven't had ECT myself. I have met people who have received it. One woman lost the memories of the first 10 years of her child's life. I can't imagine losing all of those memories.

I think that ECT should be a method of last resort. And when I say "last resort", I don't mean it in the same way that psychiatrists would mean it, i.e. you've tried all other medications out there and nothing helps, so ECT is your only choice. Uhm, nope. I mean "last resort" in that someone has tried ALL other options....they've run the proverbial gamut on supplements, they've tried alternative therapies that aren't in the mainstream, and so on. And for the developing mind? Completely out until age 21. (I think 18 is too young, still.)

And once someone has really tried everything, then it may be time to consider risking brain damage.

Because, the truth is that there is more than just one or two or even three causes of depression (ie imbalances of seratonin or norepinephrine or dopamine, the big 3). But, psychiatry wants to boil down symptoms to just those three chemicals. So, if someone has depression due to an imbalance of something else, OF COURSE medication will be useless.

And depressed people aren't the best for making these decisions (as the article states.) Nor are parents who are desperate for their child to be "fixed".

 

[Kintsugi]

I know two people who have had ECT in its modern era.

One is a developmentally disabled client. Most people say it messed him up big time and attribute much of his current behavior (or lack of behavior) to this treatment. However, that myth was busted. One of my co-workers worked with him before, during, after, and now, and he said it really improved him, and what we see today is what he was like directly preceding the treatment.

The other is a (non-offending) pedophile I knew as a child, who tried to kill himself as a teen after some shit that went down between us (totally non-abusive). He told me about it when we reconnected (and I was a teen), and he said that although he had a lot of short-term memory loss, it really improved his mood and functioning. I was horrified, but he insisted it was helping him a lot, although he wouldn't remember the preceding week. He got it once every month or two or some such.

I understand it's become very sophisticated, although memory loss is still an issue.

I wouldn't condone it being used on the young, though. I would say 25+, when the brain is definitely developed.

 

[StellaBlue]

I have not had ECT...although I did research and seriously consider it. The people I have met who have had it (and they have only been adults) have been very distressed about the memory loss. I have not met anyone (and granted my "n" is very small) who has enthusiastically endorsed it. Having it done to a child - or for that matter, anyone under the age of 24 or 25 - I think is absolutely wrong. I am not a doctor or a scientist, so maybe there are things I don't know or haven't considered...but to me, if it is ever indicated, it is a treatment for a fully developed brain - and there is no way a child's brain needs this.

 

[twinkle30]

I had a friend who used it for depression and it worked wonders for her.

 

[Neverthesame]

I don't know much about it. Though I seem to remember an aunt of mine had it done. I don't know how old she was. But I do remember she was the sad product of 1960's psychiatric medicine. You name it, they did it to her or forced it down her throat. Permanent shaking hands, like she had Parkinson's disease, except it was drug induced.

Anyways, sorry that was a sad tangent there. I have to admit, if it were possible to focus the memory loss to a specific time. I think I'd be first one to sign up for it.

 

[joeylittle]

Like @itsKismet said - I think there are times, extreme times, when it is appropriate. My definition of extreme involves unremitting psychosis, to a degree that the options are lifetime inpatient with constant suffering. If you're a functional schizophrenic who occasionally loses it, but generally you are happy and living in assisted care - well, that's not constant suffering. If you cannot make things shift with medication and you are non-functional, meaning you cannot communicate, you are either frozen or in constant fear - your mind is trapping you, basically - then yes, it's the best we have.

I've met people who have had it (or regularly need it) who are willing to trade the memory loss for a life they can live in the present that is relatively pain-free. And I've met people who have had it who regret it with every inch of themselves. What bothers me the most, probably, is that there is no real data supporting what seems to be the fact of memory loss. You talk to people - consistently, they will tell you about memory loss. You talk to doctors, they will tell you that the occurrences of memory loss are 'marginal'. The good doctors will then say, "but memory loss appears in practice to be inevitable". And the others just shrug and say, "the data says memory loss is a rare occurrence".

It has gotten more calibrated than it was in the 1960's, but really, there is still a ton of guesswork going into it. A bit like how being a good anesthesiologist is a combination of training and experience, being able to administer ECT well - for maximum positive and minimal negative impact - is a skill that is worth seeking out, if you are going to go that route. (I say a bit like because the science in putting people to sleep for surgery is still way more precise than the science in sending volts through the brain).

I did a ton of research into it, as I was slipping into a very unremitting, dysfunctional depression - and really, really considered it. But ultimately, I'm not willing to risk my recall. I use recall professionally. I don't know how I'd be who I am without recall. I don't care about the long-term loss as much, but the short-term would really do me in. And it is also not recommended if you don't have a care system or support system in place, which I don't.

Using it on anyone under the age of 25 is, in my opinion, criminal - unless that patient is persistently 'locked' in a psychotic or catatonic state - and even then, using it on someone under 18/19 is just premature. The brain is still changing. I only give 18-25 some leeway because it's hard to have absolute rules with things like this. But 25 is the generally agreed-upon age (in the medical community) of full maturation of the brain - so that seems like a safe number to me.

And I think doctors should apply a great deal of discretion and caution in selecting who they will consent to give the treatment to. Of course it's best if the patient can consent, but when they can't, it really should be a court of last resort.

 

[Neverthesame]

Even with my very limited knowledge on this, I cannot imagine electrocuting a child would be a good idea. Before 25 should also be a no,no. Unless the <25 patient is in such a bad way, that it could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, that the procedure wouldn't leave them worse off. But that is simply my personal opinion.

 

[shimmerz]

Children need to be kept away from the psychiatric industry. I continually see that nobody speaks about how this will affect them years down the road. Here in our system, once you reach the age of 18 all services are dropped. I have known two mothers who lost their children to suicide due to psychiatric help being dropped on them.

Therapy, yes. Psychiatrists? Nope. They are cold bastards imo.

 

[Friday]

As someone who has been hooked up to car batteries I am perpetually biased against running current of any voltage through my body ever again. Or anyone I even passingly might like, even if my arguments are totally irrational :p

Snort. Although I have volunteered to be tazed a few times since then. That's more testosterone than sense.

Due to that extreme, if possibly irrational bias, I would need to see decades of well done longitudinal research before I'd even be willing to consider it rationally.

 

[Ronin]

^ Yep, there. Electricity? Keep that shit away from me. Happy enough my heart'd disagree rather loudly if my head was messed enough to volunteer for that kind of stuff. (That said, since that time I've been in a situation I've needed ECT for my health. Very thankful I've had people figure out psychotic states linked to traumatic situations aren't the same deal as plain out psychosis & having worked with me on alternatives.)

 

[Blue Survivor]

My family was friends with this couple in their 60's who lived across the State, and every so often the couple would come and stay with us so that the husband could get EST at an area treatment location. I was just a kid then, and I asked my parents why someone would want to do that (all I could imagine was that 1980's movie 'Return to Oz' when Dorothy is taken to the asylum and tied down before getting EST). My parents explained to me that he was Bipolar and that it was so bad that EST was the only thing that made him 'normal.' I hope to not offend anyone with that comment, that is just how it was explained to me. I do remember his wife being exasperated a lot of the time due to his mood swings, but I also remember her feeling relieved towards the ends of their visits. I think they both agreed that it helped him tremendously.