Research Research About Myptsd

[joeylittle]

It's not up to MyPTSD to demonstrate that peer support is effective. There have been various studies over the years that have demonstrated that to a level that is sufficient for other papers to refer to them - which is all about how the scientific community talks to itself. I don't mean that disparagingly.

We could run a study and prove that MyPTSD has helped x number of people decrease the intensity of y symptoms over z years...but, it would be the kind of sample set that is hard to take seriously. I read many studies with sample groups of 10, 20, 30...and they do provide an interesting demonstration of a phenomenon; however, that's all it is - an observed phenomenon, which is one little grain in the big bushel called Science.

I believe we establish our value through providing access - access to dialogue, access to data, articles, opinion pieces, and community. Many people who use the site don't actually use the entire site - but, there are benefits to be found here even if the only thing you do is read the articles. Or maintain a trauma diary.

Fundamentally, anything that points noses in our direction is good.

I think that it would be awesome if this site was able to attract funding, and there are government and non-government sources of funding that could well kick in if there was an evidence base.

Funding is overrated :) I say that with a smile, because it's nice to be given money, but there's quite a lot of work that goes into securing that money, and then another load of work that goes into demonstrating where that money went, in order to re-secure the money. I'm pretty confident that if MyPTSD wanted to apply for funding, it could make a compelling application to the right source organization - without needing any additional studies beyond the ones that are already in existence.

But, to be honest, I believe that it's just as valuable to have a system that relies on member contributions. The big advantage is that donations take far less time to manage than grants. Grants really take time - and with a volunteer staff, that's where things would start to be stretched thin. I'm a little stretched right now in managing this little raffle we are doing; thankfully, it's running nicely under its own steam, and looks like it will just need a push towards the end.

My point is, securing funds from government or other organizations is time-intensive; I believe that, so far, we are better off spending our time writing for the site, not writing grant applications (from a person who has written many a grant application :O_o:)

I'll respond more on your ticket, @BlueOrange - but I also appreciate this thread, and the time people are taking to articulate their thoughts on the subject, and am in no way intending to shut down the conversation. :)

 

[BlueOrange]

It is quite an interesting thread, isn't it!

While I don't control any book authors either, I do have a professional relationship with a book author. I said to them, "Myptsd is really good." They asked "Have there been any studies?" I forwarded the question.

I think that the quality of psychological research improves all the time, and I'm encouraged by what I see in recent research.

I have no desire whatsoever for myptsd to conduct or fund any research. I do continue to believe that it's good to have research that confirms the value of good things (like this site).

The case against grant applications is well made. The current model works.

 

[hodge]

I do quite a bit of grantwriting for a homeless shelter and help day center for homeless people to try to help get them back on their feet, or on their feet for the first time. It really doesn't take a whole lot of time once you get your basics down. You just get your stats together and write your analyses of what the situation is, and in succeeding years, all you have to do is updates your stats and the current situation. Our homeless center/shelter has gotten repeated grants from Bank of America, Hitachi, Nissan, and others over more than a decade, plus more locally based businesses and churches, as well as government block grants.

If Anthony ever wants to pick my brain about this, I'd be happy to help in any way I can.

 

[anthony]

Thanks... but then I have to register this as a non-profit, then the headaches really begin. Doing that adds an entire layer of bureaucracy that doesn't exist here. I near guarantee the site would then need a professional therapist monitoring everything, people would be banned left right and centre for any kind of inability to regulate oneself, even for a brief time, as said bureaucracy comes with legal implications that don't exist right now as a private peer support website.

Right now, if someone goes and jumps off of a building because they turned suicidal from something here... that is all them.

If you turned this into a non-profit, the same thing happens, legal case ensues, insurances are required, site closes down / loses funding, therapist in oversight loses qualification, snowball down a mountain of shit.

Seriously... I have looked into all these things, and the best thing for this website is to just stay private and peer support. The moment you introduce anything official, is the same moment you screw over the site.

There is good reason why the big organisations and such don't run mental health peer support forums... because it would put them in a world of shit the moment someone does something and harms themselves or such. The few that exist, are so heavily moderated its hard to get any real conversation live. Without any of that, the site falls under the normal realms of website discussions, and thus falls into a gigantic black hole of free speech and freedom of expression and do what you want on the world wide web and don't blame another for your actions. Laws protect the site the way it is.

Link to the site all you want... go hard... but trust me, you don't want to make anything official or non-profit status. You may as well close it down the moment you try.

 

[Anarchy]

This is probably beating an already dead horse

Further to Anthony and Joey's observations about seeking grants.

With grants comes bureaucratic control

The body making grants, needs to justify to its members, donors, political masters or what ever, where the money went and what it achieved

To do that, things to measure and how to measure them must be decided

At that point, the fluid and flexible community nature disappears, and is replaced by aiming to hit key targets and tick the chosen boxes.

Examples from say state sector (and state regulated private) healthcare,

social security ( check out the hell our Nordic members get put through for that, and the Nordic countries are supposed to be the model that all should aspire to).

And agricultural subsidies ( where else could farmers get paid to not grow crops, and get so good at not growing those crops and good at putting in the records and returns to show the army of agricultur department bureaucrats that they've very successfully not grown crops
that they make enough money to buy more and more land to not grow those crops on).

Provide fairly good illustrations of where grant dependency can all to quickly and easily lead to.

 

[Powder]

Grants don't provide consistent funding over time.

I'm so happy that Anthony's team has preserved the integrity of this set of forums for those who need it. I don't need a study to know it's value in my life.

But if the team conducted or had someone do one, I'm sure they would find that the forum has helped those willing to: visit regularly, follow the guidelines, listen to opinions that differ from theirs, and actually apply what they learn in their lives systematically, doing their own anecdotal research into what seems to work for them.