Lead

Feb 26 16 3:43 AM

Tags : :

I grew up an in abusive home, and its was kept under wraps in various ways. However my parents if ever questioned, could just say I had problems, or was disabled. Before I got label intellectual disabilities recently,  to prove my incompetence, professionals had determined I was learning disabled. However, this was often used an excuse. 

There reaction to the abuse when I finally told them, because I figured it was safe enough, as I was pretty sure the worst of it was over. A big reason for this, was because I no lager wanted to get medication, and therapy that was ineffective. However I was told the medication, and theoryipy was largely the same anyways. It seems odd to tell someone who was abused their whole life, that it didn't matter. On top of tha to suggest treatment that often times made things worse.

I have flashbacks of being suffocated, how is a pill that's made me feel worse in the past going to help that? On top of that I've had them lie about me.

They say, there's trauma, but evidence of an underlining condition. What evidence? What evidence for anything? The underlining condition, or proof, it's separate from the trauma?  How do they determine this in any case? It all seems so arbitrary. I know I have trauma. I was suffocated, but there are lots of things I can't just put my finger on, and say trauma. Things add up, and there's a lot of complexity. However this has got me thinking. How can they determine that anybody doesn't have a reason for how the way they are? So many factors are at play, between normal differences in people, and unique situation. Assuming that they know all of them, which they don't, how can they honestly say, there is no reason, they must be disordered? 

That's not even going into how subjective what they call symptoms, and disorders. A lot of these same traits are concidde red normal, and even gifts at times. They expect, me to believe people's brains are inherently different, and it just happens to match whatever is considered socially acceptable at the time? The disorders may completely change, but the reason is the same. Are you going to sit there, and tell me everybody who ounce had normal brains, have suddenly become normal. The same goes for the disorders that were removed. This can also, claim somebody with blatant trauma also has evidence of the disorder, when there is no evidence of what an average person is supposed to be as a result of that. Of course, let's not forget the overall goal, also to help people to be what they consider normal. Yet, they wonder why people think it's okay to target someone for being labeled mentally ill.