Jerry A. Finch wrote the following excerpts in his message:
I recently saw a posting here that made a reference to the cause of PD being
related to co-dependency and the inability to express feelings. While I am
extremely open to the freedom we all need to express our ideas, I must take
exception to this one.
Not that I want to get on the ground floor of an arguement about brain
chemistry and emotions, but science has pretty well proven that depression is a
result of PD, not the cause. Nor have I seen any scientific evidence of someone
being cured of PD by breaking co-dependent personality patterns. If there is
such verifiable evidence, I know we all would be extremely interested.
It is inherent for us who are members of the PD community to offer each other
all the help and love we can gather. That requires speaking as honestly as we
can when we share ideas, and to base our promotions on proven methods. Freedom
of speech may allow me to say that BBQ cures PD, but a moral obligation prevents
me from promoting it as a fact. While a plunge into psychotherapy might be the
best method of dealing with PD for some, it isn't a proven cure, at least not
yet.       *end quotes*
 
Perhaps this discussion should continue in that there may be aspects of
personality (for lack of a precise jargon) preceding diagnosis that
correlate (therefore might be causal) to degeneration rate of neurons; the
mental handling of the PD diagnosis per se may affect the amount of
degeneration during the early period which is definitely depressing (id
est, a psychological loss of significant import - it is proof that one is
not whole - it is uncurable - it is complex to predict what will happen or
how soon so one is left in limbo, etc.).
 
I was diagnosed as a part of a full physical testing and state of health at
Sansum Clinic in Santa Barbara, CA.  The many tests and multiple physicians
found no disease or physical/biological evidence of abnormality, so the
usual diagnosis mode of these symptoms with shown abscence of tumor mean I
have PD.  The mention of positive response to levodopa was the final step
in the diagnosis was probably stated.  I pursued my usual learning all I
can and was given a prescription which allowed me to purchase Dr Duvoison's
book on PD for the price of $5 at the clinic's research library.
 
I related all that to be background to my not being advised to consider or
seek any psychological counseling in regard to the normal phases of dealing
with significant personal loss.  These being: shock of loss itself, anger
(why me), despair, depression, and eventual acceptance.
 
Perhaps each of the physicians knew these phases were starting for me.
Perhaps one or all of them cognitively considered the process aand made
judgement cognitively - consciously - that I was likely to be able to
handle it without professional help; but, nothing was verbalized.
 
Perhaps I would have benefitted from a discussion of what to expect - as
outlined above.  Providing a pampflet with discussion of the normal phases
of handling significant bad news would have been good.
 
Perhaps they did not consider this part of their responsibility.  Perhaps
none of this came to their cognizance.   Perhaps they followed the apparent
procedure of having their staff administer an IQ type test, found me more
competent than most and left it at that - I never received a proper
feedback of the test result.  But I can be cynical and that makes me
postulate that there may not have been a part of their organization
competent and competetive in cost providing such counseling, so it was not
considered.
 
I propose the group debate the QUESTION: Should the psychology of handling
significant loss be expicitly considered at diagnosis?
 
Sub-questions might be how? by whom? should support groups pay more
attention to it? et cetera          ...my best wishes to all, ron
 
Ron,59,dz PD 11  <[log in to unmask]> Ronald Vetter
http://www1.ridgecrest.ca.us/~rfvetter/