Barbelith Underground > Conversation > ADD, 123, ADD, baby you and me

Different problems. Reactive depression and low self esteem, to be exact. I probably haven't been too clear about that.

Yesss, but you talk as if these terms were discrete, readily-categorisable entities unequivocally distinct from - how did you originally put it? - terse posts, trouble focussing/concentrating to your "personal satisfaction" and doing "menial work". They're not. With a bare minimum of reframing, terse posts, trouble focussing/concentrating to your "personal satisfaction" and doing "menial work" could equally be viewed as reactive depression or low self-esteem. Or an overpunitive superego. Or situational unhappiness. Or existential malaise. Or an early mid-life crisis. Etc., etc.

The fact that you're choosing to view them as "metabolic" or "biological" and seeking a validating label/pharmaceutical solution does not necessarily mean they're different from your problems of the past.

When I make the distinction between cogntion/biology I'm making the distinction between complexes/low self esteem etc which involve thought processes, self images and beliefs and chemical problems in the brain, metabolisim or organs. For example, a fear of the dentist vs chemical imbalance depression.

I know you're making this distinction - and I'm telling you it's a bollocks distinction to make. The whole idea of "chemical imbalance depression" derives from the simplistic concept of there existing depression for an identifiable 'reason' (reactive) as opposed to depression without one (endogenous) - which then must be the result of inner "biological" imbalance.

Although this is a popular meme, there's little or no solid evidence for it; what there was has largely been discredited. The idea of the "chemical imbalance" persists in the popular imagination, though, possibly because it suits a) the very human tendency to place one's faith in an external panacea, and b) the interests of multinational pharmaceutical companies to keep selling that panacea.

Twelve sessions monthly between 2001/2002and eight sessions weekly in 2005 hardly counts as "too much" or "deadening". I'd much rather you ask me questions about my situation than make assumtions.

I'm sure you would. You seem prickly at the mere suggestion that you could have had anything but the optimum level of therapy - although if this were the case, I don't suppose you'd have written this thread (oh yeah, I forgot - "different problems"). For some people, seeing a psychiatrist even a couple of times is too much; it can disempower by diminishing personal responsibility in favour of 'will in a pill'.

Stuff I really want to do and good advice for anyone, but I just can't seem to get the basics done, let alone getting down the gym or planning out a diet. That's the flustrating thing - I know how I want to act and I know what I want to do, I just can't ever seem to get it done. Leaving home and having to take responsibility for myself has magnifed this somewhat.

Perhaps you just don't want it enough, then. What you've described thus far within the thread has been largely passive: oh, I know, you get CBT 'homework' but there's a hefty dollop of sitting in a room expecting someone to guide you through your problems too. Buying into the concept of a "biological" cause/solution for (what seem to me to be) distinctly 'soft' (in terms of organicity) symptoms - terse posts, trouble focussing/concentrating to your "personal satisfaction" and doing "menial work" - allows even more latitude for passivity. Sit back and let the Ritalin work. Take the strain off your responsibility/willpower.

You haven't mentioned the voluntary work suggestion. I think anyone would benefit from spending time around people with a tougher lot in life. Try it.