Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Been thinking about genetics a lot lately...so is it nature or nurture?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hound dog" data-source="post: 535277" data-attributes="member: 84"><p>Based on adoption statistics, I'm going to venture to guess that those females who give up their children (or have them removed) tend to be proportionately (probably by a high factor) difficult children, who may have a long family line of mental illness (diagnosed and undiagnosed). Then too, you'd have to consider the children's ages of when they left the bioparents care, as those that remain longer and suffer abuse/neglect would also still have an environmental/nurture factor playing into it, even those that were removed at fairly young ages. It's something, if they don't do now, I think they need to educate prospective adoptive parents on the odds of their adopted child having a mental illness. Of course they probably don't want to do that as it would decrease the amount of people wishing to adopt. </p><p></p><p>I have 2nd cousins that are fraternal (boy/girl) twins, who thanks to some major drug use were in a severely abusive/neglectful home environment for a period of a few years. However, their early years were the exact opposite. (abuse/neglect started at around age 5-8) They went to a distant cousin who has run a therapeutic foster home for years. If you think MY rules were strict, hers were omg wow! The twins arrived in her home an utter mental mess, although there were times when their original personalities shown through. By age 12 you'd never guess they'd ever been in an abusive situation. They each were adopted by 13 into this family and are exceptional adults/parents. But then I have to take into account this distant cousin also came from the same family I did........then added extensive training to it........and her success rate was pretty darn high. But even then, not by far perfect. </p><p></p><p>The schizo twins study is only some of what makes me believe that mental illness is indeed a true illness, and not just groupings of unacceptable/uncontrollable behaviors. There was another study done on catatonic patients, where they discovered that a certain treatment/medication combo thing literally brought them out of their catatonic state. But it was so hard on the body, that they decided that it wasn't worth it. But in my opinion it showed these patients weren't catatonic due to environment/trauma or all the other endless reasons they'd come up with over the years........but that it is a disease process of sorts. The schizo twins study makes sense, IF you view mental illness as an actual disease process. It would explain how one twin can have it, yet another be unaffected. </p><p></p><p>I really get upset at the <strong>lack of genuine </strong>research going on for mental illness. You'd think with the dramatic rise, there would be an equal if not higher urgent need to find out the why behind it in order to stop it, reduce it, or turn it around. Instead, it seems all they're interested in is coming up with new medications that mask the symptoms.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hound dog, post: 535277, member: 84"] Based on adoption statistics, I'm going to venture to guess that those females who give up their children (or have them removed) tend to be proportionately (probably by a high factor) difficult children, who may have a long family line of mental illness (diagnosed and undiagnosed). Then too, you'd have to consider the children's ages of when they left the bioparents care, as those that remain longer and suffer abuse/neglect would also still have an environmental/nurture factor playing into it, even those that were removed at fairly young ages. It's something, if they don't do now, I think they need to educate prospective adoptive parents on the odds of their adopted child having a mental illness. Of course they probably don't want to do that as it would decrease the amount of people wishing to adopt. I have 2nd cousins that are fraternal (boy/girl) twins, who thanks to some major drug use were in a severely abusive/neglectful home environment for a period of a few years. However, their early years were the exact opposite. (abuse/neglect started at around age 5-8) They went to a distant cousin who has run a therapeutic foster home for years. If you think MY rules were strict, hers were omg wow! The twins arrived in her home an utter mental mess, although there were times when their original personalities shown through. By age 12 you'd never guess they'd ever been in an abusive situation. They each were adopted by 13 into this family and are exceptional adults/parents. But then I have to take into account this distant cousin also came from the same family I did........then added extensive training to it........and her success rate was pretty darn high. But even then, not by far perfect. The schizo twins study is only some of what makes me believe that mental illness is indeed a true illness, and not just groupings of unacceptable/uncontrollable behaviors. There was another study done on catatonic patients, where they discovered that a certain treatment/medication combo thing literally brought them out of their catatonic state. But it was so hard on the body, that they decided that it wasn't worth it. But in my opinion it showed these patients weren't catatonic due to environment/trauma or all the other endless reasons they'd come up with over the years........but that it is a disease process of sorts. The schizo twins study makes sense, IF you view mental illness as an actual disease process. It would explain how one twin can have it, yet another be unaffected. I really get upset at the [B]lack of genuine [/B]research going on for mental illness. You'd think with the dramatic rise, there would be an equal if not higher urgent need to find out the why behind it in order to stop it, reduce it, or turn it around. Instead, it seems all they're interested in is coming up with new medications that mask the symptoms. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
General Discussions
The Watercooler
Been thinking about genetics a lot lately...so is it nature or nurture?
Top