Jani's at the mercy of her mind

[justdrew]

it might be good to archive his site, as it could be pulled at any moment or re-edited.

Someone with more psych skills than me would probably be better at theorizing on how such a post could be worded to maybe get through to him. I'm not sure there's ANY chance of that happening though.

We'd have to have specific alternatives ready. and while we know a lot, there could be vast amounts of info that have not been disclosed. There are pros on the ground who do care about kids and who probably can see this "our" way, but getting the judge to go along would be the trick for them. I will see if there might be a couple pro's I could risk talking to about this on Monday. The best one is retired, but she's still engaged in the work.

[compared2what?]

i agree with mac on the substance of all the points he's making now, and most of the points he's been making throughout the thread, with one partial exception. And even on that point, i don't actively disagree with him. i just don't have as certain an opinion as he does.

but fwiw: i don't really see how anyone could seriously dispute the assertion that there's no evidence that she was born with any problems at all, including schizophrenia. or make a supportable argument that there's any reason to think that her problems now are either due to or amount to schizophrenia. or that there's any grounds on which to claim that what she's getting from her doctors and parents now is some form of help rather than some form of brutal and dehumanizing abuse.

i also think she's much too young to be taking those drugs. and that all six-year-olds are too young conclusively to be diagnosed with almost any serious mental disorder as defined by the dsm, almost none of which are based on authoritative or scientifically valid clinical work to begin with, and virtually all of which would be of no or next-to-no practical value even if they were, imo.

i'm just too fearful of further alienating and antagonizing mac to have said so before now, let alone to explain what i was trying to say when i posted earlier in light of any of the forgoing. as i still am wrt explanation of views expressed earlier.

and that's entirely due to my limitations, not his or anyone else's. which are (obviously) entirely my responsibility and not his. or anyone else's. the topic just happens to touch upon areas that are close enough to my own narcissistic wounds that I'm irrationally and disproportionately fearful of provoking a hostile response that i know perfectly well isn't, in objective terms, a great enough threat to justify my cowardice. in short: i'm a great big oversensitive baby, and that's nothing to fucking boast about.

in any event. i do understand that the topic is jani, not me. and that's the topic wrt which i want to contribute whatever i've got to give that might be of any potential use to anyone. if i can. so basically, this post isn't a whole lot more than a statement to that effect; an advance apology for all the many ways I'm sure I'll fuck up if i ever do manage to stop being such a pussy; and -- most importantly -- an expression of agreement with and support for mac's position, in the event that i don't.

sincerely, albeit unbecomingly trepidatiously,

c2w

[lightningBugout]

You know, it suddenly strikes me that there is a huge risk of any organized activity as a potential disaster for this site.

I would argue that any action resulting from this thread, it seems only fair, should be at least passed by our proprietor Mr. Wells. The StXrmfrXnt thread is a good reminder that he's already put up with hella bullshit here.

I recognize such a post would not be signed "the denizens of RI," but it would take all of 30 seconds to find the posts source here.

ps. I did forward the article and thread both to a friend who is involved with the ISSTD (International Society for the Study of Trauma and Dissociation). Not because this child sound DID, etc. but because it is a generally progressive group of psycho-therapeutic professionals.

[Penguin]

Thats true.

[chiggerbit]

I already had reservaions about boundary violaions with regards to this little kid, what with LA times violating her right to privacy, Jesus, even having a video shoved in her face like that with it posted for the whole world to see, even us discussing her and her family. (Sorry, the t on my keyboard is giving out, so I'm pasting one in when needed.) I would caution people here to be very cautious in how they become acively involved. Please don't become a direct player in the circus by posting on his blog. Fine, make connecions through professional third-paries. Janni looks like she needs all the help she can get. But be very cauious about respecting boundaries.

[justdrew]

I already had reservaions about boundary violaions with regards to this little kid, what with LA times violating her right to privacy, Jesus, even having a video shoved in her face like that with it posted for the whole world to see, even us discussing her and her family. (Sorry, the t on my keyboard is giving out, so I'm pasting one in when needed.) I would caution people here to be very cautious in how they become acively involved. Please don't become a direct player in the circus by posting on his blog. Fine, make connecions through professional third-paries. Janni looks like she needs all the help she can get. But be very cauious about respecting boundaries.

yes, all very true, and probably best not to post anything there.

...and I hadn't thought of that LBO, good point

[agitprop]

Look, agitprop, please take your thoughts about alleged gender-differences elsewhere. It's not what this thread is about, nor is it about you. Start a new thread about your favoured topic if you want. You are distorting this one (I don't want to quote your earliest contributions yet again) and throwing it off-topic. So please take it elsewhere.

Back on-topic.

Not the one who brought it up, Big Mac. Now back to the topic at hand, which is most definitely NOT you either, no matter how hard you are trying to dominate it, or overpower through insults anyone who doesn't completely tow your line.

[agitprop]

i'm just too fearful of further alienating and antagonizing mac to have said so before now, let alone to explain what i was trying to say when i posted earlier in light of any of the forgoing. as i still am wrt explanation of views expressed earlier.

and that's entirely due to my limitations, not his or anyone else's. which are (obviously) entirely my responsibility and not his. or anyone else's. the topic just happens to touch upon areas that are close enough to my own narcissistic wounds that I'm irrationally and disproportionately fearful of provoking a hostile response that i know perfectly well isn't, in objective terms, a great enough threat to justify my cowardice. in short: i'm a great big oversensitive baby, and that's nothing to fucking boast about.

in any event. i do understand that the topic is jani, not me. and that's the topic wrt which i want to contribute whatever i've got to give that might be of any potential use to anyone. if i can. so basically, this post isn't a whole lot more than a statement to that effect; an advance apology for all the many ways I'm sure I'll fuck up if i ever do manage to stop being such a pussy; and -- most importantly -- an expression of agreement with and support for mac's position, in the event that i don't.

sincerely, albeit unbecomingly trepidatiously,

c2w

Wow. Why are you so afraid of this Mac person? It's just an anonymous forum. Speak your heart and if you disagree with something, just say it without insulting the person you are opposing If that person insults you for offering a differing point of view, they are simply revealing themselves as boorish. It's plain for anyone to see. The treatment I'm getting from this person says far more about them than me. I'm simply remaining as calm as I can and letting them beat the hell out of themselves in mental ju jitsu. It's their choice.

[lightningBugout]

Look, agitprop, please take your thoughts about alleged gender-differences elsewhere. It's not what this thread is about, nor is it about you. Start a new thread about your favoured topic if you want. You are distorting this one (I don't want to quote your earliest contributions yet again) and throwing it off-topic. So please take it elsewhere.

Back on-topic.

Not the one who brought it up, Big Mac. Now back to the topic at hand, which is most definitely NOT you either, no matter how hard you are trying to dominate it, or overpower through insults anyone who doesn't completely tow your line.

Just, for the record, I chose not to respond to your gender difference ideas, because they're not relevant to this thread. But, to put it lightly, I think they were incredibly incorrect and dualistic. That's not meant to be an attack on you. At worst a suggestion to expose yourself to more progressive research on gender differences, culture and child development.

[agitprop]

it might be good to archive his site, as it could be pulled at any moment or re-edited.

Someone with more psych skills than me would probably be better at theorizing on how such a post could be worded to maybe get through to him. I'm not sure there's ANY chance of that happening though.

We'd have to have specific alternatives ready. and while we know a lot, there could be vast amounts of info that have not been disclosed. There are pros on the ground who do care about kids and who probably can see this "our" way, but getting the judge to go along would be the trick for them. I will see if there might be a couple pro's I could risk talking to about this on Monday. The best one is retired, but she's still engaged in the work.

I would be happy to post some of the reservations voiced here on his blog, using a journalistic approach, and doing it as politely as possible. First, understand that I neither agree nor disagree with the idea that the father is responsible for the daughter's condition. I'm agnostic. I would be happy to ask him how he would respond to those who have questions about the showcasing of his daughter, along with other behaviour that appear to meet a profile of Munchausen's by proxy.

I could probably do it with a certain measure of calm because I have no axe to grind, and have no clue if that's what's happening. It would be interesting to see his response.

[agitprop]

Just, for the record, I chose not to respond to your gender difference ideas, because they're not relevant to this thread. But, to put it lightly, I think they were incredibly incorrect and dualistic. That's not meant to be an attack on you. At worst a suggestion to expose yourself to more progressive research on gender differences, culture and child development.

Just for the record, LB, that response could win awards for condescension. Good on you. I actually do keep up with cutting edge research and was pleasantly surprised by the most recent body of research which dovetails with my own personal experience.

[lightningBugout]

Just, for the record, I chose not to respond to your gender difference ideas, because they're not relevant to this thread. But, to put it lightly, I think they were incredibly incorrect and dualistic. That's not meant to be an attack on you. At worst a suggestion to expose yourself to more progressive research on gender differences, culture and child development.

Just for the record, LB, that response could win awards for condescension. Good on you. I actually do keep up with cutting edge research and was pleasantly surprised by the most recent body of research which dovetails with my own personal experience.

Lighten up. We all sound harder than we mean sometimes. You are obviously very smart and reasonable. If I sound condescending its because I find the naturalization of consumerist gender identity to be so distasteful. That's a very common phenomena and not one in which your agreement with it makes you unique.

[justdrew]

it might be good to archive his site, as it could be pulled at any moment or re-edited.

Someone with more psych skills than me would probably be better at theorizing on how such a post could be worded to maybe get through to him. I'm not sure there's ANY chance of that happening though.

We'd have to have specific alternatives ready. and while we know a lot, there could be vast amounts of info that have not been disclosed. There are pros on the ground who do care about kids and who probably can see this "our" way, but getting the judge to go along would be the trick for them. I will see if there might be a couple pro's I could risk talking to about this on Monday. The best one is retired, but she's still engaged in the work.

I would be happy to post some of the reservations voiced here on his blog, using a journalistic approach, and doing it as politely as possible. First, understand that I neither agree nor disagree with the idea that the father is responsible for the daughter's condition. I'm agnostic. I would be happy to ask him how he would respond to those who have questions about the showcasing of his daughter, along with other behaviour that appear to meet a profile of Munchausen's by proxy.

I could probably do it with a certain measure of calm because I have no axe to grind, and have no clue if that's what's happening. It would be interesting to see his response.

if anything were to be said it should probably, for now at least and from that venue, have to focus on helping him find ways to get other helpers involved so he doesn't spend (as he does now) huge amounts of time alone with the child. I'd rather see her out and away but it's not going to do any good to say so in the comments. So getting some additional staff in would be the best thing, if some nursing agency wanted to donate vast resources to octomom, I don't see why this case couldn't benefit from the same. Since our social system is so starved of cash, especially in CA, donation may be the only route.

We're probably left to trust that the social workers involved will act if they see cause and succeed in forcing some changes. It's all too uncommon an occurrence these days though.

[agitprop]

If I sound condescending its because I find the naturalization of consumerist gender identity to be so distasteful.

Wow...just...wow. But thanks about the smart and reasonable statement. That's a nice compliment.

[lightningBugout]

If I sound condescending its because I find the naturalization of consumerist gender identity to be so distasteful.

Wow...just...wow. But thanks about the smart and reasonable statement. That's a nice compliment.

Yes, this is my general take on most forms of socio-political epidemiology which conclude that "boys will be boys."

Perhaps it somehow did not read correctly, to you, that I was observing that my distaste for something I had perceived might be negatively raising the tenor of my tone.

I see nothing about the line you've quoted that, by any stretch of the imagination, results in a "wow, just wow" response.

Truly.

Genuinely.

Please do enlighten me.

I would greatly appreciate the opportunity to understand just "what...just....what" is so startling to you.