Humble recognition

Sometimes recognizing a person's depression can suffice to help them, even if temporarily.

Some of the reading I'm currently doing makes me feel better as it acknowledges depression as a disease we know very little about, in fact we know A LOT LESS THAN WE LIKE TO THINK WE DO.

That last part is the most important part; the recognition must be done with the modesty that we do not know.

The all too common patronizing "recognition" which goes something like "I haven't had it so I don't know" (IE. "We're not interested, just get back to functionality and we can all forget about it.") is hollow at best, disingenuous at worse.

To recognize that someone else is suffering something we do not know and that our concern is two-fold:
A) That the person is suffering.
B) That we are ignorant about that suffering, and that that ignorance is a faultof ours.

Pretending we know what depression entails and how to "treat" it in order to make the sufferer feel better can often have the opposite effect, because the simple "go see your doctor - take some meds - do some CBT - get more active - socialize more" is just that, overly simplistic. The simplicity of it can make the depressed person feel even more depressed.

Taking meds, doing therapy, getting active, and socializing doesn't take away that a person may genuinely feel depressed about things like the dysfunctional world we live in, about how their life (as active and social as it may be) does not make them content.

So yes, depression is a disease with biological components, but it is much more than that, and that much more is what we don't know.

Manufacturing Depression - By Gary Greenberg

Is a fascinating book which looks at the history of the disease we know as depression.

Greenberg details how the "scientific" community (in)directly with pharmaceutical companies purposely strayed away from Freudian-style analysis in diagnosing depression because of it's "unreliability". (IE. One man's self-criticism is another man's self-awareness.)

In order to give psychiatry it's proper place in "scientific" medicine (and pharmas to make profit), they came up with "Reliable criteria" which defines (and diagnoses) a person who is truly depressed.

One of my biggest beefs has long been the simplicity with which depression is diagnosed and treated. It is commonly held by medical professionals (who consider this "scientific") that the best treatment for Major Depressive Disorder is for the patient to regularly take their prescribed medication and goes through Cognitive Therapy.

My beef with this is the over-simplification. Taking anti-depressants and "changing my way of thinking" does not address philosophical questions like what consists contentment and "happiness".

A person may not feel "happy" despite having a "normal life". Many a lay person does not (or chooses not to) comprehend this (IE. "There are lots of people "worse off" than you, therefore you SHOULD be happy).

As for modern "scientific" psychiatry and psychology, the person is clinically depressed if they have 2 or more of these symptoms for 2 or more consecutive weeks:
- depressed mood (such as feelings of sadness or emptiness).
- reduced interest in activities that used to be enjoyed, sleep disturbances (either not being able to sleep well or sleeping to much).
- loss of energy or a significant reduction in energy level.
- difficulty concentrating, holding a conversation, paying attention, or making decisions that used to be made fairly easily.
- suicidal thoughts or intentions.

Listening to a list of symptoms and diagnosing is relatively easy, listening to what TRULY MAKES A PERSON UN-HAPPY is a little more difficult, so by calling it "un-reliable", the "scientists" wiggle their way out of the tough part.

In the book, Greenberg elaborates on the rise of psychiatric medicine in the past 100 or so years as well as an entire chapter on Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) which he doesn't dismiss, but makes it clear that the "scientifically proven" tag it attaches to itself is not quite accurate.

Acceptance

Acceptance is often presented as an easy catch-phrase answer when we don't know what to do.
"You lost your job?, just accept it and move on."
"Someone lied / stole / hurt you, just accept."

Of course dwelling on past events is not healthy, but neither is just "accepting" without dissecting said event and resolving it (as much as possible) in our hearts and minds.

For the depressive person, "accepting" negative outcomes often turns out to be unwarranted self-criticism.

Sometimes losing a job, getting lied to, getting robbed, or hurt is NOT the victim's fault, and "simple acceptance" that "nothing can be done about it" becomes "it must be my fault / I must have done something wrong..."

As much as the situation can not be modified, how we see it and judge those involved can make all the difference between truly moving on and simply "accepting".