Mind over Meds by Daniel Carlat - Article Example

Article Analysis Article Analysis Summary of Pop Culture Article The article, written by Daniel Carlat, is d Mind over Meds. The author reflects on his career in psychiatry and how it has evolved to become what it is today. The author starts the article by reflecting on his experience with a patient named J.J., who he ends up diagnosing with General Anxiety Disorder and prescribing a medication called Zoloft. The article then goes back to the history of the development of various drugs used to treat disorders (Carlat, 2010). The article mentions Massachusetts General Hospital, otherwise referred to as M.G.H, severally. This is the hospital where the author interned, and which has produced many notable leaders in the US mental health segment. The article is a combination of the author’s personal experiences, professional trajectory, and his perspectives on mental health in the United States. For instance, he explains that he was inspired to take up psychiatry by his father, who is also a practicing psychiatrist in San Francisco (Carlat, 2010). The author also provides readers with a clue of how challenging medical school is, terming the process he went through to qualify as a psychiatrist as “labored.” The author provides the audience with opinions on different issues, such as treatment options used to mitigate the effects of mental disorders and the dynamics of mental health concepts such as psychopharmacology (Carlat, 2010). The author reflects on his mother, who suffered from some from depression and paranoia, but did not receive the treatment she needed. This highlights the need for more intense and intricately coordinated treatment options (Carlat, 2010). Finally, this article, in general, provides a rare insight into the field of psychiatry; rare because it is delivered from a personal angle but still incorporates the professional aspects of the practice. Summary of Empirical Article This article by Stuart Grassian is about the psychiatric effects of solitary confinement. The author argues that tight restriction of the social and environmental interaction has long been known to have profound impacts on mental health. Many patient groups have agonized over this issue (Grassian, 2006). These groups include patients intensive care units (ICUs), spinal patients paralyzed by the need for extensive care, and patients with defective senses (e.g., hearing or visual impairments). The subject has also been a major worry in military settings, planning for space expeditions, and polar and submarine travel (Grassian, 2006). The US pioneered the introduction of long prison sentences, and solitary confinement, as a strategy of managing criminal behavior. According to the author, the penitentiary system emerged in Philadelphia, in the US. This was in the 19th century, and it was the result of a spirit of widespread social optimism about the prospect of rehabilitation of people with socially atypical behavior (Grassian, 2006). Great concerns about the major psychiatric impacts of solitary confinement have extended into the 20th century, both in medical publications and in the media. The issues raised about the mental manipulation of political prisoners in China and the USSR, and particularly of US prisoners of war (POWs) during the Korean War, inspired the development of a huge tome of medical and scientific works on the impacts of sensory impairment and social mistreatment, including a major collection of experimental studies (Grassian, 2006). Comparison of the Two Articles While the pop culture article by Carlat is written as an essay, Graissan’s article is scientific in nature. The two articles differ in many ways, starting with their structures. Graissan’s article bears all the hallmarks of an empirical paper, with headings and subheadings and a clear flow to the whole paper (Grassian, 2006). For example, the author starts by providing an overview (abstract) of the article and then systematically covers other topics. This article also includes a table of contents that shows the topics and the page numbers where they can be found. Looking at Carlat’s article, it is easy to see that its style is less formal compared to Grassian’s. Firstly, it seems as though the author is narrating a story and covering issues in a general manner. In Grassian’s work, an analytical approach is used to present the views and counterviews involved in the subject (Grassian, 2006). Carlat’s article does not feature any type of defined or systematic structure; it is written in a flowing, essay-style form that any reader can relate to. On the other hand, Grassian’s article is likely to be of interest to scientists or professionals in the mental health field. Another interesting contrast between the two articles is the terms and jargons used (Grassian, 2006). In the pop culture article, the wording and the language are more general and populist in nature. Anybody, regardless of the background, can read and relate to the subject. It is structured in such a way that the message resonates with the masses. On the other hand, the empirical article is better suited to professionals in mental health (Grassian, 2006). From the wording to the specific jargons used, this work appeals to a particular group of practitioners who seek specific information on the subject matter. Not anybody can read and understand the topics and issues covered by the author; even the examples provided target mental health or medical professionals whose knowledge or skills would be enhanced by decoding the contents. In summary, these differences are typical of the different styles employed in writing. Different works require different approaches depending on their purposes and their audience. It would be mistaken to write a pop culture article like an empirical article and vice versa. The aims are different, and so are the structure and the wording. Article Synthesis For the pop culture article, I think that the author has adopted a more personal angle to the paper, but there is an issue which stands out and which can generate more debate. For example, when giving the example of what his mother went through as a mental health patient, the author states that she deserved to be given better treatment. This treatment was to be intensive and well-defined. However, I think that the author’s mistake lies in too much generalization (Carlat, 2010). Personal experiences are often different from the experiences of millions of other patients. Just because he witnessed his mother receive poor treatment for her depression and paranoia does not mean that all paranoid or depressed people need to be subjected to intense and comprehensive remedies (Carlat, 2010). Sometimes, and research has shown this, mild approaches are equally if not more effective in alleviating the effects of these two illnesses. This is why researchers recommend an open mind when dealing with disorders; restrictive thinking might lead to misdiagnoses or wrong prescriptions. I was, however, pleased with the author’s ability to integrated personal and professional angles in one paper without diluting the message of the article. In the empirical paper, the author also uses too much generalization, which is not recommended in a scientific paper. Some examples are detailed but not precise, leaving the reader with a poor understanding of the specific aim of the article. The real issue, however, lies in the subject of the article. I think that the psychiatric effects of solitary confinement go beyond imprisonment, which is the main example used by the author (Grassian, 2006). Some individuals are often maligned by the society, or malign themselves from society out of their own liking. This is a type of confinement which has been shown to have major impacts on mental health. Also, some people have personalities that make them inclined towards confinement and solitary lifestyles, but they do not exhibit any negative psychiatric effects as a result of their behavior (Grassian, 2006). This is an aspect which needs to be explored further when discussing the psychiatric impacts of solitary confinement. References Carlat, D. (2010, April 24). Mind over Meds. Retrieved March 27, 2015, from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/25/magazine/25Memoir-t.html?_r=0 Grassian, S. (2006). Psychiatric impacts of solitary confinement. Journal of Law and Policy, 22(1), 325-383. Read More