Friday 30 August 2013

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: ‘Coming Out’ Bipolar

I have an ethical dilemma.

I have bipolar disorder. Not much I can do about it; not much of an ethical paradox. It is what it is.

But that is not the whole of my dilemma. I also happen to be a writer that writes about a whole range of subjects including my experience of living with a mental illness. My predicament is whether to use my own name when writing about the personal stuff. Should I tell the world – with all its prejudices – that I have bipolar disorder? Or should I use a pseudonym, effectively protecting me from stigma and prejudice? Will outing myself negatively impact on my professional profile or will it contribute in some small way to helping others?
One of the best ways to overcome stigma and prejudice, of course, is to ‘out’ it. It is becoming increasingly common for celebrities to talk of personal experiences of depression and various mood disorders. It is less common for those with schizophrenia to have access to such advocates. For us mere mortals, personalising mental illness relies on a certain amount of courage and, some might say, madness.

Given that those with mental illnesses, like any minority group, have long been shunned by certain sections of society, more needs to be done than merely talking about the need to break down the barriers faced by sufferers. Action, they say, speaks louder than words. My writing on bipolar disorder aims, amongst other things, to help break down barriers towards mental illness to raise awareness and to de-stigmatise the widely misunderstood illness. Bipolar disorder a mood disorder, previously known as manic depression, is characterised by differing expressions and combinations of high and low moods, from extreme mania and psychosis to suicidal depression.
Admitting that I write about bipolar disorder inevitably leads to being asked whether I have bipolar disorder or a mental illness. When I say that I do, I am bombarded by a whole raft of other personal and confronting questions such as: ‘what makes you bipolar?’; ‘what are the craziest things you have done when you are high?’. Or, my personal favourite, ‘have you ever been suicidal?’.

Some questions are easy to answer; others less so. Such questions seem to challenge the actual diagnosis that took so long to reach and was such a relief to hear. I was diagnosed in 2007 after a decade and a half of extreme ups and downs. Other questions are painful because they make me remember things I did, or feelings I felt, when I was unwell.
Herein lays my dilemma. I obviously want my writing to raise awareness and help to remove the stigma of mental illness, but at what personal cost? I am left wondering: do I, in an effort to break down mental illness’ stigma, actually have an ethical obligation to “come out” and declare my hand? But how far should I go in disclosing my illness? Should I tell the world or protect myself from any uncomfortable questioning?

If I do declare my hand, my writing will probably have greater authenticity than if I merely write as an interested observer. But, the flow-on effect might be too close for comfort.
The successful treatment of a mental illness requires personal acceptance that one actually has a mental illness. Reaching this point is, for many people, easier said than done. However, doing so empowers one to take control over treatment plans and, perhaps most importantly, to take responsibility for taking the medication that is such an important part of the management regime. Accepting that you have a mental illness, or in my case bipolar disorder, is an enormous and vital step in achieving balance. Coming out publically is a whole other ball game.

My family obviously know that I am crazy! I have also been quite candid with some of my friends, colleagues and acquaintances. But whether to tell everyone who asks me is another matter entirely.
There are some downsides to such a declaration, not including the personal questions that inevitably follow. There is a tendency for well-meaning people to interpret all behaviour as fitting the ‘mentally ill’ profile and to dismiss emotions as less important than those of ‘sane’ people.

Then there are the issues associated with attitudes and assumptions that affect my family and friends. Do I want parents and guardians of my son’s friends knowing my personal medical history before we know each other’s last names? No, I probably don’t.
Do I want to put myself in the firing line and subject myself to the very prejudices that I am trying to extinguish? I’m not sure if it is the best thing to do, but telling the world and everyone else that will listen certainly does feel like the right thing to do. For me, I have chosen to put myself out there and to use my illness in order to raise the profile of mental illness and, hopefully, to be of some help to my fellow travellers. It is also helping me to make sense of negotiating the ups and downs of the highs and lows.

This is why I have chosen not to use a pseudonym.

Wednesday 28 August 2013

Six Great Books About Writing!


1. Julia Cameron, The Right to Write – An Invitation and Initiation into the Writing Life

2. Robert Masello, Writer Tells All – Insider Secrets to Getting Your Book Published
3. Queensland Writers Centre, The Australian Writer’s Marketplace – Every Contact you will ever need to Succeed in the Writing Business

4. Strunk and White, The Elements of Style – a timeless daily companion

5. Robert Masello, Robert’s Rules of Writing – 101 Unconventional Lessons Every Writer Needs to Know
6. Julia Cameron, The Sound of Paper – Inspiration and Practical Guidance for Starting the Creating Process

Tuesday 27 August 2013

The Ultimate Consumer Choice – Just Say No

 

Consumer policymakers and commentators have been all too willing pay lip-service to the four basic consumer rights as proposed by President John F. Kennedy in 1962. The right to safety, to be informed, to choose and to be heard are the central tenets of the consumer movement. Yet, few have sought to clarify or question what the rights mean and how they might be extended. When the United Nations added an additional four guidelines in 1985: the right to the satisfaction of basic needs, to redress, to education, and to a healthy environment, there was little, if any, debate about how competing consumer rights were to be balanced against each other.
The final right – the right to a healthy environment – was aimed at improving the environmental impact of production; to protect local communities, particularly in the developing world, from factory emissions and other pollutants. More recently advocates have promoted the idea of ‘sustainable consumption’: switching to ‘green power’, recycling and reducing packaging in an effort to reduce harm to the environment. However, there has not been a sustained effort to question the overall ideology of consumption and to reign in the excesses of unlimited choice. How is the ‘right to the satisfaction of basic needs’, for example, to be balanced with the ‘right to a healthy environment’? The pursuit of prosperity dependent on mass consumption is not based on ‘the satisfaction of basic needs’. Mass consumption has delivered benefits to a privileged few but has left much of the world’s population in poverty. The environmental costs of mass production and consumption have been horrendous. The ‘race to the bottom’ in an effort to serve consumer choice benefits very few – and it certainly does not serve the long-term interests of consumers regardless of where they live.

Whose interests does the pursuit of unlimited consumer choice serve (whose liberty is curbed by restricting the number of toothbrushes available in the local supermarket)? The consumer policy framework that predicates access and choice has proved to be ineffective at dealing with problems even when there has been willingness to do so. It is not so much that the framework is out dated but that policymakers have forgotten the historical foundations on which it was built. A system that is only interested in access and individual choice has little hope of spreading benefits widely and strengthening democracy.

It is not enough to offer consumers more choices in the form of alternative or sustainable consumption – these are too easily co-opted by marketers all too willing sell the alternatives. Policymakers must encourage consumers to also exercise the ultimate choice – the right to say no. Alongside self-sufficiency (intentional poverty) ‘Not Buying’ is a serious alternative to the culture of consumption.

Monday 26 August 2013

Taking Stock


Thanks to Pip for the impetus to make this quick list:

Making : a mess
Cooking : Peter Singer’s Dahl – totes vegan and totes delish
Drinking : red wine
Reading: The Right to Write by Julia Cameron
Wanting: the rain to stop
Looking: forward to the final episodes of 'Breaking Bad'
Playing: Lego
Wasting: time worrying
Sewing: nothing but planning a new project
Wishing: for a positive electoral outcome
Enjoying: 'The Americans'
Waiting: to make my vote count
Liking: making plans for new writing
Wondering: what it is like to live by the sea
Loving: Jack Dee

Hoping: my optimism will last
Marvelling: at how fast baby goats grow
Needing: another coffee
Smelling: the scents of an early spring
Wearing: the same old stuff
Following: the election campaign
Noticing: the signs of spring everywhere
Knowing: that it can’t rain forever
Thinking: about creativity
Feeling: groovy
Bookmarking: endless lists of books I want
Opening: a new chapter in my writing life
Giggling: at Blake’s 7
Feeling: optimistic!

Thursday 22 August 2013

Yay! Grass Roots Celebration Issue!


I've got an article in the latest issue of Grass Roots magazine! GR 218 Aug-Sept 2013 - 40 year celebration issue.

Wednesday 21 August 2013

Monday 19 August 2013