Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for April, 2005

There are “ladies” who have a “here and now” perspective. Carol, Clarissa and Jane are those, and this is most clear for Clarissa, probably cause she was created in 2004. That’s not to say that they don’t consider what used to happen to me in their perspectives, but it’s like “I know that happened to ‘her’ (me).” That’s cause I still find it difficult to grasp that these are all “me”, even though rationally I know they are. They all have the same experiences and knowledge, cause I do. Yet mainly Clarissa uses her knowledge of what all happened, how I created the “system”, etc. in her perspective, but “from a distance”. That’s also what I know I created some “ladies” for: to pretend that I’m looking at events “from a distance”. You see, I have always had difficulty communicating about what’s happening to myself, and as a result, I’ve often created story characters that were very autobiographical. It however also works the other way round.

Other “ladies” sort of refer to situations of my life. They are still equally present, cause what happened at these moments has an impact upon what’s happening currently. Examples are the summer of 1998 and ninth grade. Some of them have perspectives that refer to the time they were last “active”, like Elena, but since she’s “active” now, too, she’s getting more and more a “here and now” perspective. Oh boy, this sounds crazy. Need a better explanation, but can’t think of any. Others were created cause the time I created them refers to another time, like the summer of 1998 and the summer of 2004 being so similar. So I created one who was 12-years-old like I had been in 1998 and who was allowed to deal with the problems that I should “get over”. Likewise, Milou is eight, and that’s partly cause of her (my) social/behavioural problems, but also partly cause of the year 1994 still being so carefree. She was probably created in 2004. I could see her as an Inner Child.

I have many ways of categorizing the “ladies”, I used to categorize them according to perspective vs. quality, but I can’t do that anymore, since I’ve acknowledged that having a go-getter perspective, for instance, is also a quality. Since they’re all parts of me, it’s not a “you should” perspective that Jane, Brenda, Clarissa or anyone else is holding. It’s not outside. If it were, I could dismiss all “ladies” and know exactly what to do and how to be. That realization has caused me to view the “ladies” as supportive (yes, all of them!) rather than annoying. This explanation has too often led people to think I created them for fun, but anything is better than to assume that I have daemonic voices in my head, or something like that.

Lately, I’ve gotten to make a distinction between the children/teenagers and the grown-ups. That’s to do nothing with how childlike they are. Carol’s anger can be quite childish, and still I consider her a grown-up. It’s not related to their ages either, although the grown-ups are all older than I am and all the children/teens are younger than I am. It’s about what moment they “refer” to, so whether they have a complete “here and now” pperspective. That’s not the same as when I created them, since I creatd Carol and Jane in 2001 and some of the “children” in 2004. It’s about what they refer to. You could see the children/teens as Inner Children, while the others are perspectives on my current situation and the associated qualities. They’re all important in my situation, since they all make up “me”, of course.

Read Full Post »

Had a discussion with Mum on Thursday. I finally got Mum to accept my future plans. Mum said I’ve never given her a clear plan, but that makes no sense. Anyway, now she thinks I did give her a clear plan, with my statement that if the folks can help me, I want to go to rehab, and afterward I want to do volunteer work or maybe start university in January, and that I also want to go out of the house by 2006 or early 2007 at last. Mum still annoyed me with her emphasis on academic challenge (as if I can’t study without being in college), her stereotyped idea of what rehab is like, and her looking for the “least bad” option (ie. university), while I want a good option that will get me to achieve the same, albeit a little while later.

Mum’s statements about how to determine whether I’ll be doing well in a setting seem to be inconsistent: she judged the schools for the blind by the fact that I never felt happy there (which is not completley true when talking about the last one), and is judging the rehab thing by the same measures, and yet she judges high school and university by whether I have remained there or will remain there with enough pushing. I’m not going to take her “I know what’s best for you”s anymore. All she knows are her priorities, ie. academics. I indeed used to have these priorities, but I’ve realized long ago that it takes more than academic knowledge to make it in “the big world” and I want those skills deficits of mine worked up before I’m going to get into yet another academically challenging but otherwise only doable cause people insist I remain there setting.

Mum fortunately gave me permission to agree with the folks if they drew conclusions I agreed with but she didn’t, but she wanted to be absolutely sure I wasn’t allowing them to draw incorrect conclusions about me. She took Mr. De B.’s statements as an example, when I’m often getting silent when difficult topics come up. Well, firstly the getting silent thing has to do nothing with not agreeing or not wanting to say something, but with not being able to explain something, and secondly Mr. De B.’s only conclusions I’ve disagreed with so far are those Mum agrees with. But, since I assured her I’m not going to let people stick paradigms upon me that are incorrect, and since she gave me permission to assess conclusions on my own, she pretty much gave me permission to draw my own conclusions and agree to others’ conclusions that I agree with, whether she agrees or not. That’s a good thing.

The best thing is that she is not going to kick me out if I’m “making myself useful”. I don’t know exaclty what’s her definition of it, but going to rehab, doing volunteer work, and college are all included. She said she was going to kick me out if I were acting negatively. I don’t understand what’s her definition of that: I know some things that fall under it (including my state over the last year), but I’m not sure where the line between making yourself useful and acting negatively lies, cause she said that some things “were not going to get me anything if I wanted a job” (apparently assuming I was never going to college), although she agreed I were going to do them, and yet she considers Sigrid’s work for the Dutch Youth League for the Study of Nature to be “making yourself useful”.

Sometimes, I think we’ve agreed to disagree, and yet at other times Mum seems to agree to an extent. I’ve dropped my expectation that she’s going to agree with my seekign help from an agency for the blind (she simply hates them cause a few people drew incorrect conclusions about me), but she’s at least apparently understood that I’m making my own choices and it’s not her business to make sure I’m happy about my situation, by whatever definition she uses. So overall I consider the disucssion I had on Thursday to have gone positively. Now the only problems are if the rehab centre can’t help me and how to get the same outcome with the school folk. That’s a bit more difficult, since it was Mr. De B., with his all-time social/communicative paradigm (what do you contact a rehab centre for if this is your paradigm, anyway?), who initially contacted the folks, and he still thinks those people can kick me to college by September. I’ll have to point out that I’m going to make clear my own ideas about the situation to the rehab folks, and that if they can help me, I’m going to do so, and if they can’t, that doesn’t mean I’m going to have to seek out everything by myself but I can seek out other things.

Read Full Post »

I am finding that I cannot explain the complexity of what is going on in my mind. One moment, I’m writing about blindness and my feelings about it, the next you see me writing about the “ladies” and their roles in my mind, then a short while later it’s the behaviour stuff, or the communication/social problems, or my general feelings of resentment. And that’s only just what is going through my mind. That’s not even taking into account my skills deficits, cause all people say that I’m probably not as bad as I think I am. They don’t know that I learnt to hang out the laundry just last week, cannot cook or go grocery shopping, and that I still find it very difficult to travel independently. I could get a train and travel to Amsterdam if it were once in a few months, but I can’t see myself going to Nijmegen everyday, and arrive at 9:00 AM for my first college class.

With all that is going on in my mind and the skills deficits that I’m having, I’m wanting to detach completely from the whole college stuff. It’s not something I want to do; it’s something others want me to do. People still keep pretending that I want to go to college, but I’ve made damn clear that I don’t already in November. And yet they have their goals for me, and I can’t defy. That’s for two reasons: firstly, the physical consequences, ie. the possibility of being kicked out of the house, but more importantly of course my sense that they’re still my parents/teachers and have a form of authority over me. With the parents, that’s very logical since I’m still living with them, and with the teachers it’s very apparent for their responsiblility feelings with the future planning stuff (mainly my tutor and the student counsellor). In October was the only time when I was making my own decisions, but the people’s lack of support for my decision and my own lack of knowledge of how to arrange it, caused me to drop the entire thing, and decide that I should follow the other people’s decisions made for me. I’m still partly feeling willing to do so (not really willing, but obligated), but the thing that I don’t know how to get it arranged, keeps me from doing it. And that causes me to feel totally worried, cause I cannot make plans for myself but I cannot arrange what others want me to, and I’m scared that I might be kicked out of the house. That’s making me totally want to detach from the entire situation, and just simply not care, just see what will happen in June.

Astrid

Read Full Post »

What is the nature of the “ladies”, I’ve often wondered. I know that there are people who are truly multiple, either by nature (like the ones I discussed yesterday) or, some contend, through splitting in early childhood. Others say these are not really multiple but only believe they are. Either way, that’s not what the “ladies” are like. I like both the terms “parts” and “insiders”, cause that makes clear that they are pieces of myself and that they are creations of the mind. But how formed are these characters, I wonder. What am I, between all these parts? What is my role in the “system”?

All of the “ladies” are representatives of qualities that should be mine. I say “should” because, given the contradictory nature of all these qualities, it’s hard to grasp the concept that they are all mine. I used to think that I was, or was trying to be, a synthesis of all of these different perspectives and qualities. That I was merely there to mediate between the perspectives and then come up with what I considered “right”. But simply cause I don’t know what is “right”, or that it is constantly shifting depending on whose perspective is most dominant (there are perspectives I know to be maladaptive, but also more than one of which I can in my right mind say they’re correct), makes clear that I’m not, or that I’m failing horribly at it.

Further, making a compromise between all these perspectives, automatically leads to a perspective of itself. I cannot successfully fulfill all perspectives at once, for then it’d be a chaos. So I have to decide who is “right”, and whom I should give the right to be expressed even if her perspective is maladaptive. Then, still, other people (outsiders) have their perspectives, that I should also take into account. That’s what it is with, for instance, the next year stuff, when I said that I felt I should in fact arrange my things for college, even though there wasn’t a single “lady” representing that perspective. I was trying to mediate between all sorts of perspectives both inside and outside. However, I could say that Clarissa is in a way mediating between others’ perspectives, too, knowing and caring about all of the other “ladies”.

In a way, I could be seen as being amongst the “ladies”. I have written from “ladies”‘ perspectives criticizing my own choices (those that I think I’m making without one perspective being dominant) as well as I’ve criticized the “ladies”.

I used to think that I was either acting upon one “lady”‘s perspective or giving a synthesis of them all, but if I could synthesize them all, what would I need the “ladies” for? Sometimes, I wonder if there is any substantial difference between what I call “me” and what I call a “lady” beyond the fact that I won’t tell you that I’m anyone but Astrid.

I think there is a difference, in that at some times I don’t feel “divided” at all. Moments when I don’t have to worry about what “lady” I’m representing, or what “the others” will think of my decisions. There are simple situations when I don’t need them at all. Then I’m Astrid, not a “synthesis”. And yes, in all other situations I’m Astrid, too, but in the role of either a mediator or a perspective, influenced by one or more of the “ladies”.

I stand above the “ladies”, in that I know they’re images in my mind. I’m the “homeowner”, who knows all there is going on in the house. The “ladies” have rented a room. Yet I’m still not the Big Boss, cause if I were, what would I need them for? I’m trying to be. I’m trying to reclaim the compromise between the different perspectives. I’m not aiming to send the “ladies” away, cause I’m not sure what is going to be left when I do. If I knew what would remain, couldn’t I just send the “ladies” away and be perfectly normal and fine, not having all these contradictions? But the contradcitions are mine, not the “ladies”‘, and so they will stay with me as I decide that they’re not the “ladies”‘.

Astrid

Read Full Post »

I always used to be very interested in what separates what is called the “self” from the “other”. As a child, I used to imagine what it would be like if I had someone else’s mind, like my sister’s or cab driver’s, or what it would feel like to be something I wasn’t, like male or sighted. I used to be surprised that you can say of yourself that you’re a “me”, and that you cannot call someone else “me”, for that’s “you”. I still find this fascinating, and it’s an interesting philosophical thing.

Lately, I’ve become aware of a phenomenon called “natural multiplicity”. People/systems like Astraea and Amorpha discuss this thing. It’s nothing like my “system” – mine isn’t natural and it is by far not as formed as theirs are -, but it’s a very interesting phenomenon. Cause why should people be allowed only one person per body? If we say so, we say that appearance (ie. whether there is a different body) is the borderline between one person and another, while the experience of different people is essentially mental. You can’t say so without having a differentiation between the self and the other, for if you did not make this distinction, what value does the idea of different people have?

Is it an idea? I’d say not. I cannot feel that my sister is “me”, and yet I can feel that I am “me”, and, if you get into plurality anyway, I can feel that the “ladies” are “me”, to an extent (in that their qualities and perspectives should be mine). Some people contend that “the self” is only a linguistic principle, for most verbs require a defined subject, but would you ask who is raining if it rains? I wouldn’t. So I don’t think it’s merely linguistic, even though one can become very detached from oneself when one dissociates.

That still only validates the claim that what we call “self” is a mental experience, not something empirical. And even if it were empirical, that would not mean that it’d be by the existence of a body that personhood is defined. I don’t know how natural multiplicity would be accounted for in the physiological or neurological sense, but we don’t know if homosexuals have any neurological or physiological difference, either.

Read Full Post »

Why is it that the word “over-protected” always pushes my buttns? I am very often being referred to as such, merely on the basis that I don’t have good self-care skills. People seem to assume that the statement that when you expect a child to be delayed, she will be delayed, can be used in reverse mode without a problem, stating both that if you expect a person to be normal, she will be normal and that, if a person has delays, she was expected to have them. Also, the topic of over-protection is always connected with being spoiled, “because the poor thing can’t see”.

I always feel hurt by these statements, for they seem to assert that blind children are lazy unless they’re given a good kick in the pants, and that just pushing the child outside of his comfort zone will make him a normal kid. Of course I do agree that anxiety or a feeling that one cannot do something will seriously limit the child’s abilities. I just remember that when I was in the first and second grade, I used to be very afraid when going for swimming classes, to go into the deep water where I couldn’t stand on the bottom anymore. I could swim, but I was scared to go into the deep pool, and that could’ve limited my making progress if my teacher hadn’t pushed me to go into the deep pool (first, with her, and later only with the swimming teachers) to see that I could swim safely there. My teacher believed in me and guided me so I could get out of my comfort zone.

Blindness was no significant factor in this, since all the other children at my school were also blind or visually impaired and none of them feared going into the deep water, and none of them were pushed any harder than I were. Still, it makes clear how, indeed, a child needs to be pushed out of her comfort zone at times. It also makes clear how people who believe in a child’s abilities can support the child to reach her potential. Yet my teacher would not have pushed me out of my comfort zone to go into the deep water, if I hadn’t been able to swim.

And that is where the over-protection movement clashes with my feelings. Too often, it is being assumed that blind children who are not expected to do age-appropriate things, do in essence still have these skills, and yet, that everyone who does not have these skills just wasn’t expected to have them. So pushing a child out of his comfort zone will sort of unfold skills he has always possessed but was never expected to use. Am I far off-base if it leads me to think that a toddler can read if you just expect him to?

What I’m trying to say, again, is that a child will need instruction in the skills he’ll need to master. He’ll need the knowledge of how to do certain things, and if the child doesn’t have that knowledge, expectations won’t get him to master the skill. That counts for every child, but more so for blind children, as they cannot learn by observing as easily as sighted children can. A parent will have to show him how to tie his shoes, hang out the laundry properly, and do his bed. I do not doubt that blind children can master all of these skills and many more, but they’ll need to be taught to, and probably more consciously than sighted children.

Of course, this takes a parent who not only believes in the child, but is willing to push the child outside of his comfort zone. I know how demotivating it can be when you keep failing on a skill, and I know that when you don’t get pushed to keep trying, you may eventually give up on the skill. I experienced this with tying shoes, and that is probably one of my most embarrassing skills deficits: I wear shoes with zippers, sandals or loafers not only cause I find them much prettier than shoes with laces, but also cause I still can’t tie laces.

And that is where I come to the effect inproper instruction may have on a person. Too often, people who were not taught to do the same things their peers did at the same age, are being criticized as if they were spoiled, lazy brats. That’s also related to the prevailing attitude that pity and lack of instruction go hand in hand, and that if a child wasn’t instructed in basic self-care skills, it should’ve been cause the parents felt sorry for her. And being pitied is too often seen as a cool thing for the person who is being pitied, however inaccurate that may be. I hate pity, but for some reason the people in the movement critiquing over-protection see it as the most enjoyable state, that must however be avoided cause otherwise the blind child will think that the world owes her a living once she is an adult. I have never met a blind person who thought the world owes him a living, and yet I’ve met many who don’t have the skills they ought to have. Some of these people did have overly-protecting parents who spoiled them and cared for them way too long, not taking into account the fact that they wouldn’t be there to care for the blind person when he was forty. But many also had parents who simply didn’t know how to teach the blind child. My parents are an example of that. It’s very rarely occurred to me that they took any ability of mine into question, but they didn’t give me the knowledge I needed to accomplish these things. My parents have never questioned that I would go to college, would move out when I was eighteen, would get a great job and maybe a family of my own. I’ve heard visually impaired people and their families saying that they have a very limited range of choices of careers because of their disability, but my parents never thought that way and neither do I. At times, my Dad says something like: “You would probably have done the profile (collection of subjects) of Nature and Technology (instead of Culture and Society) if you were sighted,” but when I was twelve, I was convinced that I wanted to study maths at university, and my Dad was convinced I could do that. My interests just changed. The only subject in which my blindness played a role in my decision not to take it in tenth grade, was biology, but my general lack of motivation in ninth grade also contributed greatly. That’s not my parents’ fault. In fact, in seventh grade I wanted to participate in a maths contest. My teacher doubted my ability, but my Dad was convinced I could do it, so he and another maths teacher together made tactile graphics for me.

That is about academics. My parents are good with computers (Dad is a system manager) and my father is really good in maths and has studied physics himself. They have always found adaptations to let me do the same thing as the others in my class did. When teachers questioned my abilities, my parents were always there to reassure them that I could do the same as my peers and that they could expect the same level of accountability of me. An example is the Model European Parliament debating contest in tenth grade. Ten students were chosen (out of about twenty-five candidates) in a school selection procedure. At the selection, the teacher who guides the project was ill, so a couple of participants from the year before were the only ones to elect participants. They selected me, and the teacher was very worried. I’m almost certain I would not have been chosen, had the teacher been present to help with the selection. The teacher went up to my father with all sorts of questions and doubts, and Dad made clear that I could do the same things as the other participants. And he was completely right. When I wanted to participate in Saturday’s debating contest, I indeed was afraid that the guiding teacher (another one) would not allow me to and that almost kept me from applying as a participant, but I was positively surprised when the teacher was happy I wanted to participate in the training and even said he would like me to participate in the contest (it appeared we wouldn’t need a selection, but he’d made clear his appreciation of my participation).

With daily living/self-care skills, the situation is a bit different. My parents always made clear that they did expect the same of me as of sighted people my age. But what do you do when you don’t know how to teach a child to do something for herself? My Mum is, indeed, a little too eager to help me, especially if I’ve tried doing something and she thinks it’s not done properly. My father makes an art out of telling me that once I’m out of the house I’ll need to do certain things, but never teaches me to do them. Which is why I think they don’t know how to teach me: they do realize that self-care skills are needed, otherwise they would not tell me that it’s expected of me, but they don’t tell me how to do these things. Is that over-protection or just ignorance? I would think the latter.

Is that to blame on the parents? I don’t think so. Over-protection is not to blame on the parents entirely, but it is an attitude the parents can change about themselves. If a parent is ignorant of ways to teach a child, he may get the knowledge, but that may not be that easy. Not everywhere are parent organisations, and those that do exist may have poor attitudes about blindness, so they won’t help at all.

Is it to blame on the blind person, either as a child or as an adult? The “the world owes me a living” attitude may be, but what about the lack of skills, either resulting from over-protection or from lack of instruction? In the first instance, I imagine an adult may be ashamed for the image that generally exists of the person who thinks that the world owees him a living. He may become an advocate of the “don’t over-protect your child” movement, and send the messages that are so pushing my buttons. People tell me that there are lots of blind adults who have been in my situation, who didn’t magically acquire their skills. They likely mean these people, who didn’t receive a needed kick in the pants when they were little but who realized that they should have, and who hence went to a “kick in the pants” centre (ie. the NFB-type of rehab centres) and there learnt that blindness is only a nuisance and that everyone who doesn’t think so should get a good kick in the pants from the people who once believed blindness was a tragedy.

But I don’t believe blindness is a tragedy. It has greater implications, for me, than being a physical nuisance, but that has to do with my lack of skills and also with emotional problems not at all like “the world owes me a living”. I do believe that with the right training I can learn to care for myself. Only I wished that people would take the time to teach me these skills. I wished that people would stop their continuous kicking in the ass and come up with something that’d truly help me. But my parents keep nagging that I should have the skills, as if that would magically get me the skills. Is that over-protection? Is that spoiling? If it were, I could’ve all the skills I needed by now, for it’d imply that by merely deciding that you need them, you’ll have the skills. It’s been nearly two years since I first realized that college was coming near and that my parents’ telling me what skills I’d need wouldn’t get me those skills, and yet I still don’t have the skills. So I’m obviously spoiled? Is it strange that I feel hurt by these allegations?

Read Full Post »

Yesterday, we – I, another twelfth-grader, two eleventh-graders and a tenth-grader – got to go to a debating contest in Leiden. It was a contest between all schools of my type of school (Gymnasium we call it, it’s like grammar school in the UK). There were three different sorts of debate: the address, where you had to do a eulogy or a satire on a given word (eexamples were teacher, Sponge Bob, poetry, ethics), the argument, where you had to completely criticize another’s text (a text by Rousseau was an example), and the triad debate, where three people are in each party (supporters, opponents, and judges) and have to debate about a statement. I participated in the triad debate. The first time, we were the jury, which is quite an easy job. You have to analyse what each other party says and motivate why you say that one party has won the debate. The statement was: “Privatization in education leads to an increase in quality.” Then the next time we were supporters of the statement that sending SMS messages by phone increases one’s language skills. We did fairly well with that debate, and the one who had to grade us complimented me on my good response to our opponents’ arguments. I was the second one to speak, in which round you have to refute your opponent’s arguments, which I’m quite good at. Unfortunately, she couldn’t keep from saying that she found it good that I could respond to my opponent without having taken notes of their statements, which led me to think she didn’t mean what she said: it’s totally logical that I just memorize what’s being said (I don’t have a notetaker), and I have no problem with that. The third debating round was very difficult. It was about the statement that keeping grammar schools promotes segregation. We had to oppose the statement, and that was quite difficult, and unfortunately the people who graded us were not too eager to give high scores – they totally praised one party and still gave them only 59 of 100 points.

Jelle, one of our students, won the address contest. In the final round, he had to do an eulogy on the word “teacher”, which was really good and also brought with such conviction. I later heard he won the final round from the person who had won the contest last year. The girl who had to do the argument for our school, was second in her group, but not good enough to reach the final round. And as for us, I don’t think we did a horrible job, but it could’ve been done much better.

Astrid

Read Full Post »

I’m not sure why Charlotte Wyatt’s case is truly as unique as pro-life people contend it to be, but I’m shocked that yet again a judge is deciding that parents, who now are also the person’s guardians, cannot decide to keep someone alive. I get the vague feeling that it is not so unusual here for doctors to decide that keeping a person alive will not do the person any good, and hence to terminate treatment. However, it would indeed seem quite strange that they pursue their idea even against the parents’ will. From what I know, parents here may be pressured to agree to terminate treatment, but I’ve not heard of legitimate cases of euthanasia where the parents did not consent.

This writer blames this ruling on the social healthcare system, where the government can decide what health policy will be followed. And it’s indeed possible for the government to make extensive healthcare policies if healthcare is a public good, as it is here, too. However, it goes a little too far, in my view, to say that the public health system causes it to be possible that seriously ill children are killed. After all, in private healthcare, the doctors in private hospitals could make the same decisions the doctors in St. Mary’s Hospital have made, and if the law was on their side, judges would approve of their practices. I’m a great supporter of public healthcare systems, for they allow healthcare to be affordable to everyone, and as a result everyone has the possibility of good healthcare. And they’re always the government people who make the laws, and if the law isn’t on the doctors’ side, no judge will approve of their practices. No euthanasia could be performed legally before the bill allowing it was passed in 2002, and this sort of law is applicable to both the public healthcare system and private hospitals.

A person might argue that if healthcare costs the government too much, they’ll allow these practices, but that goes much too far. Rather, public health services will likely be cut, as is being done here. You’re a little too dogmatic and naive if you believe that public healthcare allows the government to introduce an euthanasia programme of sorts (for that’s what it’s going to be if you take this logic to extremes) more quickly than private healthcare.

Still, I need not say that I disagree with the judge’s ruling. The child has lung disease, has vision and hearing loss, and has a heart problem. I know many adults who do. She hasn’t stopped breathing yet, apparently, for otherwise she would’ve been dead by now. And yet a doctor is already deciding that if she stops breathing, they’re not going to resuscitate. Because now she is too ill??? Makes no sense to me. You could say, once she indeed has stopped breathing, that resuscitating won’t help her, but to decide for someone that she is apparently not too disabled to withdraw treatment now, but is too disabled to keep alive, is quite strange. But well, here there are some official policies on that. As you may know, preemies born before 25 weeks gestation are almost never treated. Charlotte would be, according to the rigid standards, since she was born at 26 weeks. And if the parents insisted they wanted to keep their daughter alive, I wouldn’t know if the doctors would fight legal battles. But it wouldn’t surprise me if they did, but that simply no parent has yet disagreed with the doctors’ decisions, since with the preemie guidelines, doctors just told parents that their babies are still too young to be treated, and one was afraid that, when Sophia Children’s Hospital in Rotterdam established slightly different standards, that parents might insist the babies be brought there, cause there they will be treated. I think doctors here would easily do what the doctors in Britain are fighting to be allowed to do.

Read Full Post »

In an effort to find information on “part work” (“ladies”, etc.) that did not immediately stick labels on people and didn’t trivialize the issue, I came across this site on something called soulbonding. In this, you get to empathize with a character from a story, TV show etc. to such an extent that he/she becomes “internalized” and is becoming a part of you sort of. The concept appears to be best known in the fanfiction writing community.

I think that soulbonding is an essential skill if you want to be a good writer, and with some, the soulbonds become permanent, as with this woman writing the page. Some folks contend that it is bordering on the mid-continuum of multiplicity, which is what people call the experience similar to my “ladies”, although I don’t agree with the word “multiple”. I think, however, that there are considerable differences. I think I’ve had soulbonds with some characters in stories that I’ve written. A good example is Ingrid, the main character in a story I wrote in ninth grade. Ingrid was a teenager whose mother was severely disabled from Multiple Sclerosis. I empathized with Ingrid’s feelings, even though they were in a way opposite of my own feelings – the story centered around disability and how it affects a person with a disability and her relatives, talking about depenedency, pity, etc. This character was very real in my mind, and I could “sense” her experiences. Another good example was Sharon, a lonely teenage girl in a story written in January, 2001. Each of these characters had elements of me and I could feel part of their lives and they of mine, but they were not split-off pieces of myself, and neither did they symbolize them, as the “ladies” do. By “symbolize”, I mean that some “ladies” have qualities that are by no means mine, but that refer to qualities of mine, such as being eight-years-old in the case of Milou.

Another considerable difference is that “ladies” pop out in my mind first, and may be created in other forms later. Three of my “ladies” were once story characters, but they had been in my mind long before they were story characters. The process of formation had occurred before I had the chance to empathize with my creations on paper. And of course I had a vague idea of what the stories my soulbonds played a role in would be about before I wrote them, but the characters had not been internalized yet. That happened during the writing process.

I say it’s an essential skill for good writers, for if you don’t believe in your own characters, how can you write about their lives? Oh well, you can criticize them, of course, but then you still have to empathize with them in order to show how ridiulous they are. Otherwise it’s like writing critically about a religion you haven’t even bothered studying, and those articles make no sense.

When reading a book or watching a movie, I think that soulbonding is an extreme form of identification, which apparently in some cases may continue long after the reading has been finished, and may even be permanent. All the soulbonds I made in my writings and readings have disappeared at least to an extent, but I’m not at all surprised that some people stick with them. Why can only children have inner worlds?

To an extent, I like the idea of soulbonding, and I definitely like their attempt at making clear that having people in your mind is not a disorder (or is not in itself a problem, as I would say). However, I feel that saying that it is the same as, or only gradually different from, midcont/median experience, is saying that midcont/median experience results from empathy rather than being parts of oneself. Well, I created my “ladies” because there are pieces of myself I cannot see as united, not because I have lots of empathy (which I even doubt whether I have). Furthermore, the writer of this page contends that soulbonding is not all fun, for when you empathize with a person who is hurting, you’re feeling hurt. Still, then, you’re seeig the soulbonds as in a substatnial way separate from yourself, which is not how it is with me. My “ladies” are very essential, internalized parts of myself, not just internalized imaginary companions. Feeling hurt when you’re hurt yourself is in a way different from feeling hurt when a friend is hurt, isn’t it?

Another thing is that soulbonders and the multiples/midconts they identify with, assume good communication between the different parts/soulbonds/insiders. I contend that having parts inside yourself is not a problem, but poor communication between these parts is. You may say: everyone in a family disagrees at times. Agreed, but a family with a teenager with severe oppositional-defiant behaviour, a young adult who locks herself in her room, and an adolescent who is angry and resentful all of the time, isn’t a healthy family, is it? And even the ones who in themselves are not troubled, like Clarissa and Milou, need to take the baggage of the troubled ones. I have enough experience in the behaviourally disordered community to know that even in real world families this is going to be quite problematic.

A very important difference is, lastly, that soulbonders are not bothered by their soulbonds when they don’t want to. The writer of this page supposes that if you are bothered by your inside people at a moment when you don’t want to, you have a problem, but that makes no sense at all. I know many people who can’t turn off their insiders, but who can still cope with them. Those are the very multiples/midconts who identify with the soulbonders. I agree that you cannot use your insiders as an excuse to do inappropriate things, or if you do, you have a real problem whether you’re bothered by it or not, but the simple fact that you can’t make your insiders disappear isn’t a problem, and the fact that you are a synthesis of your insiders (or that’s what you’re trying to be), doesn’t mean you’re totally fine with it.

Read Full Post »

I am feeling pretty weird. I have a lot going on in my mind and I so want to detach from it all. I slept for thirteen hours last night and still wanted to sleep, but couldn’t anymore. Lots of next year stuff going on again, and that, while it’s a mess inside my mind already beside that. I think nothing is coming out of the university stuff and I don’t care, or don’t want to care. Mum made some stupid remarks about going for a “daily living skills course” at the rehab centre this summer. If they had one, I’d definitely go. She thinks the summer programme I attended last summer would teach me to do all those stupid things. I namely said I was looking for a volunteer job for a few days a week during the summer. Mum apparently doesn’t care. Still not heard from Jan about the university folk. The student counsellor circulated yet another future planning form last week, but I didn’t take any effort to fill it out. She hasn’t E-mailed it or given it on a floppy disk to me, so I don’t care one bit. I want to get out of all this stuff. I cannot handle it. But whenever I say so I get the “I understand” remark and that’s it. I don’t expect people to arrange my things for me, but they want me to go to university, so they can at least give me some directions as to how to arrange it. I don’t want to go to university. But that’s over now; that was an issue of five months ago. I should go to university, for it’s April and I cannot doubt anymore. Never mind that I never doubted in the first place. Sigrid says that all the folks want me to go to the centre for the blind for training first. They don’t – Mum keeps nagging about the financial aid and that there is a way in which one can get money for the summer while waiting for financial aid for college students, and blahblahblah -, but even if they did, it wouldn’t work out. The eval the people want to do has been planned for just after my exams. I still wonder what Mr. De B. expected them to do when he initially contacted them in January. Probably to know of a way to kick me to colege by September. As if the rehab centre is for that. He probably never quite explained his expectations clearly – maybe cause the folk he spoke to didn’t want to know that much, cause she might get a false first impression. I tried to stick with the paradigm (the social/communicative problems) during the admission interview, but I just can’t avoid issues that do exist if I’m asked about them. So now they want to do the eval. Don’t know what’s coming out of it. Not a way to kick me to college by September, probably. If they can’t help me – either cause I’m too complicated or not complicated enough -, that’s a way to do so. My parents can threaten to kick me out if I don’t go to college. Well, I’ve long submitted to all the people’s wishes – in November, when I told the people I don’t doubt anymore, and simultaneously suppressed all my reasons and feelings behind not being ready for college -, but I cannot make all these arrangements overnight. I just don’t know how to do that, and no-one is going to give me even some directions. They’re all just asking me how far I am and telling me that I should hurry up. So how do I do so??? If anyone tells me what to do, I’m eager (well, not too eager, but can pretend to be) to do exactly that. But with a simple “You should (oh no “you want to”, NOT!) go to college, but how are you going to make it there?” won’t get me to get all the knowledge and skills I need. I’m getting so frustrated. Part of me (Brenda) wants to drop the entire stuff, not do anything, hope that the rehab folks can help me in a way, and wait for what happens and if my parents are truly going to kick me out. Another part of me (Carol) wants to tell all the people that it’s not going to work out but she’s going to do anything they tell her to. Yet another part (Clarissa) thinks “we” should finally take responsibility for “our” own choices and do what “we” want (but what’s that, with so many perspectives inside?). And yet another part (Jane) wants to arrange the usual college stuff and nothing else (nothing related to blindness) and see how things go in September. All these attitudes keep changing. They’re much more “formed” than opinions on college, which makes the situation more complicated, but I have learnt to cope with that, cause they’re not important issues to deal with. People on the BlindKid list advise me to make a list of the skills I’ll need to go to college and which I need to work on. They advised me the same one and a half years ago, but then I still had hope that I would learn the skills in time. I don’t have that hope now. I don’t know what’s going to happen. Maybe I’ll be out of the house in a little over two months. I don’t hope so, since, being over eighteen, I can’t rely on much help. It scares me.

Astrid

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 256 other followers

%d bloggers like this: