Attention Whores?

[Jiro]

That's still walking a slippery slope. For one thing, she wasn't diagnosed until after she had the children and her mindset and behavior deteriorated. Second, bipolar disorder can be successfully treated. Are you saying that just because she has bipolar disorder she shouldn't lose her children permenantly? Again, that's discriminatory.

no but until Britney Spears can demonstrate herself to be a functional, stable mother... good. But she hasn't so.... she was given second chance and third chance and fourth chance and so on.... it's her fault.

 

[Hear Again]

Being deaf has nothing to do with putting your kids in harm's way.

There are different types of bipolar disorders. I have friends who are bipolar, but they don't go running around shaving their heads, hitting other cars with umbrellas, driving with their babies on their laps, doing hit-and-runs, etc. Either their bipolar is mild or they are on medication that helps them deal with it.

If a person with severe bipolar refuses to take medication that can help them, then they are willingly putting themselves and others at risk. That's like handing a big sharp knife to a little kid who doesn't know what a big sharp knife is.

The difference between your friends and Britney Spears is that your friends (I assume) are on medication. Spears was not. That's why she displayed the extreme behavior she did.

Secondly, given that there are different types of bipolar (bipolar I, bipolar II, cyclothymia and schizoaffective disorder bipolar type), you can't compare one bipolar sufferer to another since the symptoms exibited by each can vary so dramatically. For example, while in a manic state, some people experience auditory hallucinations and/or delusions while others do not. Some engage in exhorbitant spending or gambling sprees while others drink excessively.

And it is not an either-or proposition of taking meds or not taking meds. What about the millions of people who have bipolar, but have not been diagnosed? These people continue to have reckless, addictive and manic/depressive behavior which continues (sometimes for years) until a friend or loved one gets them help -- or they experience a severe manic episode which lands them in the hospital. So as you can see, it's not as clear cut as you might think.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

that's true but... very difficult. Deaf disability is a physical disability. Homosexuality is not a mental illness. Those should not have any bearing in legal factor when it comes to children. However - (BD) Bipolar Disorder is a mental illness which can be unpredictable even with medication/treatment. In short - it's a ticking bomb. Wouldn't it be nice to have some kind of reliable & accurate scale to measure the severity of BD? but we don't... so it's up to family members/doctors/etc. to judge it when it comes to custody of children.

I think it's safe to say that Britney Spears is on severe level of BD and will remain a ticking bomb for rest of her life... even with medications. She should not be left alone with kids at any time as kids can trigger it at any moment.

We're not privy to her medical records, so we don't know how severe her illness is. I'm concerned because people may look at Spears and conclude that all cases of bipolar disorder has a course like hers and they don't. You can't just look at one person and say all people with bipolar disorder are like that. It's not true.

I would agree that bipolar disorder is unpredictable, but there are people who take care of themselves and I'm arguing, why shouldn't they have children? I'm not confining my statements to Spears alone. I'm thinking of how bipolar disorder can affect people in many different ways and to say those people shouldn't have children is punitive and discriminatory.

 

[Hear Again]

Britney Spears doesn't seem like a stable woman w/ Bipolar Disorder though.... Raising little children is a huge test especially for a person with Bipolar Disorder. Worst of all... she's a celebrity which means bigger pressure and constant stress. A bad combo! IMO - I think the judge was right to give a full custody of children to father.

I'm sorry Jiro, but I disagree. Britney Spears was unmedicated and undiagnosed at the time she exhibited all of the reckless behavior we've discussed in earlier posts. It was unfair and discrimminatory of the judge to deny Spears custody based on that very reason. If anything, the judge should have waited until Spears was released from the hospital and in a stable state of mind before deciding where her children should be placed.

And you're right...Spears wasn't a stable woman with bipolar. She was an unstable, *undiagnosed* woman with bipolar.

 

[Hear Again]

I see your point. I should point out that your friends are not followed by paprazzi at all times nor are their lives scrutinized in every conceivable way.

Truth be told, I'm sure Spears' nanny does most of the work. Put your mind at ease.

Good point. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the constant stress Spears was under is what was responsible for her manic episode.

 

[Jiro]

We're not privy to her medical records, so we don't know how severe her illness is. I'm concerned because people may look at Spears and conclude that all cases of bipolar disorder has a course like hers and they don't. You can't just look at one person and say all people with bipolar disorder are like that. It's not true.

I would agree that bipolar disorder is unpredictable, but there are people who take care of themselves and I'm arguing, why shouldn't they have children? I'm not confining my statements to Spears alone. I'm thinking of how bipolar disorder can affect people in many different ways and to say those people shouldn't have children is punitive and discriminatory.

yes. we've already experienced this. We've already seen the public's stereotypical view on our disability. I've learned better not to let one bad case ruin it all. In this case - I'm specifically concerned with Britney Spear. I only judge it by person's action and what's she doing is a danger to herself and her children. Like I said previously - until she can demonstrate herself as a stable, functional mother.... that's fine.

I'm sorry Jiro, but I disagree. Britney Spears was unmedicated and undiagnosed at the time she exhibited all of the reckless behavior we've discussed in earlier posts. It was unfair and discrimminatory of the judge to deny Spears custody based on that very reason. If anything, the judge should have waited until Spears was released from the hospital and in a stable state of mind before deciding where her children should be placed.

And you're right...Spears wasn't a stable woman with bipolar. She was an unstable, *undiagnosed* woman with bipolar.

she's had plenty of time and help available to her... Unfortunately... MTV Award is her priority.... not her illness and children. She should follow Christina Applegate's example... even though it wasn't mental illness but still - Christina knew her priority.

 

[Hear Again]

that's true but... very difficult. Deaf disability is a physical disability. Homosexuality is not a mental illness. Those should not have any bearing in legal factor when it comes to children. However - (BD) Bipolar Disorder is a mental illness which can be unpredictable even with medication/treatment. In short - it's a ticking bomb. Wouldn't it be nice to have some kind of reliable & accurate scale to measure the severity of BD? but we don't... so it's up to family members/doctors/etc. to judge it when it comes to custody of children.

I think it's safe to say that Britney Spears is on severe level of BD and will remain a ticking bomb for rest of her life... even with medications. She should not be left alone with kids at any time as kids can trigger it at any moment.

Actually, there are scales which measure the extent and severity of a person's manic symptoms. There are also self-diagnostic surveys/questionaires which have been found to be quite accurate.

As OB said, since we do not have information relating to Spears' medical records, we cannot conclude whether or not her manic behavior would continue even if she were on meds.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

yes. we've already experienced this. We've already seen the public's stereotypical view on our disability. I've learned better not to let one bad case ruin it all. In this case - I'm specifically concerned with Britney Spear. I only judge it by person's action and what's she doing is a danger to herself and her children. Like I said previously - until she can demonstrate herself as a stable, functional mother.... that's fine.



she's had plenty of time and help available to her... Unfortunately... MTV Award is her priority.... not her illness and children. She should follow Christina Applegate's example... even though it wasn't mental illness but still - Christina knew her priority.

Well, from what I gather, she has a conservator. I also know that the paparrazzi were all over this like white on rice. She had a camera in her face that recorded every outlandish thing she did. Maybe she brought the attention upon herself, but that being said, don't you think that if you're witnessing a woman who is clearly unwell, you should exercise a little integrity and back off?

I just find the whole thing sad. I also don't think we should judge bipolar disorder by one person. As I've said, the illness presents differently in everyone and to say someone should permanently lose custody of a child because they're ill is wrong. I'm all for keeping children safe, but I'm also for allowing the ill individual a chance to prove she can parent her children and keep them safe.

I also disagree that to say that women with bipolar disorder should never have children. That statement from someone is what brought me into this and I think the people really need to educate themselves about bipolar disorder before they start making statements.

 

[Jiro]

Well, from what I gather, she has a conservator. I also know that the paparrazzi were all over this like white on rice. She had a camera in her face that recorded every outlandish thing she did. Maybe she brought the attention upon herself, but that being said, don't you think that if you're witnessing a woman who is clearly unwell, you should exercise a little integrity and back off?

I just find the whole thing sad. I also don't think we should judge bipolar disorder by one person. As I've said, the illness presents differently in everyone and to say someone should permanently lose custody of a child because they're ill is wrong. I'm all for keeping children safe, but I'm also for allowing the ill individual a chance to prove she can parent her children and keep them safe.

I also disagree that to say that women with bipolar disorder should never have children. That statement from someone is what brought me into this and I think the people really need to educate themselves about bipolar disorder before they start making statements.

Fair enough If she really wants her children back - she should put a hold on her career. It's her choice - career or children.

 

[Hear Again]

yes. we've already experienced this. We've already seen the public's stereotypical view on our disability. I've learned better not to let one bad case ruin it all. In this case - I'm specifically concerned with Britney Spear. I only judge it by person's action and what's she doing is a danger to herself and her children. Like I said previously - until she can demonstrate herself as a stable, functional mother.... that's fine.



she's had plenty of time and help available to her... Unfortunately... MTV Award is her priority.... not her illness and children. She should follow Christina Applegate's example... even though it wasn't mental illness but still - Christina knew her priority.

Christina Applegate? I don't understand. Please explain.

 

[Jiro]

Christina Applegate? I don't understand. Please explain.

oh she's a movie star. a HOT one. pretty face, pretty boobs, pretty everything. She was the young star in MARRIED WITH CHILDREN. Recently, she was diagnosed with early phase of breast cancer. Obviously - she valued her life more and put aside her career to have a double mastectomy. Obviously - for most celebrities, this usually mean an end of career because if you're not hot, you're done for. But she's kept her head up high and is in a good spirit. She will be having a reconstructive surgery and even with her famous missing voluptuous boobs - she will be back in show business and she continues to promote breast cancer awareness.

Britney Spears can follow this same step. Just by putting hold on her career - she would not lose everything. She will still be remembered but she should have an ounce of respect and dignity for herself by not going crazy and endangering her children in public.... and by focusing on getting better... this would promote a positive awareness on BD as well.

 

[Maria]

Googled this:

 

[Hear Again]

oh she's a movie star. a HOT one. pretty face, pretty boobs, pretty everything. She was the young star in MARRIED WITH CHILDREN. Recently, she was diagnosed with early phase of breast cancer. Obviously - she valued her life more and put aside her career to have a double mastectomy. Obviously - for most celebrities, this usually mean an end of career because if you're not hot, you're done for. But she's kept her head up high and is in a good spirit. She will be having a reconstructive surgery and even with her famous missing voluptuous boobs - she will be back in show business and she continues to promote breast cancer awareness.

Britney Spears can follow this same step. Just by putting hold on her career - she would not lose everything. She will still be remembered but she should have an ounce of respect and dignity for herself by not going crazy and endangering her children in public.... and by focusing on getting better... this would promote a positive awareness on BD as well.

Thanks for your explanation! The difference as I see it between Applegate and Spears is that Applegate was in a *normal* state of mind to determine that she wanted to get better. When someone has bipolar, their thinking and judgement are severely clouded -- so much so that it's common for them to deny anything is wrong. And even if a person starts a medication regimen, it can take awhile before the reality of the diagnosis begins to "sink in" and they start to accept the diagnosis. Being told that you'll need to take meds for the rest of your life isn't easy to come to grips with either. In my case, it took a year before I fully accepted my diagnosis. If truth be told, there are still days (even after 2 years) where I start to wonder for a second if I really have this illness or not because I feel so well. Then without warning mania or depression hits and I'm right back where I started. You just can't snap your fingers and expect to get well. It doesn't work that way. It will take time for Spears to come to terms with her diagnosis and start to make the positive changes she needs to in order to live with bipolar the best she can.

 

[VamPyroX]

She told them to show up at the courthouse dates?

Maybe, maybe not.

There was one incident where she didn't want her mom to take care of her kids because of her mom's so-called drinking problems or something. So, she called the paparazzi and had them follow her to a trailer where her mom and sister were using during the filming of Jamie Lynn's Zoey 101 or something. She showed up at the trailer with documents trying to embarrass her mom in front of the paparazzi. (I don't remember the exact details, but I read about it over a year ago after Britney had her 2nd baby.)


There's also her ex-boyfriend who was paparazzi. Everyone knows that when you date one type of person, you're bringing yourself into their world... especially as a celebrity. She knew she was dating a member of the paparazzi, but didn't care. She wanted more attention.

 

[VamPyroX]

That's still walking a slippery slope. For one thing, she wasn't diagnosed until after she had the children and her mindset and behavior deteriorated. Second, bipolar disorder can be successfully treated. Are you saying that just because she has bipolar disorder she should lose her children permenantly? Again, that's discriminatory.

I never said she should lose her kids permanently because she has bipolar. I never said "bipolar" was the case. I said "illness". It could be PTSD. It could be bipolar. It could simply be her state-of-mind that's putting her at risk of harming herself and/or others.

Saying a person has bipolar is just an excuse for forgiveness.

Suppose I have bipolar and it leads me to slap people just because I'm emotional. You say "hi" to me and I slap you back. You get mad. I say, "Oh, don't blame me. I am bipolar. You'll have to forgive me." Then I walk along to meet someone else. Someone else says "hi" to me and I slap them back. "Oh, excuse me. I'm bipolar."

That's like a deaf person banging a huge 1,000-page book on the table in a library and then the librarian says, "Shh... you're being loud." Then the deaf person says, "Oh, I can't help it. I'm deaf."

 

[VamPyroX]

The difference between your friends and Britney Spears is that your friends (I assume) are on medication. Spears was not. That's why she displayed the extreme behavior she did.

Secondly, given that there are different types of bipolar (bipolar I, bipolar II, cyclothymia and schizoaffective disorder bipolar type), you can't compare one bipolar sufferer to another since the symptoms exibited by each can vary so dramatically. For example, while in a manic state, some people experience auditory hallucinations and/or delusions while others do not. Some engage in exhorbitant spending or gambling sprees while others drink excessively.

And it is not an either-or proposition of taking meds or not taking meds. What about the millions of people who have bipolar, but have not been diagnosed? These people continue to have reckless, addictive and manic/depressive behavior which continues (sometimes for years) until a friend or loved one gets them help -- or they experience a severe manic episode which lands them in the hospital. So as you can see, it's not as clear cut as you might think.

So, are you saying that she didn't know what she did was wrong? She didn't know that she needed help? She didn't know it was crazy to shave her head, didn't know it was wrong to hit another car and drive off, didn't know it was wrong to drive with a baby on her lap, etc?

 

[Oceanbreeze]

I never said she should lose her kids permanently because she has bipolar. I never said "bipolar" was the case. I said "illness". It could be PTSD. It could be bipolar. It could simply be her state-of-mind that's putting her at risk of harming herself and/or others.

Saying a person has bipolar is just an excuse for forgiveness.

Suppose I have bipolar and it leads me to slap people just because I'm emotional. You say "hi" to me and I slap you back. You get mad. I say, "Oh, don't blame me. I am bipolar. You'll have to forgive me." Then I walk along to meet someone else. Someone else says "hi" to me and I slap them back. "Oh, excuse me. I'm bipolar."

That's like a deaf person banging a huge 1,000-page book on the table in a library and then the librarian says, "Shh... you're being loud." Then the deaf person says, "Oh, I can't help it. I'm deaf."

No, it isn't. It's a mandate for treatment. Any psychiatric illness needs treament and it's the person's responsiblility to seek it or it's the reponsiblity of family members to seek it for that person.

I am not saying we should excuse her behavior and leave it unchecked! That is NOT what I'm saying at all. I am saying this.... If someone can't get the help for themselves, then someone needs to go to court and get an involuntary commitment order for the person and put them in the hospital! But, once the person is following a treatment plan successfully, why punish them? Your statements show me you know very little about mental illness and I really wish you'd get informed, because it's statements like this that create such a stigma for the mentally ill.

 

[Hear Again]

So, are you saying that she didn't know what she did was wrong? She didn't know that she needed help? She didn't know it was crazy to shave her head, didn't know it was wrong to hit another car and drive off, didn't know it was wrong to drive with a baby on her lap, etc?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. When people experience a *severe* manic episode (as Spears did), their thinking and judgement are seriously impaired. When in this kind of a state, they can't tell the difference between right and wrong nor can they control their actions. As Jillio mentioned, they exhibit extreme behavior, but do not do so willingly.

Again, many people who experience severe manic episodes deny that there is anything wrong with them. That is one of the hallmark symptoms of mania. Therefore, if they don't believe anything is wrong in the first place, that person is in no position to understand that they need help.

If you've never experienced a severe manic episode, this is probably difficult for you to understand, but I can tell you from personal experience that controlling one's behavior when in this kind of a state is impossible without medical intervention.

 

[Mrs Bucket]

If it's an illness that cannot be helped, then she shouldn't even have kids in the first place.

If I knew you had an illness that would put my children at risk, I wouldn't let you around my kids or do anything that would lead you to harm yourself or harm my kids.

I normally reserve my judgment as I feel it is not important and not my place to pass judgment at all. I have to say that it is not your place to say this quote at all. You have no right to pass such horribly misconstrued generalisations on bipolar people who are parents as well.

Just because they struggle on a daily basis even with their medications, they do care for their children. It is actually those who have sound of mind that harms children more than those who have been clinically proved and medically intervened.

Your quote paints a really bad image of the average bipolar patient and I hope you retract your post with an apology.

 

[Hear Again]

Saying a person has bipolar is just an excuse for forgiveness.

Suppose I have bipolar and it leads me to slap people just because I'm emotional. You say "hi" to me and I slap you back. You get mad. I say, "Oh, don't blame me. I am bipolar. You'll have to forgive me." Then I walk along to meet someone else. Someone else says "hi" to me and I slap them back. "Oh, excuse me. I'm bipolar."

That's like a deaf person banging a huge 1,000-page book on the table in a library and then the librarian says, "Shh... you're being loud." Then the deaf person says, "Oh, I can't help it. I'm deaf."

Vampy, the scenario you're describing doesn't represent the majority of people who have bipolar. When you describe it the way you have above, you're belittling and insulting those of us who are living and trying to cope successfully with this disorder. Bipolar isn't an excuse for bad behavior. It's a serious mental illness that can severely impair one's judgement. I hope to God you are never diagnosed with bipolar -- it is an awful illness that I wouldn't wish upon my worst enemy.