Stan: Is there something wrong with you? I have just been made aware of your creepy full disclosure statement on your website about blogging parents. If you do anything that compromises the anonymity and therefore safety of my son, I will assume you are stalking me and stalking my son and request assistance from the FBI. You need to leave us alone. Writing about mental health issues is very precarious and there are a lot of freaks and creeps out there, as I’m sure you well know, and that is why I post anonymously. If you take it upon yourself to post anything about me or him that is not done in anonymity and will therefore endanger my son, I will assume you are threatening him and mean him harm.
Please think about what you are doing. I have the right to give my son medical treatment that is prescribed by a medical doctor. I have the right to write about our lives with anonymity. You do not have the right to endanger my son. I do not profit from this site or the mental health or pharmaceutical industry in any way, shape or form and therefore full disclosure rights that would apply to people that do profit from that industry do not apply here.
Edited to add: thank you for changing it.
Meg
11 Comments
Oh my. Do you suppose he has plans to link to all blogs by parents of kids with bipolar so his readers can jump all over them? Egad what a nightmare that would be.
Off to find out what my blocking options are. Whether those are his plans or not, I suppose that’s good information to have, right?
Adrienne: I guess he does not understand that full disclosure rights as he sees them do not apply here. He can link to whatever he wants but he can’t put people’s children in danger or show intent to do them harm and if he is stalking blogging parents in any way that goes beyond a link to their site, that is a threat with intent to harm and is illegal.
“I do not profit from this site or the mental health or pharmaceutical industry in any way.”
Yes you do. You have a chemically controlled child. Thats what you wanted.
Mark: What chemical is he on?
Meg, Stan’s a good guy – his heart is in the right place, believe it or not, which is not to say that yours isn’t. Beyond that, I can’t speak for him, nor would I wish to.
He’s seen a bunch of people who have apparently been damaged by prescription medication, and he’s done enough research on the way that these drugs are manufactured and marketed to have severe doubts about the safety and efficacy of same. My own view (for what it’s worth), is that people such as Keller and Biederman are charlatans – they’ve never fixed anybody and don’t deserve to be afforded the label “expert”.
Stan’s concerned, that’s all. You may not like the way that he expresses his concerns, but there aren’t enough people in the world who give a shit, and that makes Stan unusual, and therefore valuable.
Matt
PS I was just reading your comment about comments, below. An anonymous troll recently wished me a slow and painful death. This may not surprise you, of course! I reciprocated!
Matt: I hear you but do you know Stan personally? Do you know anything about his life or background besides what he writes about himself?
I agree that people in the world can be injured by these medications. And I get Stan and Stephany’s point with that. And I do believe that Stephany’s daughter was injured by the excessive medications she took and I have complete empathy for that situation, which I have expressed many times on this site. I also know that many people are helped by medications. Life is never black or white. And you don’t hear much of the success stories of medication because those people happily go about their business leading happy lives and have no ‘point to prove’ or ‘people to set straight’.
What Stan put on his website was creepy and vindictive (it wasn’t on there for long, he changed it soon after I posted from a general threat to ‘outing’ blogging parents to a lengthy personal attack on me chronicling posts I had written on other sites – which is weird in and of itself). I’m not sure if it’s all still there or not as I don’t look anymore but those postings, as well as comments he wrote which I did not publish, gave me an insight into his character that I had not known about previously. And it was not for the positive. By any means.
Well, we worked together when a bunch of us were putting together the A Hoy blogger’s award, 18 months or so ago. I wouldn’t make an analysis of Stan – I don’t see the benefit in that, to be honest.
There’s a massive industry in favour of drugging people, and there isn’t one of a similar size arguing against it. Indeed, there appears to be a great deal of jiggery-pokery at every level of the process, from trials to drugstore’s shelves. It’s not surprising that some people (possibly including Stan, possibly not), perceive anybody not determinedly against prescription drugs as being part of that, erm, fraud (I use the word in its strict legal sense).
Anyway, I don’t need to get in the middle of yet another argument, given that I’m likely to get scant acknowledgement for defusing it (assuming that’s what happens), so I’ll butt out, now.
Matt
I’m enraged. I know Don and Meg and Ryan. They are very good friends on mine. In fact, they are practically family. Please don’t assume you know anything about them from all you get on the blog. Meg and Don have both said this here before; only a small fraction of their lives is written about. I will tell you all this. They, as a family, and as individuals, have endured great hardship – emotional, financial, physical – to keep Ryan OFF medication. There was a time when I thought Meg was nuts to do this. They have sacrificed so much to do it. So writing that they have a “chemically controlled child” is laughable and shows your ignorance. Sorry to be so blunt but many of the comments made here infuriate me. You DON’T know much about their daily lives. Please remember that.
As for Meg posting contradictory comments aroung the web. Well it must be nice for some of us (Stan) to live in such a perfect world where we always know exactly what to do at all times. As for me, I often change my mind, learn from mistakes, or simply contradict myself as I get new information. I might actually say something completely stupid once in a while. (I know you know what that’s like.) Oops, sorry.
Listen, I have no personal experience with mental illness. Although I do have extensive experience with long physical illness in my own family. And I do know there is always the possibility of the caregivers breaking. The day-in, day-out stresses of being “always on” WILL take a toll on the caregiver/parents. The lack of sleep, the emotional rollercoaster, and throw in the financial stress often associated with medical problems and you have a recipe for disaster. Caregivers can become very fragile themselves, very “brittle.” And when the caregiver breaks what happens to the patient? My friends Don and Meg are raising a very good kid. Ryan is really amazing. Their family is really amazing. I don’t know how they do it. Really. I am continually astonished. So second guessing their choices is not something they need from these comments. They think long and hard about everything they do and just the evidence of this blog shows they are always looking for something better. They do enough second guessing on their own, thank you. Information in a supportive manner would be more appropriate.
Meg, Don, Ryan you know our door is always open. I wish you sand in your shoes and peace in your hearts!
I agree John.
I am close with Meg, Don and Rye and I think it’s disturbing that someone would say those things and then look to seek out everyone’s identity, while trying to harm Meg and her family. That’s really more of something a stalker would do – not someone who is a well-adjusted, content person.
It really makes you wonder who these people are? You never really know… for all we know Stan could have multiple personalities and be sitting in a mental institution right now ..
Jim wrote:
“…It really makes you wonder who these people are? You never really know… for all we know Stan could have multiple personalities and be sitting in a mental institution right now ..”
Yes, he could. And he could also be a mental health advocate with years of experience in the field. I don’t know, I’ve never met him, and neither have you.
And if he was in a mental institution, would that make his view less valid? Be careful how you answer that question, given present company.
Matt
Oh my lordicus, let’s just light a candle, say a little vigil and put this baby to rest.