[venusss]

I always wonder about this when it's discussed... what is the difference? To me it sounds as matter of semantics. It will not change how you view yourself.

I use the "am" form... but eh... it's not all I "am". I am also a Czech, greenparty voter, cat owner, a redhead, eurovision fan, existentialist...

to me more important is how you view implications. If you have an "illness"... or if you "are" troubled. To me the "I am" form is... "well, this is who I AM", deal with it. I am also 5'11 and not that fond of it, but my long legs aren't going anywhere... althought it's not all my identity.

so what is your take on you and your quirk? (since I "have" quirk in my view, not illness). Outside the am/have distinction?

[wadingthruemotions]

Originally Posted by VenusHalley

I always wonder about this when it's discussed... what is the difference? To me it sounds as matter of semantics. It will not change how you view yourself.

I use the "am" form... but eh... it's not all I "am". I am also a Czech, greenparty voter, cat owner, a redhead, eurovision fan, existentialist...

to me more important is how you view implications. If you have an "illness"... or if you "are" troubled. To me the "I am" form is... "well, this is who I AM", deal with it. I am also 5'11 and not that fond of it, but my long legs aren't going anywhere... althought it's not all my identity.

so what is your take on you and your quirk? (since I "have" quirk in my view, not illness). Outside the am/have distinction?

For me right now it is I am this, that or the other. Because right now i am being ruled by all that I have. I have means I have it and I am okay for the most part and it is not ruling me.

If that makes sense.

So I am so not in the I have phase at this time. I was for a while, or at least I thought I was. I realize now that I may not have ever been and was fooling not just those around me, but myself as well. To the extent my cover did not allow me to see what I was truly doing to myself all along, and others too. So yea, I so AM all the things that plague me.

Sorry, I will get off my own soapbox now. So did not mean to take your thread anywhere else, just wanted to get that out there I guess to explain how I see myself in relation to your question. If that is not what you are looking for, I apologize.

[venusss]

I am rather wondering if people see it as medical/spiritual/psychological/existential/humane issue... which the I am/I have distinction seems to miss entirelly.

as i said... I don't see the difference... what is difference between being a mother and having child? Being a house owner and having a house? Having red hair or being a redhead?

[wadingthruemotions]

Originally Posted by VenusHalley

I am rather wondering if people see it as medical/spiritual/psychological/existential/humane issue... which the I am/I have distinction seems to miss entirelly.

as i said... I don't see the difference... what is difference between being a mother and having child? Being a house owner and having a house? Having red hair or being a redhead?

Ahhh in those general terms then I would say no it doesn't really make any difference to me.

[faerie_moon_x]

Last week we had a woman in our diabetes class. She was extremely nice and one of the rare people in class who stops by my desk to talk. She was newly diagnosed with diabetes.

She suddenly was telling me that growing up, her mother was very opinionated and not always very nice about it. She said that one thing her mother always used to tell them was that people with diabetes were horrible people. They were people who lacked self-control and purposefully didn't take care of themselves. If she found out if someone had diabetes she would put them down as being fat and disgusting. Then, when she was in her 60s, she was diagnosed with diabetes herself. She dropped into a deep depression and stayed in denial, making it a huge secret that she had diabetes.

So now, her daughter was standing before me. A woman in her 60s, also newly diagnosed with diabetes. And she said, "It's hard to get passed feeling like I'm worthless even all these years later."

I just looked at her and said, "Just remember you're not a diabetic, you have diabetes. You're still the same you."

Her mouth dropped open, and she was stunned. She said, "Wow. Thank you."

And I said, "That's exactly why we don't say 'I'm Diabetic, or You're Diabetic anymore. You're not your disease. You have a disease." And I thought she was going to cry. She thanked me again and said she wished her doctor would have said that to her, because she needed to hear it.

I've learned this truth by having bipolar. I am not my illness, it's part of me but it is not all consuming of me. Thinking this way helps me from victimizing myself. And it works for all illnesses, not just bipolar or diabetes.

[Trippin2.0]

For me its honestly mostly semantics to say I am bipolar.

If you wanna delve deeper, like DHX said, saying "I have" seperates you from your illness, and so maybe thats the main reason folks are passionate about saying "have" they don't want to "be" the problem, so seperating the 2 is helpful.

I don't feel diseased or disordered, I tried on that illness label and it just didn't fit, I am quirky because my brain is wired differently. So I am bipolar because I'm wired differently

To me, its really not an issue whether you wanna say "I am" or "I have biplar", as long as you're not saying "I are bipolar"... Yeah that would bug me

[venusss]

I've learned this truth by having bipolar. I am not my illness, it's part of me but it is not all consuming of me. Thinking this way helps me from victimizing myself. And it works for all illnesses, not just bipolar or diabetes.

but what if you don't view it as illness? I guess that is my issue with the distinction... because BP is I guess just one trait of me... and I see positives to it. Just like being 5'11 (and believe me, I struggled hard with that one and still struggle when travelling on a long distance bus, wishing i could just unscrew my legs and put them in the baggage space)).

To me, its really not an issue whether you wanna say "I am" or "I have biplar", as long as you're not saying "I are bipolar"... Yeah that would bug me

how about "you is bipolar"?

[Trippin2.0]

Originally Posted by VenusHalley

how about "you is bipolar"?

Yes that would bug me too! lmao

[unaluna]

Interesting. But we say I'm married or I'm single? Or I have a wife - which sounds like ownership to some ears. I'm in a relationship with bipolardom I think it has to do with expectations, what the other person can expect of you. But that's kind of an old-fashioned concept - someone with diabetes can eat sweets if they don't eat a lot of other carbs at a meal, for instance. A married person can do lots of stuff, as can a single. But you can get fired for acting too bipolar. Being more trouble than you're worth, was how my boss put it. After the project was finished tho, and they were cutting personnel.

[Cocosurviving]

Originally Posted by dark_heart_x

Last week we had a woman in our diabetes class. She was extremely nice and one of the rare people in class who stops by my desk to talk. She was newly diagnosed with diabetes.

She suddenly was telling me that growing up, her mother was very opinionated and not always very nice about it. She said that one thing her mother always used to tell them was that people with diabetes were horrible people. They were people who lacked self-control and purposefully didn't take care of themselves. If she found out if someone had diabetes she would put them down as being fat and disgusting. Then, when she was in her 60s, she was diagnosed with diabetes herself. She dropped into a deep depression and stayed in denial, making it a huge secret that she had diabetes.

So now, her daughter was standing before me. A woman in her 60s, also newly diagnosed with diabetes. And she said, "It's hard to get passed feeling like I'm worthless even all these years later."

I just looked at her and said, "Just remember you're not a diabetic, you have diabetes. You're still the same you."

Her mouth dropped open, and she was stunned. She said, "Wow. Thank you."

And I said, "That's exactly why we don't say 'I'm Diabetic, or You're Diabetic anymore. You're not your disease. You have a disease." And I thought she was going to cry. She thanked me again and said she wished her doctor would have said that to her, because she needed to hear it.

I've learned this truth by having bipolar. I am not my illness, it's part of me but it is not all consuming of me. Thinking this way helps me from victimizing myself. And it works for all illnesses, not just bipolar or diabetes.

I agree w/ DHX. I prefer "I have". I'm still newly dxd and I must find ways to make me feel better. I have days that systems or side effects consumer and I feel like BP is wining. I have to remind myself that "I have BP" and will continue w/ my treatment plan, tweak my plan if needed. OMI "I am BP" makes me feel like BP consumes me, like all there is to me is BP. I think abt BP every day so I have to keep reminding myself there is a difference.

[intergalactictraveler]

Originally Posted by VenusHalley

I always wonder about this when it's discussed... what is the difference? To me it sounds as matter of semantics. It will not change how you view yourself.

I use the "am" form... but eh... it's not all I "am". I am also a Czech, greenparty voter, cat owner, a redhead, eurovision fan, existentialist...

to me more important is how you view implications. If you have an "illness"... or if you "are" troubled. To me the "I am" form is... "well, this is who I AM", deal with it. I am also 5'11 and not that fond of it, but my long legs aren't going anywhere... althought it's not all my identity.

so what is your take on you and your quirk? (since I "have" quirk in my view, not illness). Outside the am/have distinction?

I understand how many people define themselves by their profession, marital status, illness, etc., but regarding illness, I've been trying to say that I have bipolar illness, rather than I'm bipolar. I'm not my illness, even though it impacts every aspect and moment of my life. I wasn't born an illness; I was born a human being...or at least I think I'm human. For many months, I've been seeing myself as an observer of the human race, even of my wife, not feeling like I'm part of humanity or the husband of my wife. I'm not doing it consciously, I don't think. It's some kind or reality shift; something out of Doctor Who. Quite trippy and it's not psych drugs that are causing it because I only take Klonopin(unable to take anything else). Maybe it has something to do with my ultrafast cycling and how my brain processes information and perceives the world around me.

But labels, whether self chosen or used by others to describe us, stereotype us, create walls between people, serving no useful purpose other than to blur the uniqueness each of us.

[BlueInanna]

It so doesn't matter to me how anyone else wants to say it. But for me, I would say, "I have a bp dx."

[middlepath]

Labels seem to be a way to assign meaning to ones quirks. They can also be used to indicate them vs. us. They, many times, are not useful to me...but when you are "handed" a label...there is a digestive process that requires time and introspection before either accepting/assigning or refuting said label. Either way, the core and the content remain unchanged in the presence/absence of the label.

At this point I AM bipolar because I view it as something to ponder and to wrap my mind around. At some point the I suspect I will just accept me as me with or without bipolar/brown hair/fill in the blank. I guess it is a process of integration? I don't know...

[BipolaRNurse]

I use both interchangeably, although I've noticed that when I'm discussing it with people I perceive as being on a higher plane than me, I tend to use "I have bipolar disorder" rather than "I'm bipolar". It's like I need to separate it from me somehow, while it's no big deal around family or close friends because they KNOW I am (have) BP. The only thing I really don't like is when we're called "bipolars" in a generalized manner, like "All bipolars have trouble holding down jobs".

Personally, "being" or "having" bipolar doesn't matter to me because no matter how you state it, bipolar illness is a life sentence and in most ways, it really sucks.

[ultramar]

Outside of being in the midst of an episode (and I'm fortunate that this happens maybe a couple of times a year, though it's depended on the time in my life) or having a lot of trouble with meds (sometimes), I don't particularly identify with it. (Being on this forum may bely this, but this is my sense of it). I feel like the way I have experienced bipolar is as unique (as it is for all of us, I think) as other aspects of myself are, and in a way, I think it's become integrated, over time, into who I am, another piece of a rich, complex puzzle.

I 'am' so many things, identify with so many things. I read a good novel or see a great film and I get immersed in completely different worlds, utterly different from my own, and I read and see struggles that may not have a mental health label, but are just as intense, and compelling, and painful, and tremendous as anything I could ever experience through/having this illness.

I lived in Europe and South America for several years and also experienced there things so outside the realm of my own experience. It's all somehow helped me to get out of my own head, the vastness and diversity of human experience comforts me a great deal, somehow.

[I'll insert here, that I can have this perspective here because now, at this moment, this day, I'm in a good place, I cannot always, unfortunately, feel so positively about things].

But when thinking of labels, something comes to mind with my experience living in Colombia. I knew people there who witnessed and/or were the victims of violence countless times in their lives. [I myself was witness to and victim of violence there]. But when I think about it, so many people I knew there, here, would be diagnosed off the bat with PTSD, be labeled as such, perhaps as broken, as victims, as destined to a lifetime of pain because of this, put on meds, etc. I never saw these labels there. I saw people cope how they could, seek out support, suffer, move on. No labels. No treatment either, but maybe that wouldn't have been helpful to some people either. I saw people live very full and healthy lives without it.

Not only did people not get caught in such things, I don't think it would ever even occur to them to label their experiences or their emotions in this way (and I'm referring mostly to middle-class, educated people, not people who perhaps wouldn't know about 'mental illness' due to lack of education, etc.). I think also, people had a sense that there were always people who had it worse, watching the news and seeing the massacres, etc. What would be called 'trauma' here was part of life, a part of their lives like so many other things, but not who they were, not by a long shot.

Some rambling thoughts...

[greylove]

In the past I would frequently refer to my Bipolar as an "llness". "When I became ill"......."since I became ill", etc. Now I avoid that at all costs. It is a mental illness but to call it that somehow diminishes me. On PC now I say "since my diagnosis" or "since I was diagnosed" quite often. (I know that's a bit off-track for this thread but just thought I'd mention it.) Other than that I tend to say I have Bipolar or I have Bipolar disorder.

[emgreen]

Originally Posted by ultramar

But when thinking of labels, something comes to mind with my experience living in Colombia. I knew people there who witnessed and/or were the victims of violence countless times in their lives. [I myself was witness to and victim of violence there]. But when I think about it, so many people I knew there, here, would be diagnosed off the bat with PTSD, be labeled as such, perhaps as broken, as victims, as destined to a lifetime of pain because of this, put on meds, etc. I never saw these labels there. I saw people cope how they could, seek out support, suffer, move on. No labels. No treatment either, but maybe that wouldn't have been helpful to some people either. I saw people live very full and healthy lives without it.

Not only did people not get caught in such things, I don't think it would ever even occur to them to label their experiences or their emotions in this way (and I'm referring mostly to middle-class, educated people, not people who perhaps wouldn't know about 'mental illness' due to lack of education, etc.). I think also, people had a sense that there were always people who had it worse, watching the news and seeing the massacres, etc. What would be called 'trauma' here was part of life, a part of their lives like so many other things, but not who they were, not by a long shot.

Some rambling thoughts...

An interesting perspective, Ultramar. Thanks for this.

[BlackPup]

I use "I have" more than "I am" but don't really get worried by I am either cos its just one part of who I am.

[anon61514]

Originally Posted by hankster

Interesting. But we say I'm married or I'm single? Or I have a wife - which sounds like ownership to some ears. I'm in a relationship with bipolardom ...

Own that bipolardom! Own it!

On a more serious note, I've got a posh accent and a slight problem with obsessive grandiose language so I normally say "I've been diagnosed with xxx".

That also makes it seem less like our medical terms for the conditions we have currently are made of concrete - as everyone here knows about the relevant diagnoses handbooks punted about the globe to better label subgroups and disorders.

Heck, maybe it even lets people around you comfort themselves with the idea that it might all be a big misunderstanding and you're actually lovely, fully sane and generally splendificous in all senses of the word (which I just made up ).

[ultramar]

Something that has actually helped me in a way, is how my therapist has described it. Since starting to see him, about 4 years ago, I've had two long, full-blown manic episodes [some smaller ones, but mostly as a reaction to medication changes, taking prednisone once, anything else mood-wise has really been situational or nasty anxiety]. When I was in those two episodes, he referred to it as being 'sick,' as in 'you're sick right now.'

I find this helpful, because it indicates to me that I am 'sick' when in the throes of an episode, but otherwise am not 'sick.' I am not sick all the time. I'm not sick from just have the diagnosis, not 'a sick/ill person.' Rather, there are times when 'I become ill.'

Maybe it's helpful to me, because the phrase mimics how non-psychiatric illnesses are referred to, though this is the first time that's occurred to me. But I think it's mostly helpful because it's limited to episodes, instead of all the time, as a person.

Does anyone else feel that this would be a helpful way of labeling/describing it?

Ownership is right, I think. I have things, but I am not those things, and they do not own
me. There can be a significant difference in meaning between the two.