[archipelago]

I retook the Sanity Quiz to see how I was doing. I can't remember the initial score but it wasn't very high so I didn't report it.

Today I got a score of 29, with smoking the main issue. What a surprise!

But I wonder if this really reflects anything. I collect disability for PTSD and see an analyst twice a week.

I do feel a lot stronger. With that much therapy how could one not? But I don't see myself as able to be as strong as a normal person.

I still need lots of down time to deal with things, which can't really happen if I got a full time job.

Not sure how to interpret it at all.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by iota

I retook the Sanity Quiz to see how I was doing. I can't remember the initial score but it wasn't very high so I didn't report it.

Today I got a score of 29, with smoking the main issue. What a surprise!

But I wonder if this really reflects anything. I collect disability for PTSD and see an analyst twice a week.

I do feel a lot stronger. With that much therapy how could one not? But I don't see myself as able to be as strong as a normal person.

I still need lots of down time to deal with things, which can't really happen if I got a full time job.

Not sure how to interpret it at all.

How come you see an analyst twice a week and call it "that much therapy"?

Analysts usually see patients 4 times a week, which is why it is out of reach for most people in terms of cost (and, perhaps, time).

[archipelago]

I was seeing him 3x a week with in between calls, but my analyst doesn't believe it is the frequency that matters. It is the way we work together. At some times it is just therapy, but at other times it's intensive work like analysis. Other analysts in the same field have made the same point--that someone can use a couch technique 4x a week versus someone who sees you face to face once a week. Several analysts have shown that people make more progress with fewer sessions so that doesn't really define analysis per se. I think 2x a week is enough though I like 3x for continuity, but I can't really afford it. When I was referring to lots of therapy I think I was thinking of the years and years I've put in rather than the per week amount.

[hamster-bamster]

I see. Well, you need to scroll down the list of posts on this forum and see that most reported scores are much higher than yours, and in most cases you can assume that the posters have been in long term therapy as well. So it seems that therapy/analysis have been helpful, but not yet quite to the point of rendering you employable FT. Would that be a correct summary of your situation?

[Travelinglady]

Remember, too, that this test doesn't measure all possible problems--although it's probably good that you are scoring low. How about taking the test to your analyst and talking about it?

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by PAYNE1

Remember, too, that this test doesn't measure all possible problems--although it's probably good that you are scoring low. How about taking the test to your analyst and talking about it?

Oh I think the analyst would be offended! they in general despise quantification. Traditional analysts, at least.

[hamster-bamster]

Not that a client has a duty not to offend the analyst, though .

[Travelinglady]

Well, truth be told, I'm not much on psychoanalysis! Offended? Shame on them!

That is what we actually suggest to members here, but maybe you know analysts better than I do.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by PAYNE1

Well, truth be told, I'm not much on psychoanalysis! Offended? Shame on them!

That is what we actually suggest to members here, but maybe you know analysts better than I do.

I have had a couple of sessions with analysts who also do once-a-week sitting-in-a-chair therapy, mainly to realize that I would not be able to afford the treatment even on that once-a-week basis. But I do know that they despise quantification attempts and do not much care for the dx's, either.

[archipelago]

It's an interesting conversation. My current analyst is also a psychiatrist. So have all my former ones. As MDs, they do do things differently, but the combination of being trained as an analyst on top of the other training and lots of years of experience I think is what has made the difference in my particular case. It's true that there is general skepticism about diagnosis and quantification, but they do make a diagnosis if medication is needed. My current analyst started off as a researcher so he is not opposed to quantification methods in psychology per se, but he knows that lots of studies are flawed in terms of design and external or internal validity so these sorts of things are taken for what they offer and with more than a grain of salt.

As far as my own situation is concerned, I probably am capable of working though full time sounds a bit overwhelming. I was going to a tough school full time and will continue to do so. I was handling it okay, but it was stressful. Switching to a slightly less demanding school will probably do the trick. Then I can build up my tolerance and endurance gradually.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by iota

As far as my own situation is concerned, I probably am capable of working though full time sounds a bit overwhelming. I was going to a tough school full time and will continue to do so. I was handling it okay, but it was stressful. Switching to a slightly less demanding school will probably do the trick. Then I can build up my tolerance and endurance gradually.

I believe that formally, attending school full time is considered fully functioning. In other words, if you were to go and obtain a full neuropsychological assessment that would include, among other things, a "functioning score", then you would not get a lower score just because you collect disability and are not working full time. The demands of going to school full time are high.

[hamster-bamster]

Global Assessment of Functioning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The functional score is called GAF, and, as you will see in the Wikipedia link above, "school" and "occupational" functioning, in the way they are listed, appear to be fairly interchangeable.

So if you have a low Sanity score, do well in a tough school - with some stress, admittedly, but that is OK, etc., you should feel good about the work you have done, the analyst has done, etc.

[archipelago]

Thanks for that, especially the part about the work I've done with my analyst. I work hard at it, harder than even school in some ways. I still think my GAF would be around 75 because although most symptoms are no longer present, they do come up under situations of stress that provoke them. I still have work to do to increase my tolerance for such things and increase my stamina for expanding beyond my intimate relationships, my school work, and therapy. But I feel ready for that kind of thing. It's a matter of time and patience at this point.