Some people say they can slow down the progression of Alzheimer’s disease, even stop it completely or reverse it. That may or may not be true.
The next time you hear or read about the next (or previous for that matter) cure for Alzheimer disease, consider this:
Things that sound to good to be true usually are too good to be true.
And, while I love this video, I would even take it with a grain of salt, particularly the bit at the end that says “talk to a scientist or a doctor” because the problem is, a whole whack of scientists, doctors and researchers are as cracked as the charlatans!
seeking out the wisdom, advice and knowledge of people I know to also be sensible, reasonable, rational critical thinkers with lots of hands on experience in whatever the subject matter is
On the latest “cure” for Alzheimer disease, I’m going with the healthy approach of exercising my brain and my body, eating right, living well, having fun and being present in the moment. On the other hand, I’m not afraid of living with dementia should that be my destiny.
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
Mom drugged into catatonic state on 151223, just as she was virtually every day
On July 10, 2018, the Quebec Council for the Protection of Patients and co-plaintiff Daniel Pilote (who is a long-term care resident in Quebec), filed an application for a class-action lawsuit that targets care facilities (CHSLDs) in Quebec, Canada (more here).
Larochelle Avocats, the lawyers taking the case forward, list 19 potential breaches of the Quebec health care act in an online form that invites Quebeckers with family in long-term care in the province to participate in the class action.
My mother experienced 11 of the neglectful and abusive practices on this list, as well as others which I would also consider to be neglect and abuse, while in a private Quebec nursing home (aka DementiaJail).
I have applied to be part of the class action suit, and I will actively participate if it goes forward. This is the kind of drastic action we need to take in order to create change.
Do you have a family member, friend, or someone you know in long-term care? Have you seen any of these practices firsthand? If so, please speak out against the violations of their human rights.
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
This is an open letter to members of the dementia community worldwide.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear dementia educators, researchers, geriatric professionals, Alzheimer’s societies, associations, and organizations, and members of the worldwide dementia care community,
They were blind because of what they had been taught. Teachers, trainers, supervisors and peers had told them Alzheimer disease causes the people who live with it to “wander,” “become aggressive,” “try to escape,” and “resist care,” among 101 other things. Unfortunately, when people who live with dementia (PLWD) respond in reasonable ways to adverse conditions and circumstances (RRACC), their actions are labelled “behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia,” or BPSD, despite the fact that what they do is perfectly normal under the circumstances and in most cases has little if anything to do with dementia.
The care workers, nurses and even the facility physician who were supposed to ensure my mom’s well-being didn’t understand that she responded to being in pain, or being hot, cold, tired, sick, confined, restrained, neglected, wet, hungry, bombarded with noise or being told what to do and when by becoming distressed, just as any “normal” person would. The carers, nurses and physician couldn’t see the real causes of my mother’s distress and subsequent actions because they were blindfolded by the notion of BPSD.
Like my mom was, hundreds of thousands of PLWD are stigmatized, misunderstood, drugged, neglected and abused every day because of ignorance. The vast majority of people in dementia research and care, regardless of their area of practice, want the best for PLWD. They want PLWD to lead healthy, engaged and purposeful lives, despite dementia. The majority don’t want PLWD to be drugged, neglected and abused. But, like those who were supposed to care for my mom, their collective ability to see clearly, and do what’s best is either impaired by the broken lens of BPSD, or made impossible by a BPSD blindfold.
It’s time members of the dementia care community worldwide saw the light.
BPSD is an umbrella term devised by the International Psychogeriatric Association (IPA) in the late 1990s. Its roots lie in the work of researcher Dr. Jiska Cohen-Mansfield, who, a decade earlier developed a 29-item scale to measure agitation in nursing home residents. The Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) is a research tool that is not designed to determine the causes of agitation (dementia or otherwise), it merely measures it. In the late 1990s, the IPA renamed these indicators of agitation, and proclaimed that henceforth they should be called BPSD, thereby morphing a cluster of research tools into a clinical tool.
The first two iterations of the IPA’s BPSD Educational Pack were “produced by the IPA under an educational grant provided by Janssen-Cilag,” a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceuticals, the manufacturer and distributor of risperidone, which is marketed under the brand name Risperdal, and which was subsequently sold as a treatment for BPSD. Risperidone and other antipsychotics such as quetiapine (Seroquel) and haloperidol (Haldol) are still prescribed to PLWD despite being contraindicated for anything other than a diagnosis of psychosis and “black boxed” in the USA and other countries.
Labelling the reasonable responses of PLWD as symptoms of dementia may be good for the bottom line of pharmaceutical companies, but it’s harmful to PLWD and their carers. It causes care partners, care workers, and medical personnel to misinterpret the actions of PLWD, which in turn causes dementia carers to fail to look for, and therefore identify the true causes of distress in PLWD, as well as to inappropriately use antipsychotics and physical restraints that are counterproductive and largely ineffective in addressing the issue.
Even the most skilled and knowledgeable dementia care practitioners, researchers and educators may find it hard to escape the BPSD trap. For example, I recently came across the NHS Dementia Best Practice Guide, which was written under the direction of Professor Alistair Burns, National Clinical Director for Dementia in England, for the UK’s NHS, and Professor Clive Ballard, Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Executive Dean, University of Exeter Medical School. Besides providing information, the guide emphasises “alternatives to drug treatments,” which, as a advocate against the inappropriate use of antipsychotics, I unequivocally and unreservedly support.
The list of researchers, educators, and clinicians on the guide’s advisory board reads like a UK dementia care who’s who, some of whom are highly (and visibly) committed to changing the way PLWD are perceived and treated. Here is advisory board member Dr. Dawn Brooker sharing her views at the World Health Organisation’s Global Dementia Conference in 2015:
All of this begs the question: why is the NHS Dementia Best Practice Guide entitled “Optimising treatment and care for people with behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia”? Don’t these dementia care leaders and pioneers know that BPSD are not symptoms of dementia? Well, yes. Apparently they do, as the guide content demonstrates. The statements in bold that follow are taken directly from the guide, which says, for example:
A screen shot from the NHS guide
“Pain is one of the most common causes of BPSD.”
If this is true, then a PLWD’s reasonable response to pain is a behavioural and psychological symptom of experiencing pain, not of living with dementia. If, when the pain is addressed, the symptoms disappear, then the symptoms are a result of the pain, not of dementia, which remains after the pain is relieved. This same logic applies to all the “triggers” in the guide.
“Recognition of triggers and early signs (e.g. pain, discomfort, malnourishment, dehydration, boredom, physical illness, increased levels of distress, signs of abuse or neglect) that may precede behavioural and psychological symptoms is crucial.”
If a “trigger” is the cause, dementia is not. The possible factors that may cause a PLWD to respond as most human beings would include those mentioned in the guide as well as dozens of others. Any person, whether she has dementia or not, would exhibit some kind of “behaviour” if she were experiencing the “triggers” in the guide. If a PLWD responds to these conditions in ways that those around them find challenging, then their response is a behavioural and/or psychological symptom of being hungry, uncomfortable, malnourished, bored, ill, distressed, abused, neglected, etc., NOT of dementia.
“In most cases developing simple approaches to address these early signs can help prevent symptoms from developing at all.”
Of course they can! If the cause is addressed, the symptoms won’t develop because the symptoms are not symptoms of dementia, they are the result of whatever the real causes are, which, if alleviated, will resolve the issue. A circular argument to be sure, but valid nonetheless.
“Sudden emergence of BPSD often has a physical trigger.”
In 2015, the government of Australia established Severe Behaviour Response Teams (SBRT) which are operated by DSA. The Aging Agenda article reports that: “An analysis of 173 SBRT cases over three months found severe behaviours were reduced by 50 per cent and their severity reduced by 66 per cent. There was also a 70 per cent decrease in the level of distress in aged care workers and a slight decrease in psychotropic drug use.”
So, by using “behavioural, psychological and environmental interventions,” not drugs, the SBRT were able to reduce the actions of PLWD that care workers find challenging by 50 per cent, and, at the same time, reduce the care workers’ level of distress by 70 per cent. This is HUGE, and proves once again and without a doubt that BPSD are not symptoms of dementia.
Equally important, the SBRT and the DSA determined that 70 per cent of the instances in which PLWD acted in ways that care workers found challenging were the result of the PLWD being in pain.
“Given that such a high proportion of behaviours are contributed to by pain and by the impact of an incorrect or inappropriate carer approach, the solutions to those dilemmas lie in the hands of residential [care workers],” Associate Professor Macfarlane said, according to the article.
This means that in most cases, the things that PLWD do that care partners and care workers find challenging are behavioural and psychological symptoms of pain and/or an incorrect or inappropriate carer approach. These findings echo those of the Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement’s pan-Canadian collaborative conducted in 2014/15, and my own research of 2016/17/18, the results of which are here, here, here, and here.
It defies belief that members of the dementia community worldwide continue to erroneously attribute the reasonable reactions of PLWD to dementia when the evidence that they are not BPSD is widely available, undeniable, and overwhelming.
How many studies confirming what is common sense will it take for people to stop using the harmful artificial construct of BPSD? How long will it take for dementia educators, researchers, geriatric professionals, Alzheimer’s societies, associations, and organizations, and members of the worldwide dementia care community to open their collective eyes, fix their broken lenses, take off their blindfolds and see the light?
What can individuals and organizations that are part of the dementia community do to shift this paradigm?
Here are six ideas for starters:
1 ) People who publish guides and information such as the NHS Dementia Best Practice Guide, could #BanBPSD from their language and publications. Leaders such Professor Alistair Burns,Professor Clive Ballard, and the advisory board that worked with them on the guide could have the title changed to reflect the basic truths in the guide’s content.
3 ) Dementia Support Australia could rewrite its page on “behaviour” to reflect what it has proven through the SBRT project — that pain and inappropriate care approaches, not dementia, are the causes of behaviour that challenges carers.
4 ) Researchers could stop researching BPSD, and instead focus their efforts on the real causes of distress in PLWD, or better yet, research ways to address the causes and reduce the distress.
5 ) The International Psychogeriatric Association, which first coined the term BPSD, could do us all a favour and step into the 21st century. It could redefine the way it characterizes dementia and the people who live with it to align the IPA with the evidence instead of clinging to an artificial construct and continuing to support a myth whose primary beneficiary is the pharmaceutical industry.
6 ) Everyone, especially clinicians and other medical professionals in the dementia space worldwide could #BanBPSD from their own language as well as from the larger dementia lexicon from today onwards.
As a member of the worldwide dementia community, you can take action right now:
Reject the harmful artificial construct of BPSD
Share this post with your colleagues, your communities, care workers, care partners and across social media
Use the hashtag #BanBPSD.
Help me and other advocates create a better world for people who live with dementia and their carers.
Thank you,
Susan Macaulay,
Dementia Care Advocate
Blogger, author, former care partner
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
The term “behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia” (BPSD) is a harmful artificial construct used to inappropriately describe reasonable responses to adverse conditions and circumstances (RRACC) when such responses are expressed by people living with dementia (PLWD).
The term BPSD was coined in the late 1990s by the International Psychogeriatric Association (IPA). Twenty years on, a growing number of dementia care advocates worldwide are calling for the BPSD construct to be rejected by the geriatric healthcare professionals and researcher and to be banned from dementia care language (#BanBPSD). Prominent among those calling for the paradigm shift are dementia care pioneers Kate Swaffer, former nurse and care partner, speaker, blogger, activist, and author of What the Hell Happened to My Brain?, and Dr. Allen Power, geriatrician, speaker, author, trainer, consultant.
Dr. Power, whose books Dementia Beyond Drugs and Dementia Beyond Disease, are essential reading for geriatric health professionals, care workers and care partners, summarizes the problems with BPSD like this:
1 ) Relegates people’s expressions to brain disease
7 ) Misapplies psychiatric labels, such as psychosis, delusions and hallucinations
Essentially, the broken lens of BPSD stops us from seeing the real causes of the reasonable reactions to adverse conditions and circumstances (RRACC) when expressed by PLWD, and thus impedes dementia care practitioners and researchers from finding and employing effective, enabling and engaging solutions to the distress experienced by many PLWD.
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
“As a retired medical writer and care partner for my parents (both with dementia/Alzheimer’s), I am relieved to see a growing number of health care professionals who have stopped focusing on the cure and ineffective treatment options. Throwing Big Money at Big Pharma is a Big Mistake.
Concurrent to understanding the underlying physiological causes of dementia, we need to immediately address the emotional and psychological symptoms and fallout of living with it, for both the people who have it, and those who are their companions and carers. This aspect of living with dementia is largely ignored at the moment.
We also need financial assistance to help people living with dementia (PLWD) stay in their homes, given the atrocities committed in residences and long-term care facilities. Healthcare systems throughout North America and elsewhere in the world (e.g. the UK) are in crisis and are ill-equipped to do what is required; they are too big to shift quickly enough to meet the needs.
We need open-minded entrepreneurs to step up and use innovative resources to ensure a good quality of life for PLWD. People living with dementia are angry and restless and with good reason; they need to be heard, not shut up, put away and restrained. And antipsychotics? No way. We need a paradigm shift, and it’s not going to happen until more people like you, Dr. Power, with your credentials and credibility, step up and speak the plain truth. Thank you.“
Read more of Lorrie Beauchamp’s insightful thoughts on ADRD and being a care partner on her blog Unforgettable. Follow her on twitter here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“you said it!” is a place to discover informed comments, inspiring thoughts, short stories, good ideas, provocative opinions, quotable quotes and noteworthy snippets from across my worldwide network.
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
I share this video because it demonstrates in a concrete, compact, and comparative way some of the physical and psychological effects the inappropriate prescription of antipsychotics had on my mother over a period of three years. This isn’t the end of our story. There’s much more proof to come.
I’m compelled to share our experience so the people you love, and you don’t suffer as Mom and I did. I also want to make it known to care providers, governments and our society overall that it is our collective obligation to provide people who live with dementia and older adults the care they deserve. It’s a human rights issue.
I hope people of the future look back with incredulity at where we are today and say “We can’t believe they did things that way.”
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
Email Address
//s3.amazonaws.com/downloads.mailchimp.com/js/mc-validate.js(function($) {window.fnames = new Array(); window.ftypes = new Array();fnames[0]=’EMAIL’;ftypes[0]=’email’;fnames[1]=’FNAME’;ftypes[1]=’text’;fnames[2]=’LNAME’;ftypes[2]=’text’;}(jQuery));var $mcj = jQuery.noConflict(true);
For about 80 years, it was accepted as scientific fact that rabbits were first domesticated in 600 A.D. as a result of a decree issued by Pope Gregory the Great declaring that fetal rabbits could be eaten during Lent.
Quite by accident, in 2016/17, the rabbit domestication story that had been accepted by scientists around the world for almost a century was discovered to be a complete fabrication.
“The whole thing is a house of cards,” Dr. Greger Larson said [as reported by the New York Times], acknowledging that he too has cited the story just like many other researchers. The remaining question, he said, is: “Why did we never question this? Why were we so willing to believe in this origin myth?”
Dr. Larson, who is the director of the paleo-genomics and bio-archaeology research network at the University of Oxford, made the finding (actually, more accurately, it was discovered by one of Larson’s graduate students whom Larson had asked to do some historical fact checking), which was subsequently published by Trends in Ecology and Evolution in December 2017, and which you won’t be able to read unless you live in an ivory tower (one of my pet peeves).
What astonished me as I listened to the story (hear it for yourself below), were the similarities between it and the ongoing acceptance as truth by much of the research, medical and gerontology community worldwide of the artificial construct of so-called “behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia,“ more commonly known as “BPSD.”
In particular, the uncanny applicability of these snippets of conversation between CBC host Carol Off (CO) and guest Greger Larsen (GL) struck me:
GL: “The story…has been banging around for years but nobody ever bothered questioning [it]. And it’s in both the lay and academic literature…”
CO: “How much of that actually turns out to be true?” GL:“None of it actually.”
GL: “…and so the whole thing is just a house of cards of kind of accidentally mistaking people and translations and older references that all then got pieced together slowly. A bit like a Chinese Whispers or a game of telephone when you were a kid, and so the end result ends up being this kind of bizarre story…”
GL: “And everybody just cites this story very easily over and over again, until it becomes recognized as a kind of fact.”
GL: “So all of these little bits of it were just being kind of shelved onto a house that was being badly constructed with a lot of different materials, until you ended up with something that just made no sense whatsoever.”
GL: “…what the rabbit story really revealed to me was the degree to which we don’t question the things that fit into our worldview. So if I tell you something that you believe without me having to prove it, then you don’t require a whole lot of evidence.”
GL: “…actually there is not a single case where we have any decent evidence…”
The interview closes with this summary into which I’ve inserted in italics what I see as additional parallels to the myth of BPSD:
“These things are agglomerated onto an evolving tradition (the biomedical model). And now when we get to it, we just think ‘oh, well rabbits have always been associated with Easter (“challenging behaviours” are caused by ADRD). And actually they are a very, very recent addition (human behaviour has always been human behaviour until we had a reason to label it as aberrant). And somehow the hare (reasonable reactions to adverse circumstances) got replaced (with BPSD), even though the hare was part of it all along. So when and where that took place and what the motivations were (Ignorance, misunderstanding, good intentions and Big Pharma profit marketing?) and how it all happened (Ignorance, misunderstanding, good intentions and Big Pharma marketing?) we’ve got no idea, but that’s a project we’ve got going on (indeed we do). And what we’re going to get to the bottom of that one (damn right!).”
Here is the CBC As It Happens interview with Dr. Larson (fascinating AND funny):
In the event that you don’t see the sanity in what I say and/or you don’t share my view, I offer this:
Thanks to CBC and As It Happens for great stories and public broadcasting worth listening to.
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
“Why didn’t you just tell the people at the long-term care facility to stop giving your mother the drugs?” readers ask when I share posts like this one, this one,this one, or this one. Or, “Why didn’t you move her back home or to another facility?” The questions always read more like accusations than real curiosity.
“Because I wasn’t in legal control of her care,” is the short answer. But it was a lot more involved than that.
My mother signed a legal document (before she was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease), giving complete control of her money and well-being to a family member (not me) in the event of her incapacity.
The other family member and I had diametrically opposed views on how my mother should be cared for when the time came. I wanted more and better care; the person in legal control wanted less and cheaper. My mother had ample financial resources, which I felt should be spent on her care; the person in legal control wished to preserve her estate.
Soon after Mom went into Dementia Jail, she was sedated for normal behaviour that could have been addressed with the right care and the right environment. I loved my mom, and when I saw the impact that increasing doses of inappropriately prescribed quetiapine and risperidone had on her, I asked politely, then begged, and then fought tooth and nail to get her off them.
When my advocacy failed, I initiated legal proceedings to try to get control of her care. Mom could have easily afforded non-pharmacological ways to address issues that had led to her being inappropriately sedated with antipsychotic drugs, the side effects of which would eventually contribute to her death. I had incontrovertible proof that these non-pharmacological strategies worked, and that they would improve the quality of Mom’s life should they be fully implemented.
However, I had never been in court before, and I mistakenly thought that when professionals such as doctors, nurses and social workers swore to tell the truth they would indeed do so. I hadn’t considered that people would lie, or that facts would be misrepresented and twisted. What an eye-opener! In hindsight, it’s hard to believe how naïve I was. The so-called medical “experts” ignored me (in the first instance), and the judge disbelieved me (in the second).
Despite losing in court, I continued to fight for Mom’s rights for the next two and half years. I visited her virtually every day. I provided her weekly healing music sessions, and shared our experiences with others through social media. My transparency angered the administration at ElderJail, and I was forced to remove all mentions and pictures of Mom from my blog under threat of being denied access to her. I complied. Then my visiting “privileges” were confined to between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. when Mom was mostly “asleep.” The cruelty of this was unimaginable. I again complied, again under threat of being denied any access to her at all. I had to cancel the music sessions she loved because of the time constraint.
Antipsychotic drugs are often given to people living with dementia out of ignorance. Many family members who love their parent, spouse or whomever, feel they are doing the best thing by giving them these medications (in relatively few cases, they may be). Doctors, nurses and others convince family members that antipsychotics are a must, and long-term care facilities threaten to evict people or deny access to family members who advocate for fewer drugs and better care.
A small minority of people who live with dementia may benefit from these types of medications. But the vast majority do not. If and when antipsychotics are given to someone who lives with dementia, it should be at the lowest possible dose for the shortest possible time. My mother was sedated into a zombie-like state for hours every day for four years. That was a violation of her rights and a form of abuse.
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
It’s one thing to see someone when they are sedated. It’s quite another to see the sedation taking effect, and the person who doesn’t wish to be sedated trying to fight it off.
Against my wishes and against her will, my mom was sedated with quetiapine at breakfast every day for almost four years. The dose she was given knocked her out cold for several hours. She got another debilitating dose in the evening. They also gave her risperidone twice each day. This drug regimen was an abuse of her human rights.
I had incontrovertible proof that non-pharmacological strategies improved the quality of Mom’s life, and, should they have been fully implemented would have eliminated the “need” to inappropriately sedate her with quetiapine and risperidone. I repeatedly voiced my concerns and shared my evidence. I was ignored, and branded a troublemaker.
It took 45 minutes to an hour for the quetiapine to take full effect. Sometimes, during that window, I would pick Mom up at her Dementia Jail and take her to my house so that when she woke up three or four hours later, we could spend some quality time together.
This is what Mom’s experience looked like during the last five minutes or so before she fell “asleep:”
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
Care partners and care staff may become frustrated when someone who lives with dementia declines to take medications that care partners and care staff believe are beneficial for the person living with dementia.
Do I know why I’m giving this person this medication in this dose at this time?
Is the medication necessary? If it was necessary before, is it still? Has that been tested for in some way recently (e.g. by slowly lowering the dose)? If it hasn’t, should it be?
Could the dosage be reduced? Could the medication be eliminated completely?
What are the risks associated with this medication? What are the benefits? Do the benefits outweigh the risks? Or do the risks outweigh the benefits?
What are the consequences if a dose is missed? What are the consequences if a dose is delayed? Do the benefits of skipping or delaying a dose outweigh the risks?
Have I researched non-pharmacological ways to address whatever issue the medication is meant to address? Have I tried them? If so, what happened? If they “failed,” did I ask myself why? Have I tried non-pharmacological means a second time? Have I tried them repeatedly?
What would I do if someone tried to give me drugs I didn’t want or need and/or that made me feel funny, sleepy or ill? How would I feel if a stranger tried to give me pills and I didn’t know what they were?
What are the side effects of the medication? Have I read and do I understand the information sheet for this particular drug? Do I know how this drug interacts with others? What are the contraindications?
What obvious effect or effects does the medication have on the person I’m giving it too? If I don’t know what the effects are for this person in particular, when can I make time to observe the effects carefully? What effect or effects might the medication have that may not be immediately visible or obvious to me?
Could the medication be interacting in a negative way with other medications the person is taking or foods she or he is eating such as grapefruit for example?
In the past, have I regularly asked the person how she or he feels after she or he has taken the medication? Have I asked after the drug is meant to have taken effect?
Does the medication taste bad, look bad or smell bad? Is the medication hard to swallow? Does it feel funny (e.g. stinging, hot, or cold) going down?
How do I react when people order me to do things I don’t want to do or that I know will have negative consequences for me? How do I react when people think they know better than I do what’s best for me? How do I feel when people try to control me, tell me what to do or treat me like a child?
How do strong medications affect me when I take them? How does it feel when I have adverse effects from taking medicine?
Is taking medicine something I generally look forward to? Or is it something I would prefer not to do, but I do it because I have to under “doctors orders”?
Would I want to take drugs that put me to sleep or made me feel anxious or nauseous or produced other unpleasand effects?
How do I feel about taking medication in general? Do I think it’s a good thing or a bad thing? How does the person I’m giving the medication to feel about taking medicine in general?
When and why have I taken medicine? How does being ill cause me to feel? Do I usually feel comfortable or uncomfortable? Do I tend to be happy and cheerful, or otherwise?
Have I ever stopped talking a medication that’s been prescribed for me because I didn’t think it was working, or I didn’t like the way it made me feel, or I just felt I should stop for no particular reason?
How did you answer question 14? If you are like 94% of the 1,300+ people who have answered my short survey on behaviour, you would refuse to take drugs you didn’t want to take (as shown in the graph below). Think about that the next time a person who is living with dementia chooses not to take the drugs you want to give them.
#mc_embed_signup{background:#fff; clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; } /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block. We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */
Subscribe to MAS now & get 5 free PDFs & a page of welcome links:
“As a retired medical writer and care partner for my parents (both with dementia/Alzheimer’s), I am relieved to see a growing number of health care professionals who have stopped focusing on the cure and ineffective treatment options. Throwing Big Money at Big Pharma is a Big Mistake.
Concurrent to understanding the underlying physiological causes of dementia, we need to immediately address the emotional and psychological symptoms and fallout of living with it, for both the people who have it, and those who are their companions and carers. This aspect of living with dementia is largely ignored at the moment.
We also need financial assistance to help people living with dementia (PLWD) stay in their homes, given the atrocities committed in residences and long-term care facilities. Healthcare systems throughout North America and elsewhere in the world (e.g. the UK) are in crisis and are ill-equipped to do what is required; they are too big to shift quickly enough to meet the needs.
We need open-minded entrepreneurs to step up and use innovative resources to ensure a good quality of life for PLWD. People living with dementia are angry and restless and with good reason; they need to be heard, not shut up, put away and restrained. And antipsychotics? No way. We need a paradigm shift, and it’s not going to happen until more people like you, Dr. Power, with your credentials and credibility, step up and speak the plain truth. Thank you.“