talking about vertigo, or else not
Sep. 26th, 2009 10:47 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
When I wrote this entry and said I was having four hour periods of not being dizzy once every six days, I knew there would be a problem with it, and there was. It comes up a lot when you talk about a chronic illness or disability to more than one person. It's one of the reasons I don't talk more about it (other reason: not being able to do stuff and feeling crappy is BORING), but I thought it was worth talking about because it's a problem I haven't seen discussed much.
I got an e-mail from a friend congratulating me on having a period of feeling good every day, and cheerfully opining that this friend would far rather have a chunk of feeling good every day than have one whole good day and then a whole bad one.
You see what happened there? My friend is generally a careful reader, like most of you are generally careful readers. But between the lj page and the e-mail, "once every six days" had transmuted into "once every day." It could have happened to anybody. It was, it seems, bound to happen to somebody when I made that post, because it generally does, and when it does, it's never the other direction. I never have to correct someone thinking I said I felt decent about once a month that it's actually more like once a week. Anyone can make a simple mistake when they're reading someone else's journal quickly; heaven knows I do enough of it. But on this topic it's never in the other direction. It's never in the "I thought things were worse for you than they actually are" direction. And I'm very clear that it's not that I have the absolute worst situation ever. It's not that there is nothing worse my friends could imagine. Many of you make a career out of imagining horrible things; I have no illusion that mine is the pessimal condition. So that doesn't explain the error always being in the happier direction. What does explain it is that the people who care about me really want me to be doing better.
But here's the thing: it takes a non-trivial act of will to say, "Yay! For approximately 4 out of every 144 hours, I feel all right! That's nearly 3% of the time that I feel moderately okayish and normal! After a year and a half of PT exercises and coming up on two years of really bad problems, not to mention the slightly more erratic problems preceding it, I get not quite 3% of the time feeling decent!" I think we can all agree that from an objective standpoint, this is not actually great. If someone came up to you out of the blue and said, "I only feel okay not quite 3% of the time," you would be pretty upset for them, and worried. This is only good compared to, say, 0-2% of the time feeling at all well--which is what I've been having before, so I can actually make myself make the comparison. But that act of perspective--that it's better than it was, that it's some small amount of progress--is really, really important. It's a huge personal momentum difference that does not appear by magic. This is not the kind of great that's like "someone is sending me on the fabulous vacation of my choice, timing my choice, expenses paid!", intuitive kind of great. It's worth working at. But yah. Work.
Having to correct somebody who is being Supportively Pleased For Me that, in fact, they need to hold off on being quite that Supportively Pleased For Me because things are not nearly that good yet really, really interferes with my ability to maintain that positive perspective. It shifts my focus from what I do have in terms of my current health and physical abilities to what I don't have. It's also very easy to read in the Supportively Pleased tone when the person who is using it thinks your situation sucks--particularly when they offer mitigating factors to try to help you be happy with the way things are--and when they've overestimated how good your situation is and are still trying to cheer you up about it, it's doubly hard to stay positive.
And...I am a big believer in taking ownership of one's own reactions. I am a big believer in not setting social traps for you people. And I'm a big believer in not punishing you for wanting me to be doing better--that's not a win for anybody. I don't want anybody to feel bad when they were trying to be happy for me. But this is the kind of error that feels like I have a broken toe and you've just tripped and stepped on it. Anybody could trip. It would take a great big jerk to be mad at somebody for tripping. But damn, that broken toe was aching already, and now it's throbbing.
Also I am quite aware of some of my friends on whom I had previously counted sort of evaporating in the course of all this. And I don't want to make people afraid to say anything at all. The person who tripped and stepped on your broken toe at least showed up. They were there for you, spending time with you, and stepping on you was incidental to the fact that they were spending the time. That hasn't been true of everybody I thought it might be true of. I'm very grateful that it's not true of everybody, or even most of you.
But what it means is that it's often a great deal easier for me not to talk about it at all. Not because I think people don't want to hear it. Because I can't always deal with their reactions. With your reactions. That's where I'm going with all of this: several of you have told me recently that I can vent to you, and I really appreciate it, and I believe you. But sometimes I can't. It's not that I feel you wouldn't hear it or couldn't be supportive. It's that I'm not always able to process the responses and still do what I need to do to keep moving forward. And sometimes it's not even that anybody responds suboptimally. It's just laying the stuff out in black and white in rows and columns that stacks it up in ways it had previously not stacked. I can't always predict that.
I asked my friend whether it was okay to post this with the identity filed off, because I didn't want it to feel like "Why Friend X Sucks By Mris Age 31." Unsurprisingly, Friend X was more interested in hearing how I was doing than in keeping the internets from hearing that someone had made a minor mistake of the type anyone could make. That's the kind of friend X is, and I appreciate it. I don't want anybody to think I don't. It's just that sometimes I'm limited in how I can respond, and I wanted to see if I could maybe make it clear why.
I got an e-mail from a friend congratulating me on having a period of feeling good every day, and cheerfully opining that this friend would far rather have a chunk of feeling good every day than have one whole good day and then a whole bad one.
You see what happened there? My friend is generally a careful reader, like most of you are generally careful readers. But between the lj page and the e-mail, "once every six days" had transmuted into "once every day." It could have happened to anybody. It was, it seems, bound to happen to somebody when I made that post, because it generally does, and when it does, it's never the other direction. I never have to correct someone thinking I said I felt decent about once a month that it's actually more like once a week. Anyone can make a simple mistake when they're reading someone else's journal quickly; heaven knows I do enough of it. But on this topic it's never in the other direction. It's never in the "I thought things were worse for you than they actually are" direction. And I'm very clear that it's not that I have the absolute worst situation ever. It's not that there is nothing worse my friends could imagine. Many of you make a career out of imagining horrible things; I have no illusion that mine is the pessimal condition. So that doesn't explain the error always being in the happier direction. What does explain it is that the people who care about me really want me to be doing better.
But here's the thing: it takes a non-trivial act of will to say, "Yay! For approximately 4 out of every 144 hours, I feel all right! That's nearly 3% of the time that I feel moderately okayish and normal! After a year and a half of PT exercises and coming up on two years of really bad problems, not to mention the slightly more erratic problems preceding it, I get not quite 3% of the time feeling decent!" I think we can all agree that from an objective standpoint, this is not actually great. If someone came up to you out of the blue and said, "I only feel okay not quite 3% of the time," you would be pretty upset for them, and worried. This is only good compared to, say, 0-2% of the time feeling at all well--which is what I've been having before, so I can actually make myself make the comparison. But that act of perspective--that it's better than it was, that it's some small amount of progress--is really, really important. It's a huge personal momentum difference that does not appear by magic. This is not the kind of great that's like "someone is sending me on the fabulous vacation of my choice, timing my choice, expenses paid!", intuitive kind of great. It's worth working at. But yah. Work.
Having to correct somebody who is being Supportively Pleased For Me that, in fact, they need to hold off on being quite that Supportively Pleased For Me because things are not nearly that good yet really, really interferes with my ability to maintain that positive perspective. It shifts my focus from what I do have in terms of my current health and physical abilities to what I don't have. It's also very easy to read in the Supportively Pleased tone when the person who is using it thinks your situation sucks--particularly when they offer mitigating factors to try to help you be happy with the way things are--and when they've overestimated how good your situation is and are still trying to cheer you up about it, it's doubly hard to stay positive.
And...I am a big believer in taking ownership of one's own reactions. I am a big believer in not setting social traps for you people. And I'm a big believer in not punishing you for wanting me to be doing better--that's not a win for anybody. I don't want anybody to feel bad when they were trying to be happy for me. But this is the kind of error that feels like I have a broken toe and you've just tripped and stepped on it. Anybody could trip. It would take a great big jerk to be mad at somebody for tripping. But damn, that broken toe was aching already, and now it's throbbing.
Also I am quite aware of some of my friends on whom I had previously counted sort of evaporating in the course of all this. And I don't want to make people afraid to say anything at all. The person who tripped and stepped on your broken toe at least showed up. They were there for you, spending time with you, and stepping on you was incidental to the fact that they were spending the time. That hasn't been true of everybody I thought it might be true of. I'm very grateful that it's not true of everybody, or even most of you.
But what it means is that it's often a great deal easier for me not to talk about it at all. Not because I think people don't want to hear it. Because I can't always deal with their reactions. With your reactions. That's where I'm going with all of this: several of you have told me recently that I can vent to you, and I really appreciate it, and I believe you. But sometimes I can't. It's not that I feel you wouldn't hear it or couldn't be supportive. It's that I'm not always able to process the responses and still do what I need to do to keep moving forward. And sometimes it's not even that anybody responds suboptimally. It's just laying the stuff out in black and white in rows and columns that stacks it up in ways it had previously not stacked. I can't always predict that.
I asked my friend whether it was okay to post this with the identity filed off, because I didn't want it to feel like "Why Friend X Sucks By Mris Age 31." Unsurprisingly, Friend X was more interested in hearing how I was doing than in keeping the internets from hearing that someone had made a minor mistake of the type anyone could make. That's the kind of friend X is, and I appreciate it. I don't want anybody to think I don't. It's just that sometimes I'm limited in how I can respond, and I wanted to see if I could maybe make it clear why.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 04:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 05:30 pm (UTC)Of love, however, I remain quite fond.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 04:27 pm (UTC)Thanks for writing.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 04:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 04:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 05:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 11:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 12:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 04:52 pm (UTC)*love*
no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 05:30 pm (UTC)Not setting social traps for your friends is important, and so is not trapping yourself.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 05:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 06:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 06:35 pm (UTC)Living with a chronic medical condition sucks. If it involves pain a lot of the time, and/or negatively affects how one lives one's life, it sucks big time. And everyone who is in the suckage situation has to deal with it in their own personal best way. Sometimes dealing with one's own suckage situation hampers one's attention to one's friends' and acquaintances' suckage situations. Dealing with one's own situation really is "It's all about me." Dealing with someone else's definitely is not--or should not be.
Just some random thoughts.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 07:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 08:40 pm (UTC)I tend to try and read carefully, because I know how easy it is for people to take the wind out of your sails, like the time i bounced at my uncle about being asked to write knitting patterns and them going to be sold as part of kits, and his response was "Great, so when will you be looking for a job?" which is so far beyond my capabilities it felt like a punch to the gut.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 09:42 pm (UTC)BUT, I've meant to write this for a while and don't think I have - your explanation of issues like this - of, really, just about all the issues surrounding invisible chronic illness - has helped me so much in learning to be sensitive to what my mother is dealing with in her newly acquired disability. Like many with invisible illnesses, she looks young and whole and healthy but isn't, and your posts and those of many others on LJ who are open about these things have helped me learn that sometimes my instincts (being relentlessly cheerful and positive, for starters) are really wrong.
So, to get back to you and your post, I'm here and reading, but I don't comment on your posts much. I am, however, enjoying your stories, hoping for the best for you, and continuing to be grateful for the chance to be educated by your willingness to share. Thank you.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 10:05 pm (UTC)I'm glad you're having more vertigo-free periods. And you have just reminded me that I need to do today's stretches.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-26 11:25 pm (UTC)A relative sees me and I say I had a good week, and then the next time he sees me with a cane and says: "I thought you didn't need that anymore!"
A friend makes similar assumptions, based on the fact that I rode my bike every day this week (I ride my bike every day nearly every week, whether I can walk two feet without assistance or not).
It happens so often, and -- as you said -- in only one direction, that I have been forced to draw the conclusion that people just desperately want to remove me from the List of Things I Need to Worry About.
The relentless optimism and fact-reviving begins, then, to feel like they just want me to get back to "normal" so they don't have to deal with whatever icky feelings my illness gives them. Of course, they want me to get better, too, but MS is incurable.
They are lying to themselves to make themselves feel better, and I'm sure consciously it's because they want ME to feel better, but for some reason it feels like a lot of self-soothing at my expense.
I have no idea if that made sense; today is not one of those "good" days.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 12:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:15 am (UTC)I suspect I'm at about 3-4% m'self, which is, yes, so much! better than 0-2%, and this made me go, "Oh! This is what has been happening when I say that yay! I have been making my 20-30-minute work quota almost every day, and my friends say AWESOME you are going to get that diss done in no time!" and then I want to cry.
But I didn't put the pieces together till I read this, so, thank you.
Also, I keep wishing I was more around, for you and for other friends with health foo, but I think I'd need to reach at least 10% before being any good in that regard :/
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:55 am (UTC)I have wildly variable ideas of what "being around for me" means. Levels of contact that feel like one person giving up on a friendship with me will feel like perfectly normal SOP from another friend. In your case, my baseline is "Shweta will e-mail when she gets the chance," not, "Shweta will e-mail weekly," or fortnightly, or "will visit when she's in town once a year" or anything like that. So while I would not at all mind more of you in my life, I do not in the least feel that you've evaporated on me. I don't think I would even if I wasn't counting your own health issues to wrangle.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 03:01 am (UTC)Mostly 'cause right now almost any resources I have go into the diss and everything else is procrastination but somewhat because the bad health feeds into being scared of people and wanting to hide under the table.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 03:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:38 am (UTC)If it's any comfort, I'm sure there are other people like me who often make assumptions in the negative direction, but don't say so, because one doesn't say those sort of things. I never say fake optimistic things; I just don't express my fears for people because they don't genuinely need to hear 'em.
In that vein, having these periods of non-vertigo is a wonderful thing. Am I correct in thinking this is the result of the PT, rather than something kind of random? If so, that's a very good thing indeed.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 02:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 03:05 am (UTC)I think of you and your PT with sympathy whenever I take Charlie to PT, because his is basically directed play, and I know that yours is sooooo not. I'm very glad -if- it's starting to have the desired effect.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 03:06 am (UTC)genuinelygenerallyno subject
Date: 2009-09-27 03:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 04:58 am (UTC)I tend to assume, when you're not venting even though clearly things are still rough, that at least someone it is because it's easier for you to deal *without* venting. I know you know how many people care about you and would be glad to lend an ear (I can tell because I do and would, and yet there are so many people closer to you). But based on stuff you've written before about introversion, and the "hauling up a bucket" metaphor, it makes sense to me that venting and dealing with the repercussions thereof might count hard work for you, and sometimes your coping skills are better employed elsewhere.
All of which is to say I find your posts like this one useful and interesting. But I still rage at the universe for making things hard for so many of the people I know.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 06:19 am (UTC)When I was a kid, I longed for the concept of "invalid" to be reintroduced, because "illness" implies individual incidents + cure, not just the long slow grind of living with it.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 01:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 09:25 am (UTC)Shweta linked to this post, so I read it, and it's hard being ill much of the time. I hope you're able to find a way to have more vertigo-free hours in the near future.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 11:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 01:26 pm (UTC)Hmm. Yah, I do think I like electrons better than spoons, to the surprise of everyone.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-27 03:37 pm (UTC)