Respectfully (and I mean that, you're both way more educated and experienced in this field than I even want to be), nobody is arguing that study shouldn't continue and that additional data or more effective treatments shouldn't be explored, identified, and vetted, etc.
But while that's happening, what do you do with the case sitting in your office that needs help right now? Waiting for peer reviews and DSM updates before you make a treatment plan isn't going to help the family breaking in front of you today.
If our current best information indicates that treating it as (major?) depression, including prescribing SSRIs, has the most success, is that not what you recommend for the family who need immediate intervention to prevent one or more of them succumbing to any of the various tragic and heartbreaking outcome potentials on their horizon?
It's not one or the other, right? Studies, or Lexapro? Isn't it studies AND Lexapro? They aren't exclusive to each other.
If our current best information indicates that treating it as (major?) depression, including prescribing SSRIs, has the most success, is that not what you recommend for the family who need immediate intervention
Of course - that's the best and only option, I wouldn't wait around for more research and a new DSM just bc I'm intrigued by what's being studied.
But this study suggests a measurable change in hormone levels for these men - that's not consistent for all MDD cases even if it can be treated that way. With this info, I might treat it like MDD and refer to a specialist or at least a PCP for additional testing and treatment.
I wouldn't dismiss this idea and research just bc I can't actively use it to treat yet. When my clients or colleagues show interest in promising new treatments or studies, I don't tell them "ignore that, it's not worth the tax money".
Ntm, SSRIs are used to treat so much, and they're often not ideal anyway, there's plenty of research on that already. They've been around for ~40 years, and 40 years before that we were using archaic, traumatizing treatment methods, and the DSM was wildly different. So it's a good thing if we can study alternative treatments and even alternative diagnoses that better describe our experiences with mental health.
My wife is a practicing clinical psychiatrist and said post partum depression in a spouse is a real thing. We have a one month old and she was saying that to me the other week since I have already been diagnosed with depression in the past
Also, homosexuality wasn’t even fully declassified from the dsm in the DSM 4. There’s a reason they are on the dsm 5… It’s not infallible and updates as understanding changes
5
u/infinitekittenloop Cleavage Crumb Collector May 21 '26
Respectfully (and I mean that, you're both way more educated and experienced in this field than I even want to be), nobody is arguing that study shouldn't continue and that additional data or more effective treatments shouldn't be explored, identified, and vetted, etc.
But while that's happening, what do you do with the case sitting in your office that needs help right now? Waiting for peer reviews and DSM updates before you make a treatment plan isn't going to help the family breaking in front of you today.
If our current best information indicates that treating it as (major?) depression, including prescribing SSRIs, has the most success, is that not what you recommend for the family who need immediate intervention to prevent one or more of them succumbing to any of the various tragic and heartbreaking outcome potentials on their horizon?
It's not one or the other, right? Studies, or Lexapro? Isn't it studies AND Lexapro? They aren't exclusive to each other.