Even without knowing all of the reasoning behind Gene Wilder’s decision to keep his diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease a secret, one can infer from his family’s statement that stigma was a big factor.
Walking (indoors and outdoors) is something we all do freely, every day, without even thinking about it. Moving away from “lock-down” memory care for people living with dementia not only helps alleviate distress, but also affirms and enables everyone’s basic human right to be able to move freely.
Recently, I posted a provocative argument for considering locked doors as physical restraints. I have received many comments about the post; and as promised, I am following up with a second installment (of three), in which I will give some guidelines for those who wish to take up the challenge.
The problem with “restraints” in long-term care is that in most cases the things we do to increase physical safety help us to feel better, but actually decrease the sense of security felt by the person. So it is with locked doors in memory care homes.
Would it surprise you if I said that the very organizations that are discouraging the abuse of antipsychotic drugs to treat people living with dementia are actually convincing people to use them? It’s a matter of language.
As it happens, I received two related news reports from colleagues today. Both concern the current state of affairs with psychotropic drug research, and the dangerous ways in which data is being manipulated and misrepresented.
I have decided to coin a new philosophy around the support of people who live with changing cognitive abilities.
This short and not-too-sweet post is an addendum to my guest editorial that was published here in McKnight’s on Friday, July 24th.